End-of-Life Discussions From the Perspective of Social Care and Healthcare Professionals in Palliative Care.

IF 1.3
Omega Pub Date : 2025-11-01 Epub Date: 2023-06-21 DOI:10.1177/00302228231185172
Anne Kuusisto, Kaija Saranto, Päivi Korhonen, Elina Haavisto
{"title":"End-of-Life Discussions From the Perspective of Social Care and Healthcare Professionals in Palliative Care.","authors":"Anne Kuusisto, Kaija Saranto, Päivi Korhonen, Elina Haavisto","doi":"10.1177/00302228231185172","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><p>This study describes the state of end-of-life discussions in Finland. A qualitative descriptive study with thematic interviews was conducted. Data were gathered from palliative care unit nurses, physicians and social workers. Inductive content analysis was used. According to interviewees (<i>n</i> = 33), the state of end-of-life discussion included three main categories. First, optimal end-of-life discussion time included early end-of-life discussion, end-of-life discussion at different phases of severe illness, and flexibility and challenges in scheduling end-of-life discussion. Second, end-of-life discussion initiators included both healthcare professionals and non-healthcare professionals. Third, social care and healthcare professionals' experiences of end-of-life discussion consisted of the importance and challenge of end-of-life discussion, end-of-life communication skills development in multiprofessional care context, and end-of-life communication in multi-cultural care context. The results can be used to justify the need of a national strategy and systematic implementation on Advance Care Planning (ACP), considering the multiprofessional, multicultural and internationalizing operating environment.</p>","PeriodicalId":74338,"journal":{"name":"Omega","volume":" ","pages":"448-470"},"PeriodicalIF":1.3000,"publicationDate":"2025-11-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC12444026/pdf/","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Omega","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1177/00302228231185172","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"2023/6/21 0:00:00","PubModel":"Epub","JCR":"","JCRName":"","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

This study describes the state of end-of-life discussions in Finland. A qualitative descriptive study with thematic interviews was conducted. Data were gathered from palliative care unit nurses, physicians and social workers. Inductive content analysis was used. According to interviewees (n = 33), the state of end-of-life discussion included three main categories. First, optimal end-of-life discussion time included early end-of-life discussion, end-of-life discussion at different phases of severe illness, and flexibility and challenges in scheduling end-of-life discussion. Second, end-of-life discussion initiators included both healthcare professionals and non-healthcare professionals. Third, social care and healthcare professionals' experiences of end-of-life discussion consisted of the importance and challenge of end-of-life discussion, end-of-life communication skills development in multiprofessional care context, and end-of-life communication in multi-cultural care context. The results can be used to justify the need of a national strategy and systematic implementation on Advance Care Planning (ACP), considering the multiprofessional, multicultural and internationalizing operating environment.

Abstract Image

Abstract Image

Abstract Image

从社会关怀和姑息关怀医疗专业人员的角度讨论生命终结。
本研究描述了芬兰生命末期讨论的现状。研究采用了专题访谈的定性描述研究方法。数据来自姑息关怀病房的护士、医生和社会工作者。研究采用了归纳式内容分析。根据受访者(n = 33)的说法,生命末期讨论的状况主要包括三类。首先,最佳临终讨论时间包括早期临终讨论、重症不同阶段的临终讨论以及临终讨论时间安排的灵活性和挑战。第二,生命末期讨论的发起者包括医护人员和非医护人员。第三,社会护理和医护专业人员的临终讨论经验包括临终讨论的重要性和挑战、多专业护理背景下的临终沟通技巧发展以及多元文化护理背景下的临终沟通。考虑到多专业、多文化和国际化的工作环境,研究结果可用于证明有必要制定国家战略并系统地实施临终关怀规划(ACP)。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 求助全文
来源期刊
自引率
0.00%
发文量
0
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
确定
请完成安全验证×
copy
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
右上角分享
点击右上角分享
0
联系我们:info@booksci.cn Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。 Copyright © 2023 布克学术 All rights reserved.
京ICP备2023020795号-1
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:604180095
Book学术官方微信