To Lose a Loved One by Medical Assistance in Dying or by Natural Death with Palliative Care: A Mixed Methods Comparison of Grief Experiences.

IF 1.5 4区 心理学 Q3 PSYCHOLOGY, MULTIDISCIPLINARY
Omega-Journal of Death and Dying Pub Date : 2024-08-01 Epub Date: 2022-04-14 DOI:10.1177/00302228221085191
Philippe Laperle, Marie Achille, Deborah Ummel
{"title":"To Lose a Loved One by Medical Assistance in Dying or by Natural Death with Palliative Care: A Mixed Methods Comparison of Grief Experiences.","authors":"Philippe Laperle, Marie Achille, Deborah Ummel","doi":"10.1177/00302228221085191","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><p>The integration of assisted dying into end-of-life care is raising reflections on bereavement. Patients and families may be faced with a choice between this option and natural death assisted by palliative care; a choice that may affect grief. Therefore, this study describes and compares grief experiences of individuals who have lost a loved one by medical assistance in dying or natural death with palliative care. A mixed design was used. Sixty bereaved individuals completed two grief questionnaires. The qualitative component consisted of 16 individual semi-structured interviews. We found no statistically significant differences between medically assisted and natural deaths, and scores did not suggest grief complications. Qualitative results are nuanced: positive and negative imprints may influence grief in both contexts. Hastened and natural deaths are death circumstances that seem to generally help ease mourning. However, they can still, in interaction with other risk factors, produce difficult experiences for some family caregivers.</p>","PeriodicalId":47794,"journal":{"name":"Omega-Journal of Death and Dying","volume":null,"pages":null},"PeriodicalIF":1.5000,"publicationDate":"2024-08-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC11317015/pdf/","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Omega-Journal of Death and Dying","FirstCategoryId":"102","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1177/00302228221085191","RegionNum":4,"RegionCategory":"心理学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"2022/4/14 0:00:00","PubModel":"Epub","JCR":"Q3","JCRName":"PSYCHOLOGY, MULTIDISCIPLINARY","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

The integration of assisted dying into end-of-life care is raising reflections on bereavement. Patients and families may be faced with a choice between this option and natural death assisted by palliative care; a choice that may affect grief. Therefore, this study describes and compares grief experiences of individuals who have lost a loved one by medical assistance in dying or natural death with palliative care. A mixed design was used. Sixty bereaved individuals completed two grief questionnaires. The qualitative component consisted of 16 individual semi-structured interviews. We found no statistically significant differences between medically assisted and natural deaths, and scores did not suggest grief complications. Qualitative results are nuanced: positive and negative imprints may influence grief in both contexts. Hastened and natural deaths are death circumstances that seem to generally help ease mourning. However, they can still, in interaction with other risk factors, produce difficult experiences for some family caregivers.

通过临终医疗救助或通过姑息治疗自然死亡来失去爱人:悲伤经历的混合方法比较。
将协助死亡纳入临终关怀引起了人们对丧亲之痛的反思。患者和家属可能面临在这一选择和姑息治疗辅助下的自然死亡之间的选择;一个可能影响悲伤的选择。因此,本研究描述并比较了因临终医疗救助或自然死亡与姑息治疗而失去亲人的个人的悲伤经历。采用了混合设计。60名丧亲者完成了两份悲伤问卷。定性部分包括16次个人半结构化访谈。我们发现,医疗辅助死亡和自然死亡之间没有统计学上的显著差异,评分也没有表明悲伤并发症。定性结果是微妙的:积极和消极的印记可能会在这两种情况下影响悲伤。仓促和自然死亡是死亡的情况,似乎通常有助于减轻哀悼。然而,在与其他风险因素的互动中,它们仍然会给一些家庭照顾者带来困难。
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
4.10
自引率
20.00%
发文量
259
×
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