Medical Students’ Opinions About the Commercialization of Healthcare: A Cross-Sectional Survey
There are serious concerns about the commercialization of healthcare and adoption of the business approach in medicine. As market dynamics endanger established professional values, healthcare workers face more complicated ethical dilemmas in their daily practice. The aim of this study was to investigate the willingness of medical students to accept the assertions of commercialized healthcare and the factors affecting their level of agreement, factors which could influence their moral stance when market demands conflict with professional values. A cross-sectional study was conducted in three medical schools in Turkey. The study population consisted of first-, third-, and sixth-year students, and 1,781 students participated in total. Students were asked to state if they agreed with the assertions of commercialized healthcare. Of all students, 87.2 per cent agreed with at least one of the assertions, and one-fifth (20.8 per cent) of them agreed with more than half of the assertions. First-year students significantly agreed more with some assertions than third- and sixth-year students. Being female, having mid-level family income, choosing medicine due to idealistic reasons, and being in the third or sixth years of medical study increased the probability of disagreement. Also, studying in a medical school that included integrated lectures on health policies, rights related to health, and health inequities, along with early field visits, increased the probability of disagreement. This study suggests that agreement with the assertions of commercialized healthcare might be prevalent among students at a considerable level. We argue that this level of agreement is not compatible with best practice in professional ethics and indicates the need for an educational intervention in order to have physicians who give priority to patients’ best interests in the face of market demands.
KeywordsCommercialization Privatization Medicine Professionalism Medical education Professional ethics
Authors do not have competing interest to declare. An earlier version of this paper was orally presented at an international conference and a national symposium:
•M. Civaner, Y.I. Ulman, H. Balcıoglu, and K. Vatansever. 2009. Medical students’ opinions about commodification of healthcare services and the alteration during medical education. EACME Conference, September 10–11, Venice, Italy.
•M. Civaner, Y.I. Ulman, H. Balcıoglu, and K. Vatansever. 2011. Tip ogrencilerinin saglik hizmetlerinin metalastirilmasi hakkindaki dusunceleri: Tip egitimi boyunca degisim [in Turkish].Topluma Dayalı Tıp Eğitimi—Eğitim Araştırmaları Sempozyumu, Tıp Eğitimini Geliştirme Derneği, May 5–7, Antalya, Turkey.
Yesim Isil Ulman, the second author of the presentation, has withdrawn from the study of her own will and has documented her decision (the signed document is available at request). The authors are grateful to Yesim Isil Ulman for her contributions and also to Raymond De Vries, Marcello Ienca, and Ademola Kazeem Fayemi for their critical review.
- Angell, M. 2005. The Truth about the drug companies: How they deceive us and what to do about it. New York: Random House Inc.Google Scholar
- Baldwin, D., and D. Self. 2006. The assessment of moral reasoning and professionalism in medical education and practice. In Measuring medical professionalism, edited by D.T. Stern, 78. London: Oxford University Press.Google Scholar
- Dixon, A., R. Robertson, J. Appleby, P. Burge, N. Devlin, and H. Magee. 2010. Patient choice. London: The King’s Fund.Google Scholar
- Field, A. 2009. Discovering statistics using SPSS. Los Angeles: Sage publications.Google Scholar
- General Medical Council, U.K. 2013. Good medical practice. Manchester: General Medical Council.Google Scholar
- Mackintosh, M. 2003. Health care commercialisation and the embedding inequality. Geneva: United Nations Research Institute for Social Development. http://www.unrisd.org/80256B3C005BCCF9/(httpAuxPages)/4023556AA730F778C1256DE500649E48/$file/mackinto.pdf. Accessed August 31, 2015.Google Scholar
- Relman, A.S. 2005. The health of nations. The New Republic, March 7. http://www.newrepublic.com/article/the-health-nations. Accessed August 31, 2015.
- Republic of Turkey Ministry of Health. 2001. Health transformation programme. Ankara: Republic of Turkey Ministry of Health.Google Scholar
- Republic of Turkey Ministry of Health. 2007. Turkey health transformation program—the progress so far. Ankara: Republic of Turkey Ministry of Health.Google Scholar
- Republic of Turkey Ministry of Health. 2009. Health transformation program in Turkey—progress report. Ankara: Republic of Turkey Ministry of Health.Google Scholar
- Ruthjersen, A.L. 2007. Neo-liberalism and health care. PhD dissertation, School of Humanities and Human Services, Queensland University of Technology, Brisbane, Australia.Google Scholar
- World Bank. 1993. World development report 1993: Investing in health. New York: Oxford University Press.Google Scholar
- World Bank. 2002. Turkey: Reforming the health sector for improved access and efficiency, report no. 24358-TU. https://openknowledge.worldbank.org/bitstream/handle/10986/14824/multi0page.pdf?sequence=1. Accessed August 31, 2015.Google Scholar
- World Bank. 2003. In Innovations in health service delivery the corporatization of public hospitals, edited by A.S. Preker and A. Harding. Washington, DC: World Bank.Google Scholar
- World Bank. 2014. Project in support of restructuring of health sector. http://www.worldbank.org/projects/P102172/health-transformation-social-security-reform-project?lang=en. Accessed August 31, 2015.
- World Medical Association. 2006. International code of medical ethics. http://www.wma.net/en/30publications/10policies/c8/. Accessed August 31, 2015.Google Scholar
- Zuberi, D.M., and M.B. Ptashnick. 2011. The deleterious consequences of privatization and outsourcing for hospital support work: The experiences of contracted-out hospital cleaners and dietary aids in Vancouver, Canada. Social Science and Medicine 72(6): 907–911. doi: 10.1016/j.socscimed.2010.12.024.CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar