Department of Supportive Care, Princess Margaret Cancer Centre, University Health Network, Toronto, Ontario, Canada
Global Institute of Psychosocial, Palliative and End-of-Life Care (GIPPEC), University of Toronto, Toronto, Ontario, Canada.
BMJ Open. 2021 Dec 3;11(12):e055789. doi: 10.1136/bmjopen-2021-055789.
Canadians have had legal access to medical assistance in dying (MAiD) since 2016. However, despite substantial overlap in populations who request MAiD and who require palliative care (PC) services, policies and recommended practices regarding the optimal relationship between MAiD and PC services are not well developed. Multiple models are possible, including autonomous delivery of these services and formal or informal coordination, collaboration or integration. However, it is not clear which of these approaches are most appropriate, feasible or acceptable in different Canadian health settings in the context of the COVID-19 pandemic and in the post-pandemic period. The aim of this qualitative study is to understand the attitudes and opinions of key stakeholders from the government, health system, patient groups and academia in Canada regarding the optimal relationship between MAiD and PC services.
A qualitative, purposeful sampling approach will elicit stakeholder feedback of 25-30 participants using semistructured interviews. Stakeholders with expertise and engagement in MAiD or PC who hold leadership positions in their respective organisations across Canada will be invited to provide their perspectives on the relationship between MAiD and PC; capacity-building needs; policy development opportunities; and the impact of the COVID-19 pandemic on the relationship between MAiD and PC services. Transcripts will be analysed using content analysis. A framework for integrated health services will be used to assess the impact of integrating services on multiple levels.
This study has received ethical approval from the University Health Network Research Ethics Board (No 19-5518; Toronto, Canada). All participants will be required to provide informed electronic consent before a qualitative interview is scheduled, and to provide verbal consent prior to the start of the qualitative interview. Findings from this study could inform healthcare policy, the delivery of MAiD and PC, and enhance the understanding of the multilevel factors relevant for the delivery of these services. Findings will be disseminated in conferences and peer-reviewed publications.
自 2016 年以来,加拿大人已经可以合法地获得医疗协助自杀(MAiD)。然而,尽管请求 MAiD 和需要姑息治疗(PC)服务的人群有很大的重叠,但关于 MAiD 和 PC 服务之间最佳关系的政策和建议实践并没有得到很好的制定。可能有多种模式,包括自主提供这些服务以及正式或非正式的协调、协作或整合。然而,在 COVID-19 大流行和大流行后时期,在不同的加拿大卫生环境中,哪种方法最合适、最可行或最可接受尚不清楚。本定性研究的目的是了解加拿大政府、卫生系统、患者群体和学术界的主要利益相关者对 MAiD 和 PC 服务之间最佳关系的态度和意见。
采用定性、有针对性的抽样方法,通过半结构化访谈,征求 25-30 名参与者的反馈意见。将邀请在各自组织中具有 MAiD 或 PC 专业知识和参与经验并担任领导职务的利益相关者,就 MAiD 和 PC 之间的关系、能力建设需求、政策制定机会以及 COVID-19 大流行对 MAiD 和 PC 服务之间关系的影响提供他们的观点。将使用内容分析对转录本进行分析。将使用综合卫生服务框架来评估整合服务对多个层面的影响。
本研究已获得加拿大多伦多大学卫生网络伦理审查委员会的伦理批准(编号 19-5518)。在安排定性访谈之前,所有参与者都需要提供电子知情同意,并且在定性访谈开始之前,需要提供口头同意。本研究的结果可以为医疗保健政策、MAiD 和 PC 的提供提供信息,并增强对提供这些服务的多层次因素的理解。研究结果将在会议和同行评议出版物中传播。