Steering Clear of Providers

Abstract

Person-first language is a hallmark of conscientious, professional writing. Most writers and editors of scientific content (especially in medicine and related fields) are familiar with terms that empower patients or do not trivialize or label them. Instead of “asthmatics” we write “patients with asthma”; instead of “the aged” we write “elderly patients” or “older people.” The recent update to inclusive language in the AMA Manual of Style also notes this approach for racial and ethnic terms: instead of “Blacks and Whites” we write “Black and White individuals” (after clarifying the categories used in the study and if people were able to self-identify their race and ethnicity).1 Yet this approach to using terms of respect is not limited to patients or study participants: terms applied to health care workers should also be chosen with the same care. For example, the terms “orthopod” (orthopedic surgeon) and “osteopath” (osteopathic physician) are considered jargon.2 One term in particular has engendered a vigorous response: “provider.” What’s Wrong With “Provider”? At first blush, one might think there’s nothing inherently bad about the word “provider.” According to Merriam-Webster, a provider is someone who provides; in other words, supplies something or makes it available.3 Seems accurate enough, no? We’ve all seen documents that discuss our “primary care provider (PCP)” and “preferred provider organization (PPO).” In the cases of insurance documentation, billing codes, and the like, “provider” is a standard term with a very specific, sometimes even legal, definition. In the Health Insurance Portability and Accountability Act (HIPAA), for […]