Queensland Bioethics Centre, Australian Catholic University, Brisbane, Queensland, Australia
Queensland Bioethics Centre, Australian Catholic University, Brisbane, Queensland, Australia.
BMJ Open. 2023 May 9;13(5):e065964. doi: 10.1136/bmjopen-2022-065964.
There is little research on moral uncertainties and distress of palliative and hospice care providers (PHCPs) working in jurisdictions anticipating legalising voluntary assisted dying (VAD). This study examines the perception and anticipated concerns of PHCPs in providing VAD in the State of Queensland, Australia prior to legalisation of the practice in 2021. The findings help inform strategies to facilitate training and support the health and well-being of healthcare workers involved in VAD.
The study used a qualitative approach to examine and analyse the perception and anticipated concerns of PHCPs regarding challenges of providing assisted dying in Queensland. Fourteen PHCPs were recruited using a purposive sampling strategy to obtain a broad representation of perspectives including work roles, geographical locations and workplace characteristics. Data were collected via one in-depth interview per participant. The transcripts were coded for patterns and themes using an inductive analysis approach following the tradition of Grounded Theory.
The study was conducted in hospital, hospice, community and residential aged care settings in Queensland, Australia. These included public and private facilities, secular and faith-based facilities, and regional/rural and urban facilities.
Interviews were conducted with fourteen PHCPs: 10 nurses and 4 physicians; 11 female and 3 male. The median number of years of palliative care practice was 17, ranging from 2 to 36 years. For inclusion, participants had to be practising palliative and hospice care providers.
PHCPs are divided on whether VAD should be considered part of palliative care. Expectations of moral distress and uncertainty about practising VAD were identified in five areas: handling requests, assessing patient capacity, arranging patient transfers and logistical issues, managing unsuccessful attempts, and dealing with team conflicts and stigma.
The possibility of having to practise VAD causes moral distress and uncertainty for some PHCPs. Procedural clarity can address some uncertainties; moral and psychological distress, however, remains a source of tension that needs support to ensure ongoing care of both patients and PHCPs. The introduction of VAD post-legalisation may present an occasion for further moral education and development of PHCPs.
在预期将自愿协助死亡(VAD)合法化的司法管辖区中,很少有研究关注姑息治疗和临终关怀提供者(PHCP)的道德不确定性和困境。本研究调查了澳大利亚昆士兰州 PHCP 在 2021 年该实践合法化之前对提供 VAD 的看法和预期关注。研究结果有助于为促进培训和支持参与 VAD 的医疗保健工作者的健康和福祉提供信息。
本研究采用定性方法,考察和分析 PHCP 对在昆士兰州提供协助死亡所面临挑战的看法和预期关注。通过目的抽样策略招募了 14 名 PHCP,以广泛代表包括工作角色、地理位置和工作场所特征在内的观点。每位参与者通过一次深入访谈收集数据。采用扎根理论的传统方法,对转录本进行模式和主题编码的归纳分析。
该研究在澳大利亚昆士兰州的医院、临终关怀、社区和养老院进行。这些机构包括公立和私立设施、世俗和信仰为基础的设施,以及区域/农村和城市设施。
对 14 名 PHCP 进行了访谈:10 名护士和 4 名医生;11 名女性和 3 名男性。姑息治疗实践的中位数年限为 17 年,范围从 2 年到 36 年。参与者必须是姑息治疗和临终关怀提供者,才能被纳入研究。
PHCP 对 VAD 是否应被视为姑息治疗的一部分存在分歧。在五个方面发现了道德困境和对实践 VAD 的不确定性:处理请求、评估患者能力、安排患者转介和后勤问题、管理不成功的尝试,以及处理团队冲突和耻辱感。
对一些 PHCP 来说,不得不实践 VAD 会引起道德困境和不确定性。程序上的明确性可以解决一些不确定性;然而,道德和心理困扰仍然是一个紧张的根源,需要支持,以确保患者和 PHCP 的持续护理。合法化后引入 VAD 可能为进一步的道德教育和 PHCP 的发展提供机会。