Advertisement

Semantics and Patient Perceptions of New Technologies

  • David R. UrbachEmail author
Chapter

Abstract

The word technology has an overwhelmingly positive connotation. People experience new technologies constantly throughout their daily lives, and their own personal experience provides them with a clear notion of the value of the technologies they interact with. However, people perceive health technologies used in their care much differently from how they perceive the value of consumer products. There is evidence that the words used to describe technologies can have a substantial influence on how they are perceived by patients. Terms that emphasize novelty and innovation are associated with more appealing connotations than terms that emphasize the uncertainty or experimental nature of many new technologies.

Keywords

Advertising of new medical technology Marketing of new medical technology Psychology of new medical technology New technology in medicine Safety of new medical technology Health technology assessment 

References

  1. 1.
    Maisel WH. Medical device regulation: an introduction for the practicing physician. Ann Intern Med. 2004;140(4):296–302.CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  2. 2.
    Umiker-Sebeok DJ. Marketing and semiotics. Berlin: Walter de Gruyter & Co.; 1987.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  3. 3.
    Koc E. Impact of gender in marketing communications: the role of cognitive and affective cues. J Mark Commun. 2002;8(4):257.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  4. 4.
    Rao A, Kynaston J, MacDonald ER, Ahmed I. Patient preferences for surgical techniques: should we invest in new approaches? Surg Endosc. 2010;24:3016–25.CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  5. 5.
    Swanstrom LL, Volckmann E, Hungness E, Soper NJ. Patient attitudes and expectations regarding natural orifice transluminal endoscopic surgery. Surg Endosc. 2009;23:1519–25.CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  6. 6.
    Schwartzkopf R, Sagebin FM, Karia R, Koenig KM, Bosco JA, Slover JD. Factors influencing patients’ willingness to pay for new technologies in hip and knee implants. J Arthroplasty. 2013;28:390–4.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  7. 7.
    Dixon PR, Grant RC, Urbach DR. The impact of marketing language on patient preference for robot-assisted surgery. Surg Innov. 2015;22(1):15–19.Google Scholar
  8. 8.
    Mirkin JN, Lowrance WT, Feifer AH, Mulhall JP, Eastham JE, Elkin EB. Direct-to-consumer internet promotion of robotic prostatectomy exhibits varying quality of information. Health Aff (Millwood). 2012;31(4):760–9.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  9. 9.
    Hey J, Roberts KJ, Morris-Stiff GJ, Toogood GJ. Patient views through the keyhole: new perspectives on single-incision vs. multiport laparoscopic cholecystectomy. HPB. 2012;14:242–6.CrossRefPubMedPubMedCentralGoogle Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer International Publishing Switzerland 2016

Authors and Affiliations

  1. 1.Department of Surgery, Institute of Health Policy, Management and EvaluationUniversity of Toronto, Toronto General HospitalTorontoCanada

Personalised recommendations