When dying does not go well: a qualitative study
BMC Palliative Care - 2024
Tóm tắt
Several studies deal with the question of what constitutes a "satisfactory death". A smaller number of studies deal with unsatisfactory dying processes. And only a few shed light on unsatisfactory deaths that take place in hospices and palliative care units, which see themselves as places conducive to a "good" death. What also remains largely undiscussed are the ethical aspects that accompany the observation of an unsatisfactory course of death. The research was carried out as an exploratory and qualitative study. The data collection and analysis were based on the methods of the "grounded theory". Notions of a bad death are articulated here, though hardly by the affected persons and their relatives themselves, but rather by the professionals. Principally, descriptions of unsatisfactory dying processes refer to deficient success in symptom control, whereby the principle of autonomy is of particular importance. The focus here is not only on the needs of patients, but also on the needs of staff. The manifestation of such notions is related to the requirements arising from a practice that apparently evokes a need for accountability in the form of communicative reassurance. An idealised definition of "dying well" is in danger of losing sight of the contextual specifics of the practice involved, which can lead to ethically problematic situations.
Từ khóa
Tài liệu tham khảo
Miyashita M, et al. Good death in cancer care: a nationwide quantitative study. Ann Oncol. 2007;18:1090–7.
Morell EA. Learning that a death can be a good death. J Palliat Med. 2012;15:248–9.
Walters G. Is there such a thing as a good death? Palliat Med. 2004;18:404–8.
Steinhauser K, et al. In search of a good death: observations of patients, families, and providers. Ann Intern Med. 2000;132:825–32.
Granda-Cameron C, Houldin A. Concept analysis of good death in terminally ill patients. Am J Hosp Palliat Care. 2012;29:632–9.
Payne SA, Langley-Evans A, Hillier R. Perceptions of a “good” death: a comparative study of the views of hospice staff and patients. Palliat Med. 1996;10:307–12.
Borbasi S, Wotton K, Redden M, Champan Y. Letting go: a qualitative study of acute care and community nurses’ perceptions of a “good” versus a “bad” death. Aust Crit Care. 2005;18:104–13.
Bradbury M. The “good death”? Dickenson D, Johnson M, Katz JS: Death, Dying and Bereavement, London, Open University/Sage; 2000. p. 59–63.
Vig EK, Davenport NA, Pearlman RA. Good deaths, bad deaths, and preferences for the end of life: a qualitative study of geriatric outpatients. J Am Geriatr Soc. 2002;50:1541–8.
Vig EK, Pearlman RA. Good and bad dying from the perspective of terminally ill men. Arch Intern Med. 2004;164:977–81.
Wilson DM, Hewitt JA. A scoping research literature review to assess the state of existing evidence on the “bad” death. Palliat Support Care. 2018;16:90–106.
Costello J. Dying well: nurses’ experiences of “good and bad” deaths in hospital. J Adv Nurse. 2006;54:594–601.
Kristjanson LJ, McPhee I, Pickstock S, Wilson D, Oldham L, Martin K. Palliative care nurses’ perceptions of good and bad deaths and care expectations: a qualitative analysis. Int J Palliat Nurs. 2001;7:129–39.
Low J, Payne SA. The good and “bad death” perceptions of health professionals working in palliative care. Eur J Cancer Care. 1996;5:237–41.
Glaser BG, Strauss AL. The discovery of grounded theory: Strategies of qualitative research. Chicago: Aldine; 1967.
Corbin J, Strauss AL. Basics of qualitative research. Thousand Oaks: SAGE; 2008.
Vachon ML. Staff stress in hospice palliative dare: a review. Palliat Med. 1995;9:91–122.
Jonsen AR, Toulmin S. The abuse of casuistry. Berkeley: University of California Press; 1988.
Beauchamp TL, Childress JF. Principles of biomedical ethics. 5th ed. New York: Oxford University Press; 2001.
Quante M, Vieth A. Defending principlism well understood (2002). J Med Philos. 2002;27:621–49.