Research Associate, Centre for Public Policy Research, King's College London, London, UK.
Health Expect. 2015 Feb;18(1):22-31. doi: 10.1111/hex.12000. Epub 2012 Sep 4.
Personalization - most often understood in terms of granting patients greater opportunity to participate in, and make choices about, the services they receive - has become a key principle guiding reform of the English NHS.
This study sets out to explore the relationship between two senses of the term 'personal' within the context of personalization. Firstly, much of the policy literature equates a 'personal' service with one that is responsive to the choices of individual patients. Secondly, the term 'personal' can be thought to refer to the intimate relationships between patients and medical professionals that have typified traditional models of good practice.
I combine a review of the relevant academic and policy literature on personalization with a process of conceptual analysis to uncover three arguments, which suggest that personalization based on choice may adversely affect standards of care by eroding the qualities of intimacy at the heart of the care process. Thus, an unintended consequence of the drive for personalization may be the creation of an NHS that is, in an important sense, less personal than it once was.
Whilst personalization may deliver many potential benefits, the tension between promoting patient choice and retaining intimate professional-patient relationships ought to be taken seriously. Thus, the task of promoting choice whilst retaining intimacy represents a key policy challenge for advocates of personalization.
个性化——通常被理解为让患者有更多机会参与和选择他们所接受的服务——已成为指导英国国民保健制度改革的关键原则。
本研究旨在探讨个性化背景下术语“个人”的两种含义之间的关系。首先，许多政策文献将“个人”服务等同于对个别患者选择做出回应的服务。其次，“个人”一词可以被认为是指患者与医疗专业人员之间的亲密关系，这是传统良好实践模式的典型特征。
我结合了对个性化相关学术和政策文献的回顾以及概念分析的过程，揭示了三个论点，这些论点表明，基于选择的个性化可能会通过侵蚀护理过程核心的亲密品质来对护理标准产生不利影响。因此，个性化的推动力的一个意外后果可能是创建一个在重要意义上不如以往那么“个人化”的国民保健制度。
虽然个性化可能带来许多潜在的好处，但在促进患者选择和保留亲密的医患关系之间的紧张关系应该得到认真对待。因此，在促进选择的同时保持亲密关系是个性化倡导者面临的一个关键政策挑战。
