We have located links that may give you full text access.
[Red tape in psychiatry: on bureaucracy, bureaucratism, and our secret fondness for procedures].
BACKGROUND: A frequent complaint in psychiatry is that the psychiatrist-patient relationship and the quality of care are hampered by bureaucratic processes.
AIM: To provide an analysis of various types of bureaucracy in psychiatry that can serve as a starting-point for the improvement of care and the performance of qualitative studies.
METHOD: We conducted an exploratory study using PubMed, Google, and various Dutch medical journals.
RESULTS: Contemporary psychiatry is characterised by a bureaucratic organization structure. Mental, somatic, and social problems are translated in a standardised manner into medical jargon which gives rise to a DSM diagnosis, a cost-price, and outcome measures. This medical-bureaucratic system has important virtues, provided it is applied efficiently and the patient-psychiatrist relationship remains intact. In the Netherlands, however, this balance has been disturbed. Future research can be facilitated if distinctions are made between various types of bureaucracy (referred to here as Hippocratic, Weberian, and Kafkaesque bureaucracy). In addition, we discuss various national initiatives which aim to counter bureaucracy, including initiatives of the Dutch government.
CONCLUSION: If the patient-psychiatrist relationship is to regain its central role, bureaucracy needs to be countered constantly. The government can facilitate this process, but healthcare providers can also play a key role and meanwhile help to bring about a substantial reduction in the costs of care.
AIM: To provide an analysis of various types of bureaucracy in psychiatry that can serve as a starting-point for the improvement of care and the performance of qualitative studies.
METHOD: We conducted an exploratory study using PubMed, Google, and various Dutch medical journals.
RESULTS: Contemporary psychiatry is characterised by a bureaucratic organization structure. Mental, somatic, and social problems are translated in a standardised manner into medical jargon which gives rise to a DSM diagnosis, a cost-price, and outcome measures. This medical-bureaucratic system has important virtues, provided it is applied efficiently and the patient-psychiatrist relationship remains intact. In the Netherlands, however, this balance has been disturbed. Future research can be facilitated if distinctions are made between various types of bureaucracy (referred to here as Hippocratic, Weberian, and Kafkaesque bureaucracy). In addition, we discuss various national initiatives which aim to counter bureaucracy, including initiatives of the Dutch government.
CONCLUSION: If the patient-psychiatrist relationship is to regain its central role, bureaucracy needs to be countered constantly. The government can facilitate this process, but healthcare providers can also play a key role and meanwhile help to bring about a substantial reduction in the costs of care.
Full text links
Related Resources
Get seemless 1-tap access through your institution/university
For the best experience, use the Read mobile app
All material on this website is protected by copyright, Copyright © 1994-2024 by WebMD LLC.
This website also contains material copyrighted by 3rd parties.
By using this service, you agree to our terms of use and privacy policy.
Your Privacy Choices
You can now claim free CME credits for this literature searchClaim now
Get seemless 1-tap access through your institution/university
For the best experience, use the Read mobile app