Since the very emergence of the information technologies in healthcare, a major concern has been raised about the potential of remote services to undermine the intimacy, immediacy and humanity intrinsic to conventional, face-to-face medical practice. By contrast, notable literature reports the benefits of information technology–mediated services and their potential to improve efficiency and economic convenience of healthcare systems. This article aims to shed light on this ambivalence by retracing the evolution of doctor–patient interaction in relation to the main technological advancements in healthcare, and in particular, to services mediated by information technologies. Consequently, the reduction of cues and clues associated with the use of these services is framed into the reductionism of the biomedical paradigm, which provides a key to interpret the nature, scope and features of this process of technological innovation, along with its potential and limits.
Al-AwqatiQ (2006) How to write a case report: Lessons from 1600 B.C. Kidney International69(12): 2113–2114.
2.
AlvarezMC (1999) Graeco-Roman case histories and their influence on Medieval Islamic clinical accounts. Social History of Medicine12(1): 19–43.
3.
AragonSR (2003) Creating social presence in online environments. New Direction for Adults & Continuing Education100: 57–69.
4.
AtkinsonP (1995) Medical Talk and Medical Work. London: SAGE.
5.
BalintM (1957) The Doctor, His Patient and the Illness. London: Churchill Livingstone.
6.
BarbosaIASilvaMJP (2017) Nursing care by telehealth: What is the influence of distance on communication?Revista Brasileira de Enfermagem70(5): 928–934.
7.
BartoloM (2010) La disumanizzazione dei servizi di telemedicina. e-health Care2: 68–71.
8.
BauerKA (2001) Home-based telemedicine: A survey of ethical issues. Cambridge Quarterly of Health Care Ethics10: 137–173.
9.
BergerD (1999) A brief history of medical diagnosis and the birth of the clinical laboratory. Part 1 – Ancient times through the 19th century. MLO: Medical Laboratory Observer31(7): 1–8.
BynumWFPorterR (1993) Medicine and the Five Senses. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
12.
CartwrightL (1995) Screening the Body. Tracing the Medicine’s Visual Culture. Minneapolis, MN: Minnesota University Press.
13.
CartwrightMHiraniSRixonL, et al. (2013) Effect of telehealth on quality of life and psychological outcomes over 12 months (Whole Systems Demonstrator telehealth questionnaire study): Nested study of patient reported outcomes in a pragmatic, cluster randomised controlled trial. British Medical Journal346: f653.
14.
CazzulloCLPoterzioF (2007) Paziente e medico: fenomenologia e prassi della relazione terapeutica. Roma: Edizioni internazionali.
15.
ChakrabartiS (2015) Usefulness of telepsychiatry: A critical evaluation of videoconferencing-based approaches. World Journal of Psychiatry5(3): 286–304.
16.
ChanSParishMYellowleesP (2015) Telepsychiatry today. Current Psychiatry Reports17(89): 1–9.
17.
ChiapperinoLAnnoniMMaugeriP, et al. (2012) What autonomy for telecare? An externalist approach. The American Journal of Bioethics12(9): 55–57.
18.
ClarkJAMishlerEG (1992) Attending to patients’ stories: Referencing the clinical task. Sociology of Health and Illness14: 344–372.
19.
Cornejo-PalmaDUrbachDR (2018) Virtual postoperative clinic: Can we push virtual postoperative care further upstream?BMJ Quality & Safety28: 7–9.
20.
CosmaciniGRugarliC (2007) Introduzione Alla Medicina. Rome: Laterza.
21.
Da GamaD (2001) La crise de la medicine contemporaine ou la second mort d’Hyppocrate. Journal des Maladies Vasculaires5(26): 287–289.
22.
DonatiP (1984) Le trasformazioni del rapporto comunicativo nella relazione interpersonale medico-paziente. Rassegna Italiana di Sociologia4: 547–571.
23.
DowrickC (1997) Rethinking the doctor-patient relationship in general practice. Health and Social Care in the Community5: 11–14.
24.
European Commission (2012) Innovative healthcare for the 21st century. COM/2012/73612736, 6November. Brussels: European Commission.
25.
European Commission (2017) Building a European data economy. COM (2017) 9, 10October. Brussels: European Commission.
26.
European Commission (2018) Enabling the digital transformation of health and care in the Digital Single Market; empowering citizens and building a healthier society. COM(2018) 233, 25April. Brussels: European Commission.
EysennbachG (2001) What is e-health. Journal of Medical Internet Research3(2): e20.
29.
FlemingDAEdisonKEPakH (2009) Telehealth ethics. Telemedicine and e-health8: 797–803.
30.
FloridiL (2018) Soft ethics and the governance of the digital. Philosophy & Technology31(1): 1–8.
31.
FoucaultM (1973) The Birth of the Clinic. New York: Pantheon.
32.
GillumRF (2013) From papyrus to the electronic tablet: A brief history of the clinical medical record with lessons for the digital age. The American Journal of Medicine126(10): 853–857.
33.
GoldimJR (2006) Bioethics. Origins and complexity. Revista HCPA26(2): 86–92.
34.
HaFJLongneckerN (2010) Doctor-patient communication. A review. The Ochsner Journal10: 38–43.
35.
HarnettPJonesAMAlmondBM, et al. (2018) A virtual clinic to improve long-term outcomes in chronic kidney disease. Clinical Medicine18(5): 356–363.
36.
HodgkinP (1996) Medicine, postmodernism and the end of certainty. British Medical Journal313: 1568–1569.
37.
HunterKM (1991) Doctors’ Stories: The Narrative Structure of Medical Knowledge. Princeton, NJ: Princeton University Press.
38.
IllichI (1976) Medical Nemesis. The Expropriation of Health. New York: Pantheon.
39.
JewsonN (1976) The disappearance of the sick-man from medical cosmology 1770-1870. Sociology10: 388–405.
40.
KaplanBLitewkaS (2008) Ethical challenges of telemedicine and telehealth. Cambridge Quarterly of Healthcare Ethics17: 401–416.
41.
KassellL (2016) Paper technologies, digital technologies: Working with early modern medical records. In: WhiteheadAWoodsAAtkinsonS, et al (eds) The Edinburgh Companion to the Critical Medical Humanities. Edinburgh: Edinburgh University Press, pp. 120–135.
42.
KlugeEA (2011) Ethical and legal challenges for telematics in a global world: Telehealth and the technological imperative. International Journal of Medical Informatics80(2): e1–e5.
43.
KollerL (2011) The evolution of medical imaging technologies: Electric meat and the physician’s shifting gaze. EÄ2(3): 1–22.
44.
LateefM (2011) The practice of telemedicine: Medico-legal and ethical issues. Ethics in Medicine27(1): 17–24.
45.
LearSA (2018) The delivery of cardiac rehabilitation using communications technologies: The ‘virtual’ cardiac rehabilitation program. Canadian Journal of Cardiology34: S278–S283.
46.
LunKC (2018) The datafication of Everything – Even toilets. Yearbook of medical informatics27(1): 234–236.
47.
LuptonD (2013) The digitally engaged patient: Self-monitoring and self-care in the digital era. Social Theory and Health11: 256–270.
48.
LuptonD (2016) Towards critical digital health studies: Reflections on two decades of research in health and the way forward. Health20(1): 49–61.
49.
MahmoudHVogtE (2018) Telepsychiatry: An innovative approach to addressing the opioid crisis. Journal of Behavioral Health Services & Research46: 680–685.
50.
MatusitzJBreenGM (2007) Telemedicine: Its effects on health communication. Health Communication and New Information Technologies21(1): 73–83.
51.
MayCGaskLAtkinsonT, et al. (2001) Resisting and promoting new technologies in clinical practice: The case of telepsychiatry. Social Science & Medicine52(12): 1889–1901.
52.
MillerEA (2003) The technical and interpersonal aspects of telemedicine: Effects on doctor–patient communication. Journal of Telemedicine and Telecare9: 1–7.
53.
MortMRobertsCCallénB (2013) Ageing with telecare: Care or coercion in austerity?Sociology of Health and Illness35(6): 799–812.
54.
MunirKAhmadKHMcClatcheyR (2015) Development of a large-scale neuroimages and clinical variables data atlas in the neuGRID4You (N4U) project. Journal of Biomedical Informatics57: 245–262.
55.
NagelSKRemmersH (2012) Self-perception and self-determination in surveillance conditions. The American Journal of Bioethics12(9): 53–55.
56.
NettletonS (2004) The emergence of e-scaped medicine. Sociology38(4): 661–679.
57.
NochomovitzMSharmaR (2017) Is it time for a new medical specialty? The medical virtualist. The Journal of the American Medical Association27: e1–e2.
58.
NoelKYagudayevSMessinaC, et al. (2018) Tele-transitions of care. A 12-month, parallel-group, superiority randomized controlled trial protocol, evaluating the use of telehealth versus standard transitions of care in the prevention of avoidable hospital readmissions. Contemporary Clinical Trials Communications12: 9–16.
59.
OsorioJH (2011) Evolution and changes in the physician-patient relationship. Colombia Médica42(3): 400–405.
60.
PflugeisenBMMouJ (2017) Patient satisfaction with virtual obstetric care. Matern Child Health J21: 1544–1551.
61.
PickstoneJ (2000) Ways of Knowing: A New History of Science Technology and Medicine. Manchester: Manchester University Press.
62.
PowellB (1970) Descartes’ machines. In: Aristotelian Society (ed.) Proceedings of the Aristotelian Society (1970-1971), vol. 71. Oxford: Oxford University Press, pp. 209–222.
63.
RobackKHerzogA (2003) Home informatics in healthcare: Assessment guidelines to keep up quality of care and avoid adverse effect. Technology and Healthcare11: 195–207.
64.
RubeisGSchochowMStegerF (2018) Patient autonomy and quality of care in telehealthcare. Sci Eng Ethics24: 93–107.
65.
SchermerM (2009) Telecare and self-management: Opportunity to change the paradigm?Journal of Medical Ethics35(11): 688–691.
66.
SchröderJvan CriekingeTEmbrechtsE, et al. (2019) Combining the benefits of tele-rehabilitation and virtual reality-based balance training: A systematic review on feasibility and effectiveness. Disability and Rehabilitation: Assistive Technology14: 2–11.
67.
ShortJWilliamsEChristieBT (1976) The Social Psychology of Telecommunications. London: John Wiley.
68.
ShortliffeEH (1999) The evolution of electronic medical records. Academic Medicine74(4): 414–419.
69.
SilvermanD (1987) Communication and Medical Practice: Social Relations in the Clinic. London: SAGE.
SpiegelJS (2017) The ethics of virtual reality technology: Social hazards and public policy recommendations. Science and engineering Ethics24(5): 1537–1550.
72.
SteventonABardsleyMBillingsJ, et al. (2012) Effect of telehealth on use of secondary care and mortality: Findings from the Whole System Demonstrator cluster randomized trial. British Medical Journal344: e3874.
73.
TachakraSRajaniR (2002) Social presence in telemedicine. Journal of Telemedicine and Telecare8(4): 226–230.
74.
ToledoFGTriolaARuppertK, et al. (2012) Access to diabetes specialist care in underserved rural communities. JMIR Research Protocols1(2): e14.
75.
Van BemmelJHMcCrayAT (2016) The renewed promise of medical informatics. Yearbook of Medical InformaticsSuppl. 1: S12–S17.
76.
Van WynsbergheAGastmansC (2009) Telepsychiatry and the meaning of in-person contact: A preliminary ethical appraisal. Medicine, Health Care and Philosophy12: 469–476.
77.
VorugantiTHusainAGrunfeldE, et al. (2018) Disruption or innovation? A qualitative descriptive study on the use of electronic patient-physician communication in patients with advanced cancer. Supportive Care in Cancer26(8): 262785–262792.
78.
WilsonTHoltT (2001) Complexity and clinical care. British Medical Journal323: 685–688.
ZwijsenSANiemeijerARHertoghCMPM (2011) Ethics of using assistive technology in the care for community-dwelling elderly people: An overview of the literature. Aging & Mental Health15: 419–427.
