Beliefs and attitudes of family caregivers of People with dementia toward advance care planning: A Q methodology study.

JinShil Kim, KyungAh Cho, Yoon Young Hwang, Jung-Ah Lee, Sang Yi Baek, Jisun Yang, Yoonji Park, Seongkum Heo
{"title":"Beliefs and attitudes of family caregivers of People with dementia toward advance care planning: A Q methodology study.","authors":"JinShil Kim, KyungAh Cho, Yoon Young Hwang, Jung-Ah Lee, Sang Yi Baek, Jisun Yang, Yoonji Park, Seongkum Heo","doi":"10.1177/14713012251326463","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><p><b>Background:</b> Family caregivers' perspectives for advance care planning (ACP) are critically important to reflect the end-of-life wishes of people with dementia. Culture can influence ACP practice and people's perspectives toward it. Little is known about family caregivers' perspectives toward ACP in Asian countries, especially in Korea. <b>Purpose:</b> The purpose of this study was to explore beliefs and attitudes toward ACP among family caregivers of people with dementia. <b>Methodology:</b> Using a Q methodology, 28 statements (Q sample) were constructed through an extensive literature review to capture the beliefs and attitudes toward ACP in family caregivers. The P sample (25 family caregivers) completed each grid with a statement in Q sorting table. Data analysis was done using the PQ Method program (Ver. 2.35). <b>Results:</b> Three types emerged from 24 caregivers through a Varimax rotation and explained 53% of the total variance. One caregiver fell into a non-significant for any of the three types. Type 1 (<i>ACP benefit- and patient-caregiver wish-driven caregivers</i>) hold positive attitudes toward pre-care planning and the benefits but lack of respect for the preferences of people with dementia. Type 2 (<i>Well-dying- and dignity-pursued advocators</i>) recognized ACP as a dignity-preserving approach but had concerns about pre-care planning and felt the burden for management of people with dementia. Type 3 (<i>Patient autonomy supportive surrogates)</i> perceived the importance of respecting the preferences of people with dementia and the roles of family caregivers in ACP care. <b>Conclusions:</b> Differences in the perspectives toward ACP of family caregivers have emerged. It is crucial to develop tailored interventions for each type to optimize ACP care for people with dementia and implement them as early as possible after onset to reduce patient suffering and caregiver burden, enhance dignified death, and improve quality of life.</p>","PeriodicalId":72778,"journal":{"name":"Dementia (London, England)","volume":" ","pages":"14713012251326463"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0000,"publicationDate":"2025-03-12","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Dementia (London, England)","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1177/14713012251326463","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"","JCRName":"","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

Background: Family caregivers' perspectives for advance care planning (ACP) are critically important to reflect the end-of-life wishes of people with dementia. Culture can influence ACP practice and people's perspectives toward it. Little is known about family caregivers' perspectives toward ACP in Asian countries, especially in Korea. Purpose: The purpose of this study was to explore beliefs and attitudes toward ACP among family caregivers of people with dementia. Methodology: Using a Q methodology, 28 statements (Q sample) were constructed through an extensive literature review to capture the beliefs and attitudes toward ACP in family caregivers. The P sample (25 family caregivers) completed each grid with a statement in Q sorting table. Data analysis was done using the PQ Method program (Ver. 2.35). Results: Three types emerged from 24 caregivers through a Varimax rotation and explained 53% of the total variance. One caregiver fell into a non-significant for any of the three types. Type 1 (ACP benefit- and patient-caregiver wish-driven caregivers) hold positive attitudes toward pre-care planning and the benefits but lack of respect for the preferences of people with dementia. Type 2 (Well-dying- and dignity-pursued advocators) recognized ACP as a dignity-preserving approach but had concerns about pre-care planning and felt the burden for management of people with dementia. Type 3 (Patient autonomy supportive surrogates) perceived the importance of respecting the preferences of people with dementia and the roles of family caregivers in ACP care. Conclusions: Differences in the perspectives toward ACP of family caregivers have emerged. It is crucial to develop tailored interventions for each type to optimize ACP care for people with dementia and implement them as early as possible after onset to reduce patient suffering and caregiver burden, enhance dignified death, and improve quality of life.

痴呆症患者家庭照顾者对提前照护计划的信念和态度:一项Q方法学研究。
背景:家庭照护者对预先照护计划(ACP)的看法对于反映痴呆症患者的临终愿望至关重要。文化可以影响ACP实践和人们对它的看法。在亚洲国家,尤其是韩国,人们对家庭照顾者对ACP的看法知之甚少。目的:本研究的目的是探讨痴呆患者家庭照顾者对ACP的信念和态度。方法:采用Q方法,通过广泛的文献回顾,构建28个陈述(Q样本),以捕捉家庭照顾者对ACP的信念和态度。P样本(25名家庭照顾者)用Q排序表中的语句完成每个网格。使用PQ Method程序(版本2.35)进行数据分析。结果:24名护理人员通过Varimax旋转出现了三种类型,解释了总方差的53%。一名护理人员在三种类型中任何一种都属于非显著性。1型(ACP福利和病人照顾者愿望驱动的照顾者)对护理前计划和福利持积极态度,但缺乏对痴呆症患者偏好的尊重。第二类人(追求死亡和尊严的倡导者)认为ACP是一种维护尊严的方法,但对护理前计划有顾虑,并感到管理痴呆症患者的负担。3型(患者自主支持性替代)意识到尊重痴呆症患者偏好和家庭照顾者在ACP护理中的作用的重要性。结论:家庭照顾者对ACP的看法存在差异。至关重要的是,针对每种类型制定量身定制的干预措施,以优化对痴呆症患者的ACP护理,并在发病后尽早实施,以减轻患者痛苦和护理人员负担,促进有尊严的死亡,并改善生活质量。
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:481959085
Book学术官方微信