"They Did Not Know How to Talk to Us and It Seems That They Didn't Care:" Narratives from Bereaved Family Members of Black Veterans.

IF 3.2 3区 医学 Q2 PUBLIC, ENVIRONMENTAL & OCCUPATIONAL HEALTH
Ann Kutney-Lee, Keri L Rodriguez, Mary Ersek, J Margo Brooks Carthon
{"title":"\"They Did Not Know How to Talk to Us and It Seems That They Didn't Care:\" Narratives from Bereaved Family Members of Black Veterans.","authors":"Ann Kutney-Lee, Keri L Rodriguez, Mary Ersek, J Margo Brooks Carthon","doi":"10.1007/s40615-023-01790-4","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><p>Racial disparities in the quality of health care services, including end of life (EOL) care, are well-documented. While several explanations for these inequities have been proposed, few studies have examined the underlying mechanisms. This paper presents the results of the qualitative phase of a concurrent mixed-methods study (QUANT + QUAL) that sought to identify explanations for observed racial differences in quality of EOL care ratings using the Department of Veterans Affairs Bereaved Family Survey (BFS). The objective of the qualitative phase of the study was to understand the specific experiences that contributed to an unfavorable overall EOL quality rating on the BFS among family members of Black Veterans. We used inductive thematic analysis to code BFS open-ended items associated with 165 Black Veterans whose family member rated the overall quality of care received by the Veteran in the last month of life as \"poor\" or \"fair.\" Four major themes emerged from the BFS narratives, including (1) Positive Aspects of Care, (2) Unmet Care Needs, (3) Lack of Empathy, Dignity, and Respect, and (4) Poor Communication. Additionally, some family members offered recommendations for care improvements. Our discussion includes integrated results from both our qualitative and previously reported quantitative findings that may serve as a foundation for future evidence-based interventions to improve the equitable delivery of high-quality EOL care.</p>","PeriodicalId":16921,"journal":{"name":"Journal of Racial and Ethnic Health Disparities","volume":" ","pages":"3367-3378"},"PeriodicalIF":3.2000,"publicationDate":"2024-12-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Journal of Racial and Ethnic Health Disparities","FirstCategoryId":"3","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1007/s40615-023-01790-4","RegionNum":3,"RegionCategory":"医学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"2023/9/21 0:00:00","PubModel":"Epub","JCR":"Q2","JCRName":"PUBLIC, ENVIRONMENTAL & OCCUPATIONAL HEALTH","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

Racial disparities in the quality of health care services, including end of life (EOL) care, are well-documented. While several explanations for these inequities have been proposed, few studies have examined the underlying mechanisms. This paper presents the results of the qualitative phase of a concurrent mixed-methods study (QUANT + QUAL) that sought to identify explanations for observed racial differences in quality of EOL care ratings using the Department of Veterans Affairs Bereaved Family Survey (BFS). The objective of the qualitative phase of the study was to understand the specific experiences that contributed to an unfavorable overall EOL quality rating on the BFS among family members of Black Veterans. We used inductive thematic analysis to code BFS open-ended items associated with 165 Black Veterans whose family member rated the overall quality of care received by the Veteran in the last month of life as "poor" or "fair." Four major themes emerged from the BFS narratives, including (1) Positive Aspects of Care, (2) Unmet Care Needs, (3) Lack of Empathy, Dignity, and Respect, and (4) Poor Communication. Additionally, some family members offered recommendations for care improvements. Our discussion includes integrated results from both our qualitative and previously reported quantitative findings that may serve as a foundation for future evidence-based interventions to improve the equitable delivery of high-quality EOL care.

“他们不知道如何与我们交谈,似乎他们不在乎:”黑人退伍军人丧亲家庭成员的叙述。
包括临终关怀在内的医疗服务质量方面的种族差异有据可查。虽然对这些不平等现象提出了几种解释,但很少有研究探讨其潜在机制。本文介绍了并行混合方法研究的定性阶段的结果(QUANT + QUAL),试图通过退伍军人事务部丧亲家庭调查(BFS)来确定观察到的EOL护理评级质量种族差异的解释。该研究定性阶段的目的是了解导致黑人退伍军人家庭成员对BFS的总体EOL质量评级不利的具体经历。我们使用归纳主题分析对与165名黑人退伍军人相关的BFS开放式项目进行了编码,这些退伍军人的家庭成员将退伍军人在生命最后一个月接受的整体护理质量评为“差”或“尚可”。BFS叙述中出现了四个主要主题,包括(1)护理的积极方面,(2)未满足的护理需求,(3)缺乏同理心、尊严和尊重,(4)沟通不畅。此外,一些家庭成员提出了改善护理的建议。我们的讨论包括我们定性和先前报告的定量研究结果的综合结果,这些结果可能为未来的循证干预措施奠定基础,以改善高质量EOL护理的公平提供。
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
Journal of Racial and Ethnic Health Disparities
Journal of Racial and Ethnic Health Disparities PUBLIC, ENVIRONMENTAL & OCCUPATIONAL HEALTH-
CiteScore
7.30
自引率
5.10%
发文量
263
期刊介绍: Journal of Racial and Ethnic Health Disparities reports on the scholarly progress of work to understand, address, and ultimately eliminate health disparities based on race and ethnicity. Efforts to explore underlying causes of health disparities and to describe interventions that have been undertaken to address racial and ethnic health disparities are featured. Promising studies that are ongoing or studies that have longer term data are welcome, as are studies that serve as lessons for best practices in eliminating health disparities. Original research, systematic reviews, and commentaries presenting the state-of-the-art thinking on problems centered on health disparities will be considered for publication. We particularly encourage review articles that generate innovative and testable ideas, and constructive discussions and/or critiques of health disparities.Because the Journal of Racial and Ethnic Health Disparities receives a large number of submissions, about 30% of submissions to the Journal are sent out for full peer review.
×
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