Affiliation:
1. Centre for Health Services Research, University of Newcastle-upon-Tyne,
Abstract
Blood pressure is one of the key measurements taken in standard clinical examinations. Its importance has long been associated with the instrumental precision offered by the sphygmomanometer, which is supposed to have replaced other, more imprecise methods of blood pressure measurement, such as feeling the pulse with the finger. Drawing on ethnographic fieldwork in a neurosurgical clinic, this paper explores the co-existence of the sphygmomanometer and the finger methods in practice. I argue that in neurosurgery these methods are both independent from and interdependent with each other: independent in the way they achieve different assessments of the patient’s blood pressure at the same time; and interdependent in the way the surgeon’s and anaesthetist’s measurements are dynamically linked with each other. The paper suggests that this particular form of coordination through heterogeneity might be described, borrowing from Michel Serres’ work, as mutual parasitism, and that this metaphor might be useful in rethinking the role of science - research, or ‘evidence’ - in medical practice.
Subject
History and Philosophy of Science,General Social Sciences,History
Cited by
35 articles.
订阅此论文施引文献
订阅此论文施引文献,注册后可以免费订阅5篇论文的施引文献,订阅后可以查看论文全部施引文献