Implementing telemedicine technologies (TT) for patient–physician communication leads to the emergence of new structures of boundaries. Hence, boundary work theory can provide a useful lens for examining how primary care physicians (PCPs) experience TT. The objective of this research was to examine the experiences of PCPs in using TT in their communication with patients. During 2023 in-depth interviews were conducted with 20 Israeli PCPs: family physicians and pediatricians. The concept of boundary work emerged as a focal point, with three forms of boundary work identified in the PCPs’ descriptions of their TT experiences: collaborative, competitive, and configurational. Interviewees described improved collaboration with patients who find it difficult to get to the clinic and better service for administrative issues. However, they reported constant power struggles to maintain their authority. They expressed concern about treatment failure and suggested that healthcare organizations reconfigure TT so that it can be used to provide optimal care. They suggested that healthcare organizations should instruct physicians how to best manage TT consultations and regulate its usage. This article demonstrates that while implementing TT in primary care has many advantages, it uncovers boundary work for maintaining power and authority that both PCPs and healthcare organizations should take into account in practice as well as in policy.
AarhusRBallegaardSA (2010) Negotiating boundaries: Managing disease at home. In: CHI 2010: Proceedings of the 28th international conference on human factors in computing systems, pp.1223–1232.
2.
AllenD (2009) From boundary concept to boundary object: The practice and politics of care pathway development. Social Science & Medicine69(3): 354–361.
3.
AndreadisKMuellersKAnckerJS, et al. (2023) Telemedicine impact on the patient-provider relationship in primary care during the COVID-19 pandemic. Medical Care61(Suppl 1): S83–S88.
4.
BhatKSHallAKKuoT, et al. (2023) “We are half-doctors”: Family caregivers as boundary actors in chronic disease management. Proceedings of the ACM on Human-Computer Interaction7(CSCW1): 1–29.
5.
BlixMJeanssonJ (2019) Telemedicine and the welfare state: The Swedish experience. In: LarssonATeiglandR (eds) Digital Transformation and Public Services: Societal Impacts in Sweden and Beyond. Milton Park: Routledge, pp.15–32.
6.
BraunVClarkeV (2006) Using thematic analysis in psychology. Qualitative Research in Psychology3(2): 77–101.
7.
ChudnerIDrach-ZahavyAGoldblattH, et al. (2020) Power gaps among stakeholders in Israel’s primary care and the role of primary care physicians’ relative power in their intention to use video-consultations with patients. Telemedicine and e-Health26(2): 190–204.
8.
ChungCFDewKColeA, et al. (2016) Boundary negotiating artifacts in personal informatics: Patient-provider collaboration with patient-generated data. In: Proceedings of the 19th ACM conference on computer-supported cooperative work & social computing, pp.770–786.
9.
DingXChenYDingZ, et al. (2019) Boundary negotiation for patient-provider communication via wechat in China. Proceedings of the ACM on Human-Computer Interaction3(CSCW): 1–24.
10.
DowrickAKellyMFederG (2020) Boundary spanners: Negotiating connections across primary care and domestic violence and abuse services. Social Science & Medicine245: 112687.
11.
FlemingMDSafaeiniliNKnoxM, et al. (2023) Between health care and social services: Boundary objects and cross-sector collaboration. Social Science & Medicine320: 115758.
12.
GierynTF (1983) Boundary-work and the demarcation of science from non-science: Strains and interests in professional ideologies of scientists. American Sociological Review48(6): 781–795.
13.
GrossmanZChodickGReingoldSM, et al. (2020) The future of telemedicine visits after COVID-19: Perceptions of primary care pediatricians. Israel Journal of Health Policy Research9(1): 53–10.
14.
HaimiMBrammli-GreenbergSWaismanY, et al. (2018) Physicians’ experiences, attitudes and challenges in a pediatric telemedicine service. Pediatric Research84(5): 650–656.
15.
HuzzardTAhlbergBMEkmanM (2010) Constructing interorganizational collaboration: The action researcher as boundary subject. Action Research8(3): 293–314.
KeshetYBen-AryeESchiffE (2013) The use of boundary objects to enhance interprofessional collaboration: Integrating complementary medicine in a hospital setting. Sociology of Health & Illness35(5): 666–681.
KurtzSM (2002) Doctor-patient communication: Principles and practices. Canadian Journal of Neurological Sciences29(S2): S23–S29.
21.
LangleyALindbergKMørkBE, et al. (2019) Boundary work among groups, occupations, and organizations: From cartography to process. Academy of Management Annals13(2): 704–736.
22.
LeeJLChoudhryNKWuAW, et al. (2016) Patient use of email, Facebook, and physician websites to communicate with physicians: A national online survey of retail pharmacy users. Journal of General Internal Medicine31(1): 45–51.
23.
LevinaNVaastE (2005) The emergence of boundary spanning competence in practice: Implications for implementation and use of information systems. MIS Quarterly29(2): 335–363.
24.
LuptonD (2013) The digitally engaged patient: Self-monitoring and self-care in the digital health era. Social Theory & Health11(3): 256–270.
25.
NorthS (2020) Telemedicine in the time of COVID and beyond. Journal of Adolescent Health67(2): 145–146.
26.
PogorzelskaKMarcinowiczLChlabiczS (2023) A qualitative study of primary care physicians’ experiences with telemedicine during the COVID-19 pandemic in north-eastern Poland. International Journal of Environmental Research and Public Health20(3): 1963.
27.
Schneider-KampAFerschB (2021) Detached co-involvement in interactional care: Transcending temporality and spatiality through mHealth in a social psychiatry out-patient setting. Social Science & Medicine285: 114297.
28.
ShacharL (2022) “You become a slightly better doctor”: Doctors adopting integrated medical expertise through interactions with e-patients. Social Science & Medicine305: 115038.
29.
SnoswellCLTaylorMLComansTA, et al. (2020) Determining if telehealth can reduce health system costs: Scoping review. Journal of Medical Internet Research22(10): e17298.
30.
StarSK (2010) This is not a boundary object: Reflections on the origin of a concept. Science Technology & Human Values35(5): 601–617.
31.
StarSLGriesemerJR (1989) Institutional ecology, ‘translations’ and boundary objects: Amateurs and professionals in Berkeley’s museum of vertebrate zoology, 1907-39. Social Studies of Science19(3): 387–420.
32.
SturtJHuxleyCAjanaB, et al. (2020) How does the use of digital consulting change the meaning of being a patient and/or a health professional? Lessons from the long-term conditions young people networked communication study. Digital Health6: 2055207620942359.
33.
TimmermansS (2020) The engaged patient: The relevance of patient-physician communication for twenty-first-century health. Journal of Health and Social Behavior61(3): 259–273.
