Literature DB >> 10197949

Terminally ill patients' and lay-carers' perceptions and experiences of community-based services.

N J Jarrett1, S A Payne, R A Wiles.   

Abstract

This paper reports on terminally ill patients' and their lay-carers' perceptions and experiences of community-based services. It forms part of a larger investigation which examined the extent of service provision and any perceived gaps and problems from the perspectives of both clients and providers of community-based assistance for the terminally ill. The participants were nine terminally ill patients and 12 lay-carers receiving community nursing care. Fifteen face-to-face, semi-structured interviews were conducted to elicit their experiences and perceptions of the care being provided. Qualitative, thematic analysis was carried out on the audio-taped interviews. On the whole, respondents reported a high level of satisfaction and appreciation for the help provided. Several areas appeared more problematic, however, and warrant further consideration. These include perceptions of health professionals, particularly their role domains, power and expertise, and some of the practical disadvantages and problems faced by some patients and their families. These are illustrated and the implications for dying patients, their lay-carers and community-based health professionals are discussed.

Entities:  

Mesh:

Year:  1999        PMID: 10197949     DOI: 10.1046/j.1365-2648.1999.00908.x

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  J Adv Nurs        ISSN: 0309-2402            Impact factor:   3.187


  9 in total

1.  Hospice at home service: the carer's perspective.

Authors:  Dorry McLaughlin; Kate Sullivan; Felicity Hasson
Journal:  Support Care Cancer       Date:  2006-08-30       Impact factor: 3.603

2.  Patient, primary care physician and specialist expectations of primary care physician involvement in cancer care.

Authors:  Michèle Aubin; Lucie Vézina; René Verreault; Lise Fillion; Eveline Hudon; François Lehmann; Yvan Leduc; Rénald Bergeron; Daniel Reinharz; Diane Morin
Journal:  J Gen Intern Med       Date:  2011-07-13       Impact factor: 5.128

Review 3.  "Please, I want to go home": ethical issues raised when considering choice of place of care in palliative care.

Authors:  Victoria J Wheatley; J Idris Baker
Journal:  Postgrad Med J       Date:  2007-10       Impact factor: 2.401

Review 4.  What do consumers see as important in the continuity of their care?

Authors:  Megan Barnet; Tim Shaw
Journal:  Support Care Cancer       Date:  2013-07-05       Impact factor: 3.603

5.  Expectations to and evaluation of a palliative home-care team as seen by patients and carers.

Authors:  Dorthe Goldschmidt; Lone Schmidt; Allan Krasnik; Ulla Christensen; Mogens Groenvold
Journal:  Support Care Cancer       Date:  2006-05-16       Impact factor: 3.603

Review 6.  [Continuity of cancer care in Quebec: beyond the symptoms].

Authors:  Jean Turgeon; Serge Dumont; Michèle St-Pierre; Andrée Sévigny; Lucie Vézina
Journal:  Can Fam Physician       Date:  2006-12       Impact factor: 3.275

Review 7.  Does the patient-held record improve continuity and related outcomes in cancer care: a systematic review.

Authors:  Marjolein Gysels; Alison Richardson; Irene J Higginson
Journal:  Health Expect       Date:  2007-03       Impact factor: 3.377

8.  The Central Aspects of Pain in the Knee (CAP-Knee) questionnaire; a mixed-methods study of a self-report instrument for assessing central mechanisms in people with knee pain.

Authors:  K Akin-Akinyosoye; R J E James; D F McWilliams; B Millar; R das Nair; E Ferguson; D A Walsh
Journal:  Osteoarthritis Cartilage       Date:  2021-02-20       Impact factor: 6.576

9.  A person-centered integrated care quality framework, based on a qualitative study of patients' evaluation of care in light of chronic care ideals.

Authors:  Gro Berntsen; Audhild Høyem; Idar Lettrem; Cornelia Ruland; Markus Rumpsfeld; Deede Gammon
Journal:  BMC Health Serv Res       Date:  2018-06-20       Impact factor: 2.655

  9 in total

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.