Caregivers' Perspectives on Ethical Challenges and Patient Safety in Tele-Palliative Care: An Integrative Review.

IF 1.2 4区 医学 Q3 NURSING
Nadine Schuessler, Manela Glarcher
{"title":"Caregivers' Perspectives on Ethical Challenges and Patient Safety in Tele-Palliative Care: An Integrative Review.","authors":"Nadine Schuessler, Manela Glarcher","doi":"10.1097/NJH.0000000000000986","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><p>Tele-palliative care enables people with a life-limiting illness to consult with palliative care staff without having to leave their homes but requires commitment from all stakeholders, particularly on ethical challenges and patient safety issues. When using telecommunications and virtual technology, ethical challenges and patient safety aspects must be taken into account. The aim was to describe formal and informal caregivers' opportunities in tele-palliative care and the associated ethical and safety challenges using a Whittemore and Knafl integrative review method. Ethical and patient safety perspectives were extracted from studies reporting on tele-palliative care interventions. Content on ethically considerable information on the intervention was coded, categorized, and summarized into a matrix developed in advance from literature on socio-technical arrangements and eHealth applications. Nine studies from experimental and nonexperimental research were included. Four studies reported exclusively on the perspective of formal caregivers, 3 studies addressed the perspective of patients and informal caregivers, and 2 studies covered the perspectives of both. Studies of tele-palliative care interventions implicate effects on patient-caregiver relationships but also show that technology is not seen as a replacement of holistic palliative care. However, the authors do not address other relevant ethical issues (eg, sustainability) or consider aspects of patient safety. There is a need for further research to assess privacy, data security, and patient safety in tele-palliative care from the perspective of caregivers as telehealth becomes increasingly important.</p>","PeriodicalId":54807,"journal":{"name":"Journal of Hospice & Palliative Nursing","volume":null,"pages":null},"PeriodicalIF":1.2000,"publicationDate":"2024-02-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Journal of Hospice & Palliative Nursing","FirstCategoryId":"3","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1097/NJH.0000000000000986","RegionNum":4,"RegionCategory":"医学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"2023/9/23 0:00:00","PubModel":"Epub","JCR":"Q3","JCRName":"NURSING","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

Tele-palliative care enables people with a life-limiting illness to consult with palliative care staff without having to leave their homes but requires commitment from all stakeholders, particularly on ethical challenges and patient safety issues. When using telecommunications and virtual technology, ethical challenges and patient safety aspects must be taken into account. The aim was to describe formal and informal caregivers' opportunities in tele-palliative care and the associated ethical and safety challenges using a Whittemore and Knafl integrative review method. Ethical and patient safety perspectives were extracted from studies reporting on tele-palliative care interventions. Content on ethically considerable information on the intervention was coded, categorized, and summarized into a matrix developed in advance from literature on socio-technical arrangements and eHealth applications. Nine studies from experimental and nonexperimental research were included. Four studies reported exclusively on the perspective of formal caregivers, 3 studies addressed the perspective of patients and informal caregivers, and 2 studies covered the perspectives of both. Studies of tele-palliative care interventions implicate effects on patient-caregiver relationships but also show that technology is not seen as a replacement of holistic palliative care. However, the authors do not address other relevant ethical issues (eg, sustainability) or consider aspects of patient safety. There is a need for further research to assess privacy, data security, and patient safety in tele-palliative care from the perspective of caregivers as telehealth becomes increasingly important.

护理人员对远程姑息治疗中的伦理挑战和患者安全的看法:综合综述。
远程姑息治疗使患有限制生命的疾病的人能够在不必离开家的情况下咨询姑息治疗人员,但需要所有利益相关者的承诺,特别是在道德挑战和患者安全问题上。在使用电信和虚拟技术时,必须考虑道德挑战和患者安全方面。目的是使用Whittemore和Knafl综合审查方法描述正式和非正式护理人员在远程姑息治疗中的机会以及相关的道德和安全挑战。从远程姑息治疗干预的研究报告中提取了伦理和患者安全观点。关于干预的伦理重要信息的内容被编码、分类并汇总到一个矩阵中,该矩阵是根据社会技术安排和电子健康应用的文献预先开发的。包括9项来自实验和非实验研究的研究。4项研究专门报道了正式护理人员的观点,3项研究涉及患者和非正式护理人员的视角,2项研究涵盖了两者的视角。对远程姑息治疗干预措施的研究表明,这对患者-护理者关系产生了影响,但也表明,技术并不能取代整体姑息治疗。然而,作者没有解决其他相关的伦理问题(如可持续性),也没有考虑患者安全的各个方面。随着远程医疗变得越来越重要,有必要从护理人员的角度进一步研究远程姑息治疗中的隐私、数据安全和患者安全。
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
2.60
自引率
11.10%
发文量
203
审稿时长
6-12 weeks
期刊介绍: Journal of Hospice & Palliative Nursing (JHPN) is the official journal of the Hospice & Palliative Nurses Association and is the professional, peer-reviewed journal for nurses in hospice and palliative care settings. Focusing on the clinical, educational and research aspects of care, JHPN offers current and reliable information on end of life nursing. Feature articles in areas such as symptom management, ethics, and futility of care address holistic care across the continuum. Book and article reviews, clinical updates and case studies create a journal that meets the didactic and practical needs of the nurse caring for patients with serious illnesses in advanced stages.
×
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