Change search
CiteExportLink to record
Permanent link

Direct link
Cite
Citation style
  • apa
  • harvard1
  • ieee
  • modern-language-association-8th-edition
  • vancouver
  • Other style
More styles
Language
  • de-DE
  • en-GB
  • en-US
  • fi-FI
  • nn-NO
  • nn-NB
  • sv-SE
  • Other locale
More languages
Output format
  • html
  • text
  • asciidoc
  • rtf
Traffic risk work with sleepy patients: from rationality to practice
Uppsala Universitet, Department of Sociology, Uppsala, Sweden.
Jönköping University, School of Health and Welfare, HHJ, Dep. of Nursing Science. Jönköping University, School of Health and Welfare, HHJ. ADULT.ORCID iD: 0000-0003-1884-5696
Department of Neurosciences and Inflammation, Linköping University, Linköping, Sweden.
2018 (English)In: Health, Risk and Society, ISSN 1369-8575, E-ISSN 1469-8331, Vol. 20, no 1-2, p. 23-42Article in journal (Refereed) Published
Abstract [en]

In this article, we aim to contribute to the emerging field of risk-work studies by examining the relationship between risk rationality and risk practices in nurses’ conversations with Obstructive Sleep Apnoea patients about traffic risks. Legislation in Sweden towards traffic risk involves clinicians making risk assessment of patients prone to falling asleep while driving. In contrast to an overall care rationale, this means that the health of the patient is not the only risk object in treatment consultations. However, guidelines on how to implement legislation are missing. To examine the practical reality of nurses’ traffic-risk work, we draw on an analysis of data from a Swedish study in 2015. This study included qualitative interviews with specialist nurses and video-recorded interactions between nurses and Obstructive Sleep Apnoea patients. We found that a lack of clarity in traffic-risk guidelines on how risk should be addressed was evident in both interview accounts and in observed practice. While nurses primarily accounted for risk work as treatment-relevant education, they practised risk work as interrogation. Patients also treated nurses’ inquiries as assessment – not education – by responding defensively. We conclude that while confusing risk work and treatment enables clinicians to treat patients as competent actors, it obscures the controlling aspects of traffic-risk questions for individual patients and downplays the implications of drowsy driving for general traffic safety. 

Place, publisher, year, edition, pages
Taylor & Francis, 2018. Vol. 20, no 1-2, p. 23-42
Keywords [en]
conversation analysis, Obstructive Sleep Apnoea, risk, risk assessment, risk work, sleepy patients, traffic
National Category
Nursing
Identifiers
URN: urn:nbn:se:hj:diva-38188DOI: 10.1080/13698575.2017.1399986ISI: 000426919500003Scopus ID: 2-s2.0-85033715587OAI: oai:DiVA.org:hj-38188DiVA, id: diva2:1166317
Available from: 2017-12-14 Created: 2017-12-14 Last updated: 2018-07-16Bibliographically approved

Open Access in DiVA

No full text in DiVA

Other links

Publisher's full textScopus

Authority records BETA

Broström, Anders

Search in DiVA

By author/editor
Broström, Anders
By organisation
HHJ, Dep. of Nursing ScienceHHJ. ADULT
In the same journal
Health, Risk and Society
Nursing

Search outside of DiVA

GoogleGoogle Scholar

doi
urn-nbn

Altmetric score

doi
urn-nbn
Total: 16 hits
CiteExportLink to record
Permanent link

Direct link
Cite
Citation style
  • apa
  • harvard1
  • ieee
  • modern-language-association-8th-edition
  • vancouver
  • Other style
More styles
Language
  • de-DE
  • en-GB
  • en-US
  • fi-FI
  • nn-NO
  • nn-NB
  • sv-SE
  • Other locale
More languages
Output format
  • html
  • text
  • asciidoc
  • rtf