IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/wly/jocnur/v27y2018i21-22p4128-4140.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

Patient autonomy in a high‐tech care context—A theoretical framework

Author

Listed:
  • Catharina Lindberg
  • Cecilia Fagerström
  • Ania Willman

Abstract

Aims and objectives To synthesise and interpret previous findings with the aim of developing a theoretical framework for patient autonomy in a high‐tech care context. Background Putting the somewhat abstract concept of patient autonomy into practice can prove difficult as when it is highlighted in healthcare literature, the patient perspective is often invisible. Autonomy presumes that a person has experience, education, self‐discipline and decision‐making capacity. Reference to autonomy in relation to patients in high‐tech care environments could therefore be considered paradoxical, as in most cases, these persons are vulnerable, with impaired physical and/or metacognitive capacity, thus making extended knowledge of patient autonomy for these persons even more important. Design Theory development. Methods The basic approaches in theory development by Walker and Avant were used to create a theoretical framework through an amalgamation of the results from three qualitative studies conducted previously by the same research group. Results A theoretical framework—the control‐partnership‐transition framework—was delineated disclosing different parts cocreating the prerequisites for patient autonomy in high‐tech care environments. Assumptions and propositional statements that guide theory development were also outlined, as were guiding principles for use in day‐to‐day nursing care. Four strategies used by patients were revealed as follows: the strategy of control, the strategy of partnership, the strategy of trust and the strategy of transition. Conclusions An extended knowledge base, founded on theoretical reasoning about patient autonomy, could facilitate nursing care that would allow people to remain/become autonomous in the role of patient in high‐tech care environments. Relevance to clinical practice The control‐partnership‐transition framework would be of help in supporting and defending patient autonomy when caring for individual patients, as it provides an understanding of the strategies employed by patients to achieve autonomy in high‐tech care contexts. The guiding principles for patient autonomy presented could be used in nursing guidelines.

Suggested Citation

  • Catharina Lindberg & Cecilia Fagerström & Ania Willman, 2018. "Patient autonomy in a high‐tech care context—A theoretical framework," Journal of Clinical Nursing, John Wiley & Sons, vol. 27(21-22), pages 4128-4140, November.
  • Handle: RePEc:wly:jocnur:v:27:y:2018:i:21-22:p:4128-4140
    DOI: 10.1111/jocn.14562
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: https://doi.org/10.1111/jocn.14562
    Download Restriction: no

    File URL: https://libkey.io/10.1111/jocn.14562?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. Claire Minton & Lesley Batten & Annette Huntington, 2018. "The impact of a prolonged stay in the ICU on patients’ fundamental care needs," Journal of Clinical Nursing, John Wiley & Sons, vol. 27(11-12), pages 2300-2310, June.
    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. Alvisa Palese & Jessica Longhini & Matteo Danielis, 2021. "To what extent Unfinished Nursing Care tools coincide with the discrete elements of The Fundamentals of Care Framework? A comparative analysis based on a systematic review," Journal of Clinical Nursing, John Wiley & Sons, vol. 30(1-2), pages 239-265, January.
    2. Debra Jackson & Olga Kozlowska, 2018. "Fundamental care—the quest for evidence," Journal of Clinical Nursing, John Wiley & Sons, vol. 27(11-12), pages 2177-2178, June.
    3. Alison Kitson, 2018. "Moving on…," Journal of Clinical Nursing, John Wiley & Sons, vol. 27(11-12), pages 2175-2176, June.
    4. Cathleen Aspinall & Jenny M. Parr & Julia Slark & Denise Wilson, 2020. "The culture conversation: Report from the 2nd Australasian ILC meeting—Auckland 2019," Journal of Clinical Nursing, John Wiley & Sons, vol. 29(11-12), pages 1768-1773, June.

    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:27:y:2018:i:21-22:p:4128-4140. 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.