Patient, client, consumer, survivor or other alternatives? A scoping review of preferred terms for labelling individuals who access healthcare across settings

Daniel S J Costa, Rebecca Mercieca-Bebber, Stephanie Tesson, Zac Seidler, Anna-Lena Lopez, Daniel S J Costa, Rebecca Mercieca-Bebber, Stephanie Tesson, Zac Seidler, Anna-Lena Lopez

Abstract

Objectives: Use of the term 'patient' has been recently debated, compared with alternatives including 'consumer' and 'client'. This scoping study aimed to provide an integrated view of preferred labels across healthcare contexts and countries to clarify labelling preferences of individuals accessing healthcare.

Design: Scoping study.

Data sources: A preliminary literature search using GoogleScholar, Medline, Embase and PsycINFO found 43 key papers discussing terminology for labelling individuals accessing healthcare services. We then used citation chaining with PubMed and GoogleScholar to identify studies discussing term preferences among healthcare recipients.

Eligibility criteria: No date limits were applied, and all healthcare settings were considered. Primary research studies examining terminology preferences of individuals accessing healthcare, published in peer-reviewed journals were eligible.

Data extraction and synthesis: All authors extracted data regarding preferred term and study characteristics, and assessed reporting quality of the studies using criteria relevant to our design.

Results: We identified 1565 articles, of which 47 met inclusion criteria. Six articles that examined preference for personal address (eg, first name) were excluded. Of the remaining 41 studies, 33 examined generic terms ('patient', 'client', 'consumer') and 8 focused on cancer survivorship. Of the 33 examining generic terms, 27 reported a preference for 'patient' and four for 'client'. Samples preferring 'client' were typically based in mental health settings and conducted in the USA. Of the eight cancer survivorship studies, five found a preference for 'survivor', and three 'someone who had had cancer'.

Conclusions: Overall, healthcare recipients appear to prefer the term 'patient', with few preferring 'consumer'. Within general clinical and research contexts, it therefore seems appropriate to continue using the label 'patient' in the absence of knowledge about an individual's preferences. Reasons for preferences (eg, familiarity, social identity) and the implications of labelling for healthcare have not been investigated adequately, necessitating future empirical (including qualitative) research.

Keywords: client; consumer; label; patient; survivor; terminology.

Conflict of interest statement

Competing interests: None declared.

© Author(s) (or their employer(s)) 2019. Re-use permitted under CC BY-NC. No commercial re-use. See rights and permissions. Published by BMJ.

Figures

Figure 1
Figure 1
Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses flow diagram.

References

    1. Neuberger J. Do we need a new word for patients? Lets do away with "patients". BMJ 1999;318:1756–7.
    1. McLaughlin H. What’s in a name: ‘client’, ‘patient’, ‘customer’, ‘consumer’, ‘expert by experience’, ‘service user’- what’s next? British Journal of Social Work 2009;39:1101–17.
    1. Hoyt MF. "Patient" or "client": What’s in a name? Psychotherapy: Theory, Research & Practice 1979;16:46–7. 10.1037/h0085873
    1. Rogers CR. Client-centered therapy. Boston: Houghton-Mifflin, 1951.
    1. Krugman P. Patients are not consumers in New York Times. 2011.
    1. Christmas D. Should patient be patients? 2013. .
    1. Tallis R. Do we need a new word for patients? Commentary: leave well alone. BMJ 1999;318:1756–8.
    1. Herzberg SR. Client or patient: which term is more appropriate for use in occupational therapy? Am J Occup Ther 1990;44:561–4. 10.5014/ajot.44.6.561
    1. Hodgkiss A. User, client or patient: what do we call people receiving treatment for mental health problems? Psychiatr Bull 2000;24:441 10.1192/pb.24.12.441
    1. Shevell MI. What do we call ‘them’?: the ‘patient’ versus ‘client’ dichotomy. Developmental Medicine & Child Neurology 2009;51:770–2. 10.1111/j.1469-8749.2009.03304.x
    1. Kernick D. The name’s the game. The Lancet 1999;353:1632 10.1016/S0140-6736(05)75763-9
    1. Anonymous. What’s in a name? The Lancet 2000;356:2111 10.1016/S0140-6736(00)03483-8
    1. Andreasen NC. Clients, consumers, providers, and products: where will it all end? Am J Psychiatry 1995;152:1107–9. 10.1176/ajp.152.8.1107
    1. Mariotto A, De Leo D, Realdon P, et al. . What’s in a name. The Lancet 2001;357:1133 10.1016/S0140-6736(00)04287-2
    1. Covell NH, McCorkle BH, Weissman EM, et al. . What’s in a name? terms preferred by service recipients. Adm Policy Ment Health 2007;34:443–7. 10.1007/s10488-007-0123-1
    1. Thalitaya MD, Prasher VP, Khan F, et al. . What’s in a name - the psychiatric identity conundrum. Psychiatria Danubina 2011;23:178–81.
    1. Torrey EF, Patients C, Consumers S, et al. . What’s in a name? Schizophrenia Bulletin 2010;37:466–8.
    1. Goodyear RK, Parish TS. Perceived attributes of the terms client, patient, and typical person. J Couns Psychol 1978;25:356–8. 10.1037/0022-0167.25.4.356
    1. Dickens G, Picchioni M. A systematic review of the terms used to refer to people who use mental health services: user perspectives. Int J Soc Psychiatry 2012;58:115–22. 10.1177/0020764010392066
    1. Booth A. Unpacking your literature search toolbox: on search styles and tactics. Health Information & Libraries Journal 2008;25:313–7. 10.1111/j.1471-1842.2008.00825.x
    1. Greenhalgh T, Peacock R. Effectiveness and efficiency of search methods in systematic reviews of complex evidence: audit of primary sources. BMJ 2005;331:1064–5. 10.1136/bmj.38636.593461.68
    1. Arksey H, O’Malley L. Scoping studies: towards a methodological framework. Int J Soc Res Methodol 2005;8:19–32. 10.1080/1364557032000119616
    1. Levac D, Colquhoun H, O’Brien KK. Scoping studies: advancing the methodology. Implementation Science 2010;5:69 10.1186/1748-5908-5-69
    1. Moher D, Liberati A, Tetzlaff J, et al. . Preferred reporting items for systematic reviews and meta-analyses: the PRISMA statement. BMJ 2009;339:b2535 10.1136/bmj.b2535
    1. von Elm E, Altman DG, Egger M, et al. . The strengthening the reporting of observational studies in epidemiology (strobe) statement: guidelines for reporting observational studies. The Lancet 2007;370:1453–7. 10.1016/S0140-6736(07)61602-X
    1. Denning AS, Tuttle LK, Bryant VJ, et al. . Ascertaining women’s choice of title during pregnancy and childbirth. Aust N Z J Obstet Gynaecol 2002;42:125–9. 10.1111/j.0004-8666.2002.00125.x
    1. Dickens G, Langé A, Picchioni M. Labelling people who are resident in a secure forensic mental health service: user views. J Forens Psychiatry Psychol 2011;22:885–94. 10.1080/14789949.2011.607509
    1. Gallagher J, Waldron Lynch F, Stack J, et al. . Dress and address: patient preferences regarding doctor’s style of dress and patient interaction. Ir Med J 2008;101:211–3.
    1. Simmons P, Hawley CJ, Gale TM, et al. . Service user, patient, client, user or survivor: describing recipients of mental health services. Psychiatrist 2010;34:20–3. 10.1192/pb.bp.109.025247
    1. Wing P. Patient or client? If in doubt, ask. CMAJ 1997;15:287–9.
    1. Deber RB, Kraetschmer N, Urowitz S, et al. . Patient, consumer, client, or customer: what do people want to be called? Health Expect 2005;8:345–51. 10.1111/j.1369-7625.2005.00352.x
    1. Aukst-Margetić B, Margetić B, Ljiljana K-B, et al. . Patient, client or user: Which term is most appropriate? Socijalna Psihijatrija 2004;32:175–8.
    1. Ritchie CW, Hayes D, Ames DJ. Patient or client? the opinions of people attending a psychiatric clinic. Psychiatr Bull 2000;24:447–50. 10.1192/pb.24.12.447
    1. Cybulska E. Patients not clients – a community survey among elderly patients. Psychiatr Bull 1994;18:509 10.1192/pb.18.8.509
    1. Probert C. Consumer, customer, client, or patient. The Lancet 1990;335:1466–7. 10.1016/0140-6736(90)91498-Y
    1. Nome Eikhom M, Torsaeter M, Wik G. Psychiatric patients: views on psychiatrists' dress and address. Nord J Psychiatry 2006;60:270–4. 10.1080/08039480600790085
    1. Sawhney I, Morgan J, Tajer A. All in a name. Learning Disability Practice 2007;10:32 10.7748/ldp.10.1.32.s23
    1. McKinstry B. Should general practitioners call patients by their first names? BMJ 1990;301:795–6. 10.1136/bmj.301.6755.795
    1. Kim SH, Lee YM. What do the patients want to be called during medical encounters? Korean J Med Educ 2009;21:163–73. 10.3946/kjme.2009.21.2.163
    1. Gledhill JA, Warner JP, King M. Psychiatrists and their patients: views on forms of dress and address. Br J Psychiatry 1997;171:228–32. 10.1192/bjp.171.3.228
    1. Sim C, Hallahan B, McDonald C. Preferences of dress and address: views of attendees and mental health professionals of the psychiatric services. Ir J Psychol Med 2012;29:27–32. 10.1017/S0790966700017572
    1. McGuire-Snieckus R, McCabe R, Priebe S. Patient, client or service user? a survey of patient preferences of dress and address of six mental health professions. Psychiatr Bull 2003;27:305–8. 10.1017/S0955603600002798
    1. Batra N, Lilford RJ. Not clients, not consumers and definitely not maternants. Eur J Obstet Gynecol Reprod Biol 1996;64:197–9. 10.1016/0301-2115(95)02286-4
    1. Elliott J, White H. Patients are patients. New Zealand Medical Journal 1990;103.
    1. Sharma V, Whitney D, Kazarian SS, et al. . Preferred terms for users of mental health services among service providers and recipients. Psychiatr Serv 2000;51:203–9. 10.1176/appi.ps.51.2.203
    1. Lloyd C, King R, Bassett H, et al. . Patient, client or consumer? a survey of preferred terms. Australasian Psychiatry 2001;9:321–4. 10.1046/j.1440-1665.2001.00358.x
    1. Loudon J, Baird A, Haider Z, et al. . Patients, clients, users or customers: what should we call people attending sexual health services? J Fam Plann Reprod Health Care 2012;38:19–22. 10.1136/jfprhc-2011-0112
    1. Magnezi R, Bergman LC, Urowitz S. Would your patient prefer to be considered your friend? Patient preferences in physician relationships. Health Educ Behav 2015;42:210–9. 10.1177/1090198114547814
    1. Upton MWM, Boer GH, Neale AJ. Patients or clients? – a hospital survey. Psychiatr Bull 1994;18:142–3. 10.1192/pb.18.3.142
    1. Bellizzi KM, Blank TO. Cancer-related identity and positive affect in survivors of prostate cancer. J Cancer Surviv 2007;1:44–8. 10.1007/s11764-007-0005-2
    1. Chambers SK, Baade P, Meng X, et al. . Survivor identity after colorectal cancer: antecedents, prevalence and outcomes. Psychooncology 2012;21:962–9. 10.1002/pon.1991
    1. Morris BA, Lepore SJ, Wilson B, et al. . Adopting a survivor identity after cancer in a peer support context. J Cancer Surviv 2014;8:427–36. 10.1007/s11764-014-0355-5
    1. Kelly KM, Shah N, Shedlosky-Shoemaker R, et al. . Living post treatment: definitions of those with history and no history of cancer. J Cancer Surviv 2011;5:158–66. 10.1007/s11764-010-0167-1
    1. Deimling GT, Bowman KF, Wagner LJ. Cancer survivorship and identity among long-term survivors. Cancer Invest 2007;25:758–65. 10.1080/07357900600896323
    1. Cho D, Park CL. Cancer-related identities in people diagnosed during late adolescence and young adulthood. Br J Health Psychol 2015;20:594–612. 10.1111/bjhp.12110
    1. Zajonc RB, Markus H. Affective and cognitive factors in preferences. J Consum Res 1982;9:123–31. 10.1086/208905
    1. Zola-Morgan S, Squire LR, Alvarez-Royo P, et al. . Independence of memory functions and emotional behavior: separate contributions of the hippocampal formation and the amygdala. Hippocampus 1991;1:207–20. 10.1002/hipo.450010208
    1. Zajonc RB. Attitudinal effects of mere exposure. J Pers Soc Psychol 1968;9:1–27. 10.1037/h0025848
    1. Zajonc RB. Mere exposure: a gateway to the subliminal. Curr Dir Psychol Sci 2001;10:224–8. 10.1111/1467-8721.00154
    1. Slovic P. The construction of preference. Am Psychol 1995;50:364–71. 10.1037/0003-066X.50.5.364
    1. Wason PC, Evans JSTBT. Dual processes in reasoning? Cognition 1974;3:141–54. 10.1016/0010-0277(74)90017-1
    1. Kahneman D. Thinking, fast and slow. New York: Farrar, Straus and Giroux, 2011.
    1. Heffernan K. Responding to global shifts in social work through the language of service user and service user involvement. Int J Soc Welf 2009;18:375–84. 10.1111/j.1468-2397.2008.00614.x
    1. Turner RH. Tumer JH, Role theory, in handbook of sociological theory. New York: Kluwer Academic / Plenum Publishers, 2002:233–54.
    1. Jackson J. Contemporary criticisms of role theory. J Occup Sci 1998;5:49–55. 10.1080/14427591.1998.9686433
    1. Biddle BJ. Recent developments in role theory. Annu Rev Sociol 1986;12:67–92. 10.1146/annurev.so.12.080186.000435
    1. Hornsey MJ. Social identity theory and self-categorization theory: a historical review. Soc Personal Psychol Compass 2008;2:204–22. 10.1111/j.1751-9004.2007.00066.x
    1. Ewert B. Patient, co-producer and consumer in one person: identity facets of the user in integrated health care. Journal of Integrated Care 2016;24:161–72. 10.1108/JICA-01-2016-0006.
    1. Parsons T. The Social System. Glencoe: Free Press, 1951.
    1. Mueser KT, Glynn SM, Corrigan PW, et al. . A survey of preferred terms for users of mental health services. Psychiatr Serv 1996;47:760–1. 10.1176/ps.47.7.760
    1. Link BG, Phelan JC : Scheid TL, Horwitz AV, The labeling theory of mental disorder (ii): the consequences of labeling, in a handbook for the study of mental health: social contexts, theories, and systems. New York: Cambridge University Press, 1999:361–76.
    1. Guirguis LM, Chewning BA. Role theory: literature review and implications for patient-pharmacist interactions. Res Social Adm Pharm 2005;1:483–507. 10.1016/j.sapharm.2005.09.006
    1. Solomon MR, Surprenant C, Czepiel JA, et al. . A role theory perspective on dyadic interactions: the service encounter. J Mark 1985;49:99–111. 10.1177/002224298504900110
    1. Anczewska M, Świtaj P, Prot K, et al. . A survey to investigate the preferred terms describing people with mental disorders - recipients’ and providers’ opinions. Archives of Psychiatry and Psychotherapy 2011;3:25–30.
    1. Baskett TF. What women want: don’t call us clients, and we prefer female doctors. J Obstet Gynaecol Can 2002;24:572–4. 10.1016/S1701-2163(16)31060-X
    1. Byrne DL, Asmussen T, Freeman JM. Descriptive terms for women attending antenatal clinics: mother knows best? BJOG 2000;107:1233–6. 10.1111/j.1471-0528.2000.tb11612.x
    1. Keaney F, Strang J, Martinez-Raga J, et al. . Does anyone care about names? How attendees at substance misuse services like to be addressed by health professionals. Eur Addict Res 2004;10:75–9. 10.1159/000076117
    1. Nair BR. Patient, client or customer? Med J Aust 1998;169:593.
    1. Nair BR, Treloar CJ, Harris G. Do we need a new word for patients? Aust N Z J Med 2000;30:716–7. 10.1111/j.1445-5994.2000.tb04367.x
    1. Ramdass MJ, Naraynsingh V, Maharaj D, et al. . Question of ’patients' versus ’clients'. J Qual Clin Pract 2001;21:14–15. 10.1046/j.1440-1762.2001.00396.x
    1. Swift G, Zachariah M, Casey PR. A rose by any other name: psychiatric outpatients' views on dress and address. Ir J Psychol Med 2000;17:132–4. 10.1017/S0790966700006005
    1. Turner RN, Leach J, Robinson D. First impressions in complementary practice: the importance of environment, dress and address to the therapeutic relationship. Complement Ther Clin Pract 2007;13:102–9. 10.1016/j.ctcp.2006.10.001
    1. Wittich AC, Junnila J, Buller J. Would your patients prefer to be your clients? J Am Osteopath Assoc 2003;103:485–7.
    1. Park CL, Zlateva I, Blank TO. Self-identity after cancer: “survivor”, “victim”, “patient”, and “person with cancer”. J Gen Intern Med 2009;24:430–5. 10.1007/s11606-009-0993-x
    1. Deimling GT, Kahana B, Schumacher J. Life threatening illness and identity: the transition from victim to survivor. Journal of Aging and Identity 1997;2:165–86.

Source: PubMed

Sponsor e collaboratori

Condizioni mediche

Interventi farmacologici

3
Sottoscrivi