4.1 Article

Does Disclosure of Terminal Prognosis Mean Losing Hope? Insights from Exploring Patient Perspectives on Their Experience of Palliative Care Consultations

期刊

JOURNAL OF PALLIATIVE MEDICINE
卷 18, 期 12, 页码 1019-1025

出版社

MARY ANN LIEBERT, INC
DOI: 10.1089/jpm.2015.0038

关键词

-

资金

  1. Unihealth Foundation

向作者/读者索取更多资源

Background: A primary barrier to physician disclosure of terminal prognosis is concern that patients will lose hope. Inpatient palliative care (IPC) teams are especially posed to mediate this barrier, but little is known about patient perceptions and experience of IPC. Objective: This study aimed to elicit seriously ill patients' perspective and experience of an IPC consultation, and to explore patient attitudes toward information derived from the consultation. Methods: An exploratory, qualitative study was conducted at a large nonprofit community hospital in the Los Angeles area. An established IPC team conducted individualized consults with patients and families within 24 hours of referral. Eligible participants were English-speaking adults, aged 18 or over, who had received an IPC consultation within the previous week during their hospitalization. Purposive recruitment of patients was conducted by the IPC social worker. Interviews were conducted at bedside using a semistructured interview protocol employing open-ended questions. Results: Twelve seriously ill patients were interviewed. Four themes were identified from the interview transcripts: (1) holistic care approach, (2) knowledge/information gained, (3) hope and enlightenment, and (4) patient readiness. Conclusions: Results suggest that disclosure of a terminal prognosis does not mean loss of patient hope. Instead, hope was redefined on a goal other than cure. Presenting patients with information and increasing their knowledge about care options and resources may facilitate patients in identifying meaningful goals that are better aligned with their prognosis.

作者

我是这篇论文的作者
点击您的名字以认领此论文并将其添加到您的个人资料中。

评论

主要评分

4.1
评分不足

次要评分

新颖性
-
重要性
-
科学严谨性
-
评价这篇论文

推荐

暂无数据
暂无数据