A normativity mapping review on end-of-life care in long-term care institutions by authors from Germany, Austria, and Switzerland.

IF 2.3 2区 哲学 Q1 ETHICS
Ingrid Metzler, Hanna Mayer, Giovanni Rubeis, Jasmin Eppel-Meichlinger
{"title":"A normativity mapping review on end-of-life care in long-term care institutions by authors from Germany, Austria, and Switzerland.","authors":"Ingrid Metzler, Hanna Mayer, Giovanni Rubeis, Jasmin Eppel-Meichlinger","doi":"10.1007/s11019-025-10278-3","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><p>This article presents the findings of a \"normativity mapping review\" designed to make visible the breadth of normative understandings at work within interdisciplinary scholarship on end-of-life care in long-term care institutions. The scope of the literature was limited to peer-reviewed articles authored by scholars affiliated with institutions in Austria, Germany, and Switzerland. Terms and slogans associated with the hospice movement were used as keywords to search for literature in both German and English. During data analysis, values, frameworks, and actions were systematically extracted from the articles. Actions were then clustered into four groups: one involving actions aimed at planning future end-of-life decision-making; another focused on transforming cultures of care; a third encompassing end-of-life practices; and a fourth consisting of residual actions. A comparison of two of these groups shows that normative understandings of end-of-life care in long-term care institutions take shape around two poles-a procedural pole, involving standardised tools that can be used in specific practices to address challenges and improve care, and a substantive pole, centred on the embodied competencies and moral sensibilities of caregivers in realising visions of good end-of-life care.</p>","PeriodicalId":47449,"journal":{"name":"Medicine Health Care and Philosophy","volume":" ","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":2.3000,"publicationDate":"2025-06-06","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Medicine Health Care and Philosophy","FirstCategoryId":"98","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1007/s11019-025-10278-3","RegionNum":2,"RegionCategory":"哲学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q1","JCRName":"ETHICS","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

This article presents the findings of a "normativity mapping review" designed to make visible the breadth of normative understandings at work within interdisciplinary scholarship on end-of-life care in long-term care institutions. The scope of the literature was limited to peer-reviewed articles authored by scholars affiliated with institutions in Austria, Germany, and Switzerland. Terms and slogans associated with the hospice movement were used as keywords to search for literature in both German and English. During data analysis, values, frameworks, and actions were systematically extracted from the articles. Actions were then clustered into four groups: one involving actions aimed at planning future end-of-life decision-making; another focused on transforming cultures of care; a third encompassing end-of-life practices; and a fourth consisting of residual actions. A comparison of two of these groups shows that normative understandings of end-of-life care in long-term care institutions take shape around two poles-a procedural pole, involving standardised tools that can be used in specific practices to address challenges and improve care, and a substantive pole, centred on the embodied competencies and moral sensibilities of caregivers in realising visions of good end-of-life care.

来自德国、奥地利和瑞士的作者对长期护理机构临终关怀的规范性映射回顾。
本文介绍了一项“规范性映射审查”的发现,旨在使长期护理机构的临终关怀跨学科学术研究中工作的规范性理解的广度可见。文献范围仅限于奥地利、德国和瑞士机构的学者撰写的同行评议文章。与临终关怀运动相关的术语和口号被用作搜索德语和英语文献的关键词。在数据分析过程中,系统地从文章中提取价值、框架和行动。然后将行动分为四组:一组涉及旨在规划未来临终决策的行动;另一个重点是改变护理文化;第三种包括临终实践;第四种是残留作用。对其中两个群体的比较表明,对长期护理机构中临终关怀的规范理解围绕两个极点形成——一个是程序极点,涉及可用于具体实践的标准化工具,以应对挑战和改善护理;一个是实质性极点,集中在实现良好临终关怀愿景的护理人员的具体能力和道德敏感性上。
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
CiteScore
4.30
自引率
4.80%
发文量
64
期刊介绍: Medicine, Health Care and Philosophy: A European Journal is the official journal of the European Society for Philosophy of Medicine and Health Care. It provides a forum for international exchange of research data, theories, reports and opinions in bioethics and philosophy of medicine. The journal promotes interdisciplinary studies, and stimulates philosophical analysis centered on a common object of reflection: health care, the human effort to deal with disease, illness, death as well as health, well-being and life. Particular attention is paid to developing contributions from all European countries, and to making accessible scientific work and reports on the practice of health care ethics, from all nations, cultures and language areas in Europe.
×
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