IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/wly/jocnur/v29y2020i23-24p4697-4707.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

Constructing a problem and marketing solutions: A critical content analysis of the nature and function of industry‐authored oral health educational materials

Author

Listed:
  • Quinn Grundy
  • Cliodna Cussen
  • Craig Dale

Abstract

Aims and objectives To document the nature of industry‐authored educational materials focused on oral health; and analyse how they construct the relationships between nurses and industry. Background Nurses frequently rely on pharmaceutical and medical device companies for continuing education. However, industry‐sponsored education is a key aspect of multi‐faceted promotional campaigns and may introduce bias into clinical decision‐making. Design Critical qualitative content analysis reported according to the COREQ checklist. Methods We purposively sampled educational documents from the websites of 4 major manufacturers of oral health products for acute care. Two researchers analysed each document using an open‐ended coding form. We conducted an interpretive analysis using inductive coding methods. Results We included 63 documents that emphasised the importance of education in the form of training, expert guidance, evidence syntheses and protocols to support oral care practices. Industry promoted its relationship with nursing as an oral health authority through three dominant messages: (1) Pneumonia is a source of morbidity, mortality and treatment costs, which informed nurses about a critical problem; (2) Comprehensive oral care reduces pneumonia risk, which instructed nurses about product‐oriented solutions; and (3) Frequent oral care is important, which emphasised compliance to standardised protocols. These messages formed an accountability logic that prompted clinicians to address a problem for which the company's products served as a solution. In doing so, industry validated dominant administrative concerns including compliance, while promoting product uptake. Conclusions Industry‐authored educational materials may promote industry interests, rather than nursing or patient agendas. Dependence on industry's information and product solutions may have unintended, negative consequences for nursing practice. Relevance to clinical practice Though industry's educational materials present as convenient, helpful and evidence‐based, they may serve to redirect care processes in ways that reinforce company goals rather than clinical priorities. Nurses should seek independent sources of continuing education where possible.

Suggested Citation

  • Quinn Grundy & Cliodna Cussen & Craig Dale, 2020. "Constructing a problem and marketing solutions: A critical content analysis of the nature and function of industry‐authored oral health educational materials," Journal of Clinical Nursing, John Wiley & Sons, vol. 29(23-24), pages 4697-4707, December.
  • Handle: RePEc:wly:jocnur:v:29:y:2020:i:23-24:p:4697-4707
    DOI: 10.1111/jocn.15510
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: https://doi.org/10.1111/jocn.15510
    Download Restriction: no

    File URL: https://libkey.io/10.1111/jocn.15510?utm_source=ideas
    LibKey link: if access is restricted and if your library uses this service, LibKey will redirect you to where you can use your library subscription to access this item
    ---><---

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. Mykhalovskiy, Eric & Weir, Lorna, 2004. "The problem of evidence-based medicine: directions for social science," Social Science & Medicine, Elsevier, vol. 59(5), pages 1059-1069, September.
    2. Grundy, Quinn, 2016. "“Whether something cool is good enough”: The role of evidence, sales representatives and nurses' expertise in hospital purchasing decisions," Social Science & Medicine, Elsevier, vol. 165(C), pages 82-91.
    3. Madden, Mary, 2012. "Alienating evidence based medicine vs. innovative medical device marketing: A report on the evidence debate at a Wounds conference," Social Science & Medicine, Elsevier, vol. 74(12), pages 2046-2052.
    Full references (including those not matched with items on IDEAS)

    Most related items

    These are the items that most often cite the same works as this one and are cited by the same works as this one.
    1. Timmermans, Stefan & Almeling, Rene, 2009. "Objectification, standardization, and commodification in health care: A conceptual readjustment," Social Science & Medicine, Elsevier, vol. 69(1), pages 21-27, July.
    2. Cavanagh, Alice & Shamsheri, Tahmina & Shen, Katrina & Gaber, Jessica & Liauw, Jessica & Vanstone, Meredith & Kouyoumdjian, Fiona, 2022. "Lived experiences of pregnancy and prison through a reproductive justice lens: A qualitative meta-synthesis," Social Science & Medicine, Elsevier, vol. 307(C).
    3. Broom, Alex & Adams, Jon & Tovey, Philip, 2009. "Evidence-based healthcare in practice: A study of clinician resistance, professional de-skilling, and inter-specialty differentiation in oncology," Social Science & Medicine, Elsevier, vol. 68(1), pages 192-200, January.
    4. Behague, Dominique & Tawiah, Charlotte & Rosato, Mikey & Some, Télésphore & Morrison, Joanna, 2009. "Evidence-based policy-making: The implications of globally-applicable research for context-specific problem-solving in developing countries," Social Science & Medicine, Elsevier, vol. 69(10), pages 1539-1546, November.
    5. Rhodes, Tim & Lancaster, Kari, 2019. "Evidence-making interventions in health: A conceptual framing," Social Science & Medicine, Elsevier, vol. 238(C), pages 1-1.
    6. Timmermans, Stefan & Freidin, Betina, 2007. "Caretaking as articulation work: The effects of taking up responsibility for a child with asthma on labor force participation," Social Science & Medicine, Elsevier, vol. 65(7), pages 1351-1363, October.
    7. Knaapen, Loes & Cazeneuve, Hervé & Cambrosio, Alberto & Castel, Patrick & Fervers, Beatrice, 2010. "Pragmatic evidence and textual arrangements: A case study of French clinical cancer guidelines," Social Science & Medicine, Elsevier, vol. 71(4), pages 685-692, August.
    8. Diamond-Brown, Lauren, 2016. "The doctor-patient relationship as a toolkit for uncertain clinical decisions," Social Science & Medicine, Elsevier, vol. 159(C), pages 108-115.
    9. Perrotta, Manuela & Geampana, Alina, 2020. "The trouble with IVF and randomised control trials: Professional legitimation narratives on time-lapse imaging and evidence-informed care," Social Science & Medicine, Elsevier, vol. 258(C).
    10. Miller, Fiona A. & Lehoux, Pascale & Rac, Valeria E. & Bytautas, Jessica P. & Krahn, Murray & Peacock, Stuart, 2020. "Modes of coordination for health technology adoption: Health Technology Assessment agencies and Group Procurement Organizations in a polycentric regulatory regime," Social Science & Medicine, Elsevier, vol. 265(C).
    11. Hogarth, Stuart & Löblová, Olga, 2022. "Regulatory niches: Diagnostic reform as a process of fragmented expansion. Evidence from the UK 1990–2018," Social Science & Medicine, Elsevier, vol. 304(C).
    12. Moes, Floortje & Houwaart, Eddy & Delnoij, Diana & Horstman, Klasien, 2020. "Questions regarding ‘epistemic injustice’ in knowledge-intensive policymaking: Two examples from Dutch health insurance policy," Social Science & Medicine, Elsevier, vol. 245(C).
    13. Whelan, Emma, 2009. "Negotiating science and experience in medical knowledge: Gynaecologists on endometriosis," Social Science & Medicine, Elsevier, vol. 68(8), pages 1489-1497, April.
    14. Ferlie, Ewan & Mcgivern, Gerry & FitzGerald, Louise, 2012. "A new mode of organizing in health care? Governmentality and managed networks in cancer services in England," Social Science & Medicine, Elsevier, vol. 74(3), pages 340-347.
    15. Paul S. Adler & Seok-Woo Kwon, 2013. "The Mutation of Professionalism as a Contested Diffusion Process: Clinical Guidelines as Carriers of Institutional Change in Medicine," Journal of Management Studies, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 50(5), pages 930-962, July.
    16. Lambert, Helen, 2006. "Accounting for EBM: Notions of evidence in medicine," Social Science & Medicine, Elsevier, vol. 62(11), pages 2633-2645, June.
    17. Zohreh Schuessler & Anne Scott Stiles & Peggy Mancuso, 2020. "Perceptions and experiences of perioperative nurses and nurse anaesthetists in robotic‐assisted surgery," Journal of Clinical Nursing, John Wiley & Sons, vol. 29(1-2), pages 60-74, January.
    18. Mykhalovskiy, Eric & Armstrong, Pat & Armstrong, Hugh & Bourgeault, Ivy & Choiniere, Jackie & Lexchin, Joel & Peters, Suzanne & White, Jerry, 2008. "Qualitative research and the politics of knowledge in an age of evidence: Developing a research-based practice of immanent critique," Social Science & Medicine, Elsevier, vol. 67(1), pages 195-203, July.
    19. Chandler, Clare I.R. & Mangham, Lindsay & Njei, Abanda Ngu & Achonduh, Olivia & Mbacham, Wilfred F. & Wiseman, Virginia, 2012. "‘As a clinician, you are not managing lab results, you are managing the patient’: How the enactment of malaria at health facilities in Cameroon compares with new WHO guidelines for the use of malaria ," Social Science & Medicine, Elsevier, vol. 74(10), pages 1528-1535.
    20. Teghtsoonian, Katherine, 2009. "Depression and mental health in neoliberal times: A critical analysis of policy and discourse," Social Science & Medicine, Elsevier, vol. 69(1), pages 28-35, July.

    More about this item

    Statistics

    Access and download statistics

    Corrections

    All material on this site has been provided by the respective publishers and authors. You can help correct errors and omissions. When requesting a correction, please mention this item's handle: RePEc:wly:jocnur:v:29:y:2020:i:23-24:p:4697-4707. See general information about how to correct material in RePEc.

    If you have authored this item and are not yet registered with RePEc, we encourage you to do it here. This allows to link your profile to this item. It also allows you to accept potential citations to this item that we are uncertain about.

    If CitEc recognized a bibliographic reference but did not link an item in RePEc to it, you can help with this form .

    If you know of missing items citing this one, you can help us creating those links by adding the relevant references in the same way as above, for each refering item. If you are a registered author of this item, you may also want to check the "citations" tab in your RePEc Author Service profile, as there may be some citations waiting for confirmation.

    For technical questions regarding this item, or to correct its authors, title, abstract, bibliographic or download information, contact: Wiley Content Delivery (email available below). General contact details of provider: https://doi.org/10.1111/(ISSN)1365-2702 .

    Please note that corrections may take a couple of weeks to filter through the various RePEc services.

    IDEAS is a RePEc service. RePEc uses bibliographic data supplied by the respective publishers.