Epistemic tensions between people living with asthma and healthcare professionals in clinical encounters.

RATIONALE: Asthma is a common respiratory condition with high prevalence rates globally. While there are effective treatments, asthma remains an important health concern as people continue to die from severe attacks. Improving the experiences of, and health outcomes for, people with asthma depends heavily on their interactions with healthcare professionals. Understanding negative clinical encounters will benefit people with asthma and healthcare providers.

OBJECTIVE: To examine epistemic tensions in negative clinical encounters from a patient perspective, with an aim to better understand how patients respond to these tensions. Much of the scholarship on patient interactions with healthcare providers examines interpersonal or structural factors. Thus, focusing our analysis on tensions between lay and expert knowledge in negative clinical encounters provides a novel contribution to this body of scholarship.

METHOD: As part of a larger qualitative study (n = 70) examining the lived experiences of people who have asthma or a child with asthma, semi-structured interviews with 17 participants who described having negative clinical encounters were analyzed for themes.

RESULTS: Participants responded to epistemic tensions in two main ways: (1) by incorporating expert knowledge; and (2) by resisting/challenging expert knowledge. In both cases, participants also described feeling frustrated and uncertain about their or their child's clinical care. We analyze these responses by drawing on Lindström and Karlsson's (2016) conceptualization of epistemic tensions as arising from 3 characteristics of epistemic asymmetry: access, rights, and responsibility.

CONCLUSION: Based on this study, (1) a patient's confidence in claiming epistemic access and asserting epistemic rights when epistemic tensions arise are related to the context and their own history of living with asthma; and (2), epistemic tensions can make visible the power relations in the patient-clinician relationship, which can lead to the exertion of biomedical authority, or the taking up of patient's lay knowledge.