Abstract
Interest in how best to influence the behaviour of clinicians in the
interests of both clinical and cost effectiveness has rekindled concern
with the social networks of health care professionals. Ever since
the seminal work of Coleman et al. Coleman, J.S., Katz, E., Menzel,
H., 1966. Medical Innovation: A Diffusion Study. Bobbs-Merrill, Indianapolis.,
networks have been seen as important in the process by which clinicians
adopt (or fail to adopt) new innovations in clinical practice. Yet
very little is actually known about the social networks of clinicians
in modern health care settings. This paper describes the professional
social networks of two groups of health care professionals, clinical
directors of medicine and directors of nursing, in hospitals in England.
We focus on network density, centrality and centralisation because
these characteristics have been linked to access to information,
social influence and social control processes. The results show that
directors of nursing are more central to their networks than clinical
directors of medicine and that their networks are more hierarchical.
Clinical directors of medicine tend to be embedded in much more densely
connected networks which we describe as cliques. The hypotheses that
the networks of directors of nursing are better adapted to gathering
and disseminating information than clinical directors of medicine,
but that the latter could be more potent instruments for changing,
or resisting changes, in clinical behaviour, follow from a number
of sociological theories. We conclude that professional socialisation
and structural location are important determinants of social networks
and that these factors could usefully be considered in the design
of strategies to inform and influence clinicians.
Users
Please
log in to take part in the discussion (add own reviews or comments).