‘It all depends!’: A qualitative study of preferences for place of care and place of death in terminally ill patients and their family caregivers

Author:

Gerber Katrin1ORCID,Hayes Barbara23,Bryant Christina1

Affiliation:

1. School of Psychological Sciences, The University of Melbourne, Parkville, VIC, Australia

2. Advance Care Planning Program, Northern Health, Bundoora, VIC, Australia

3. Palliative & Supportive Care, The Royal Melbourne Hospital, Melbourne, Victoria, Australia

Abstract

Background: It is often suggested that terminally ill patients favour end-of-life care at home. Yet, it is unclear how these preferences are formed, if the process is similar for patients and family caregivers, and if there are discrepancies between preferences for place of care and place of death. Understanding these nuances is essential to support people in their decision-making and ultimately provide better care at the end-of-life. Aim: To gain an in-depth understanding of how terminally ill patients and their family caregivers make decisions about preferred place of care and place of death. Design: Semi-structured interviews with patients and family caregivers, which were analysed thematically using qualitative description. Setting/participants: A total of 17 participants (8 patients and 9 caregivers) recruited from an acute palliative care hospital ward, a sub-acute hospice unit, and a palliative homecare organisation in Melbourne, Australia. Results: The process of forming location preferences was shaped by uncertainty relating to the illness, the caregiver and the services. Patients and caregivers dealt with this uncertainty on a level of thoughts, emotions, and actions. At the end of this process, patients and caregivers expressed their choices as contextual, personal, relational, conditional and flexible preferences. Conclusions: These findings suggest that in many cases end-of-life decision-making does not conclude with a clear and stable choice. Understanding the reasons for the malleability of preferences and the process of how they are formed has implications for both clinicians and researchers.

Funder

department of education, employment and workplace relations, australian government

Publisher

SAGE Publications

Subject

Anesthesiology and Pain Medicine,General Medicine

同舟云学术

1.学者识别学者识别

2.学术分析学术分析

3.人才评估人才评估

"同舟云学术"是以全球学者为主线,采集、加工和组织学术论文而形成的新型学术文献查询和分析系统,可以对全球学者进行文献检索和人才价值评估。用户可以通过关注某些学科领域的顶尖人物而持续追踪该领域的学科进展和研究前沿。经过近期的数据扩容,当前同舟云学术共收录了国内外主流学术期刊6万余种,收集的期刊论文及会议论文总量共计约1.5亿篇,并以每天添加12000余篇中外论文的速度递增。我们也可以为用户提供个性化、定制化的学者数据。欢迎来电咨询!咨询电话:010-8811{复制后删除}0370

www.globalauthorid.com

TOP

Copyright © 2019-2024 北京同舟云网络信息技术有限公司
京公网安备11010802033243号  京ICP备18003416号-3