Understanding technology in contemporary surgical nursing: a phenomenographic examination

Abstract

The purpose of this paper is to describe the result of phenomenographic research undertaken to identify the qualitatively different ways technology is understood and experienced by contemporary surgical nurses. Twenty surgical nurses were interviewed and conversations were recorded through the use of drawings and audiotape that were analysed using a series of seven analytical steps. There were two major outcomes of the research: eight categories of description were revealed and each one constitutes a conception of the experience and understanding of technology, and an outcome space portraying the logical relations between conceptions was identified. Conceptions revealed demonstrate the importance of technology to the theory, practice, research and education of nurses, and highlight the complexity and significance of technology in contemporary surgical nursing experience.

Understanding the humanistic interaction with medical imaging technology

“…Technology has historically been seen as a major indicator for the progress of humanity, and this is especially the case in medicine (Barnard, 1999) since, in healthcare, symbols of science are more real and more prestigious than symbols of caring, and medical technology has a semiotic primacy over caring in Western cultures (Walker, 1994). This is evident within advertisements and technical reports about modem imaging where the hard technology is often promoted as the only consideration (De Wilde, 2001;MDA evaluation report, 2000;Siemens Medical Solutions, 1999) since it provides physicians with the ability to study physiological and pathological changes within the patient while the impact upon the recipient, in this case the patient, is either omitted or seen as of only secondary importance (Cesar, 1997;McKenna Adler, 1990).…”

“…To try and develop a true definition across a wide range of technologies will be of little value (Orlikowski, 1992), so perhaps the goal is not to seek to lay claim to a definition but to understand the unfolding paradoxes and characteristics of technology (Barnard, 1999).…”

“…In order to summarise some of the key references from the literature, table 2.0 (overleaf) groups the references into broad categories identified as being essential to understand technology (Barnard and Gerber, 1999). Although useful in summarising and cross referencing the articles, table 2.0 only considers a few of the possible categories to which many more could be added.…”

“…It is reasonable therefore to suggest that the aim to understand technology is, at least according to Barnard and Gerber (1999), complete.…”

“…Literature relating to the categories for understanding technology (Barnard & Gerber, 1999) 3rd party copyright material excluded from digitised thesis.…”