IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/wly/jocnur/v26y2017i23-24p4300-4312.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

Evaluating a dignity care intervention for palliative care in the community setting: community nurses’ perspectives

Author

Listed:
  • Sonja McIlfatrick
  • Michael Connolly
  • Rita Collins
  • Tara Murphy
  • Bridget Johnston
  • Philip Larkin

Abstract

Aims and Objectives To evaluate a dignity care intervention provided by community nurses seeking to address dignity concerns for people with advanced and life‐limiting conditions. Background Evidence would suggest that dying people fear a loss of dignity and a central focus of palliative care is to assist people to die with dignity. Whilst community nurses have a key role to play in the delivery of palliative care, specific interventions for dignity are lacking. Design A mixed methods study using online survey and focus group interviews and thematic analysis to examine data. Methods Twenty four community nurses implemented the dignity care intervention for people with advanced and life‐limiting conditions were recruited from four pilot sites across Ireland. Four focus group interviews and on line survey were conducted between March–June 2015. Results The community nurses found the dignity care intervention useful. It helped the nurses to provide holistic end‐of‐life care and assisted in the overall assessment of palliative care patients, identifying areas that might not otherwise have been noted. Whilst it was a useful tool for communication, they noted that it stimulated some emotionally sensitive conversations for which they felt unprepared. Conclusions Implementing the dignity care intervention in practice was challenging. However, the dignity care intervention facilitated holistic assessment and identified patient dignity‐related concerns that may not have been otherwise identified. Further support is required to overcome barriers and enable dignity‐conserving care. Relevance to clinical practice Ensuring dignity is a key aspect of palliative and end‐of‐life care; however, community nurses may not feel equipped to address this aspect of care. Implementing a dignity care intervention can assist in identifying patient dignity‐related concerns and provision of holistic care. Community nurses need more training to assist in difficult conversations relating to dignity and end‐of‐life care.

Suggested Citation

  • Sonja McIlfatrick & Michael Connolly & Rita Collins & Tara Murphy & Bridget Johnston & Philip Larkin, 2017. "Evaluating a dignity care intervention for palliative care in the community setting: community nurses’ perspectives," Journal of Clinical Nursing, John Wiley & Sons, vol. 26(23-24), pages 4300-4312, December.
  • Handle: RePEc:wly:jocnur:v:26:y:2017:i:23-24:p:4300-4312
    DOI: 10.1111/jocn.13757
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: https://doi.org/10.1111/jocn.13757
    Download Restriction: no

    File URL: https://libkey.io/10.1111/jocn.13757?utm_source=ideas
    LibKey link: if access is restricted and if your library uses this service, LibKey will redirect you to where you can use your library subscription to access this item
    ---><---

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. Chochinov, Harvey Max & Hack, Thomas & McClement, Susan & Kristjanson, Linda & Harlos, Mike, 2002. "Dignity in the terminally ill: a developing empirical model," Social Science & Medicine, Elsevier, vol. 54(3), pages 433-443, February.
    2. Sonja McIlfatrick & Felicity Hasson, 2014. "Evaluating an holistic assessment tool for palliative care practice," Journal of Clinical Nursing, John Wiley & Sons, vol. 23(7-8), pages 1064-1075, April.
    Full references (including those not matched with items on IDEAS)

    Most related items

    These are the items that most often cite the same works as this one and are cited by the same works as this one.
    1. Fabio Ferretti & Andrea Pozza & Maurilio Pallassini & Lorenzo Righi & Fulvia Marini & Sabrina Adami & Anna Coluccia, 2019. "Gender invariance of dignity in non-terminal elderly patients with chronic diseases: a multicentric study," Quality & Quantity: International Journal of Methodology, Springer, vol. 53(3), pages 1645-1656, May.
    2. Camilla A Mousing & Helle Timm & Kirsten Lomborg & Marit Kirkevold, 2018. "Barriers to palliative care in people with chronic obstructive pulmonary disease in home care: A qualitative study of the perspective of professional caregivers," Journal of Clinical Nursing, John Wiley & Sons, vol. 27(3-4), pages 650-660, February.
    3. Bridget Johnston & Philip Larkin & Michael Connolly & Catriona Barry & Melanie Narayanasamy & Ulrika Östlund & Sonja McIlfatrick, 2015. "Dignity‐conserving care in palliative care settings: An integrative review," Journal of Clinical Nursing, John Wiley & Sons, vol. 24(13-14), pages 1743-1772, July.
    4. Street, Annette F. & Love, Anthony, 2005. "Dimensions of privacy in palliative care: views of health professionals," Social Science & Medicine, Elsevier, vol. 60(8), pages 1795-1804, April.
    5. Marjorie Dobratz, 2004. "A Comparative Study of Variables That Have an Impact on Noncancer End-of-Life Diagnoses," Clinical Nursing Research, , vol. 13(4), pages 309-325, November.
    6. McPherson, Christine J. & Wilson, Keith G. & Murray, Mary Ann, 2007. "Feeling like a burden: Exploring the perspectives of patients at the end of life," Social Science & Medicine, Elsevier, vol. 64(2), pages 417-427, January.
    7. Carlos Laranjeira & Marília Dourado, 2022. "“Dignity as a Small Candle Flame That Doesn’t Go Out!”: An Interpretative Phenomenological Study with Patients Living with Advanced Chronic Obstructive Pulmonary Disease," IJERPH, MDPI, vol. 19(24), pages 1-18, December.
    8. Jacobson, Nora, 2007. "Dignity and health: A review," Social Science & Medicine, Elsevier, vol. 64(2), pages 292-302, January.
    9. Tang, Siew Tzuh & Liu, Tsang-Wu & Lai, Mei-Shu & McCorkle, Ruth, 2005. "Discrepancy in the preferences of place of death between terminally ill cancer patients and their primary family caregivers in Taiwan," Social Science & Medicine, Elsevier, vol. 61(7), pages 1560-1566, October.

    More about this item

    Statistics

    Access and download statistics

    Corrections

    All material on this site has been provided by the respective publishers and authors. You can help correct errors and omissions. When requesting a correction, please mention this item's handle: RePEc:wly:jocnur:v:26:y:2017:i:23-24:p:4300-4312. See general information about how to correct material in RePEc.

    If you have authored this item and are not yet registered with RePEc, we encourage you to do it here. This allows to link your profile to this item. It also allows you to accept potential citations to this item that we are uncertain about.

    If CitEc recognized a bibliographic reference but did not link an item in RePEc to it, you can help with this form .

    If you know of missing items citing this one, you can help us creating those links by adding the relevant references in the same way as above, for each refering item. If you are a registered author of this item, you may also want to check the "citations" tab in your RePEc Author Service profile, as there may be some citations waiting for confirmation.

    For technical questions regarding this item, or to correct its authors, title, abstract, bibliographic or download information, contact: Wiley Content Delivery (email available below). General contact details of provider: https://doi.org/10.1111/(ISSN)1365-2702 .

    Please note that corrections may take a couple of weeks to filter through the various RePEc services.

    IDEAS is a RePEc service. RePEc uses bibliographic data supplied by the respective publishers.