Home › Research › End-of-life care
Nothing to complain about? Residents' and relatives' views on a "good life" and ethical challenges in nursing homes
Bollig G, Gjengedal E, Rosland JH.. Nursing ethics, 2014-12-08
Topic: Risk, prevention and care in population studies
Background Nursing home residents are a vulnerable population. Most of them suffer from multi-morbidity, while many have cognitive impairment or dementia and need care around the clock. Several ethical challenges in nursing homes have been described in the scientific literature. Most studies have used staff members as informants, some have focused on the relatives' view, but substantial knowledge about the residents' perspective is lacking. Objective To study what nursing home residents and their relatives perceive as ethical challenges in Norwegian nursing homes. Research design A qualitative design with in-depth interviews with nursing home residents, and focus-group interviews with relatives of nursing home residents. The digitally recorded interviews were transcribed verbatim. Analysis was based on Interpretive Description. Participants and research context A total of 25 nursing home residents from nine nursing homes in Norway, and 18 relatives of nursing home residents from three of these nursing homes. Ethical considerations This study was reported to and approved by the Regional Ethics Committee in Oslo, Norway. Findings and discussion The main ethical challenges in Norwegian nursing homes from the residents' and relatives' perspective were as follows: (a) acceptance and adaptation, (b) well-being and a good life, (c) autonomy and self-determination, and (d) lack of resources. The relationship with the staff was of outmost importance and was experienced as both rewarding and problematic. None of the residents in our study mentioned ethical challenges connected to end-of-life care. Conclusion Residents and relatives experience ethical challenges in Norwegian nursing homes, mostly connected to "everyday ethical issues."
Cite this study APA, Vancouver, BibTeX · download .bib or .ris
APA 7th
Bollig, G., Gjengedal, E., & Rosland, J. H. (2016). Nothing to complain about? Residents' and relatives' views on a "good life" and ethical challenges in nursing homes. Nursing ethics. https://doi.org/10.1177/0969733014557719
Vancouver
Bollig G, Gjengedal E, Rosland JH. Nothing to complain about? Residents' and relatives' views on a "good life" and ethical challenges in nursing homes. Nursing ethics. 2016. doi:10.1177/0969733014557719. PMID: 25488765.
BibTeX
@article{bollig2016-25488765,
author = {Bollig, G. and Gjengedal, E. and Rosland, J. H.},
title = {{Nothing to complain about? Residents' and relatives' views on a "good life" and ethical challenges in nursing homes}},
journal = {Nursing ethics},
year = {2016},
doi = {10.1177/0969733014557719},
pmid = {25488765},
url = {https://doi.org/10.1177/0969733014557719}
}
Built from the record alzhub holds for this paper, not looked up. Volume, issue and page numbers are not held in the record. Check the citation against the original before you use it.
Key findings
- Ethical considerations This study was reported to and approved by the Regional Ethics Committee in Oslo, Norway.
- Findings and discussion The main ethical challenges in Norwegian nursing homes from the residents' and relatives' perspective were as follows: (a) acceptance and adaptation, (b) well-being and a good life, (c) autonomy and self-determination, and (d) lack of resources.
- The relationship with the staff was of outmost importance and was experienced as both rewarding and problematic.
- None of the residents in our study mentioned ethical challenges connected to end-of-life care.
- Conclusion Residents and relatives experience ethical challenges in Norwegian nursing homes, mostly connected to "everyday ethical issues."
Study details
- Participants25
- Evidence strengthLow
How this study scored 47/100
Published in a peer-reviewed journal. Scored zero for study design, effect reported and randomized / blinded because the record does not state it. We have no data on journal's citation record, times cited, citations per year, impact for its field and year, cited by studies here, still being cited, senior author's track record, institution's track record and multicenter collaboration, so those were left out: it earned 27 of the 58 points we could judge it on, which is 47 out of 100.
| Component | Points | Why |
|---|---|---|
| Journal tier | 7 / 10 | Tier 3 — peer-reviewed journal (Nursing ethics) |
| Journal's citation record | — / 4 | No journal record from OpenAlex — left out of this score |
| Study design | 0 / 12 | No study design recorded — scores zero, not guessed (not stated in the record — scored 0) |
| Strength of evidence | 1 / 5 | Rated “low” in our summary |
| Peer-review validation | 10 / 10 | Peer-reviewed. Published as an article in a named peer-reviewed journal. |
| How recent | 1 / 5 | 2016 — within 20 year(s) of the newest study here |
| Sample size | 1 / 4 | 25 participants |
| Effect reported | 0 / 3 | No effect size reported — scores zero (not stated in the record — scored 0) |
| Studied in people | 3 / 3 | Studied in people (participant count stated) |
| Randomized / blinded | 0 / 2 | No randomization or blinding stated — scores zero (not stated in the record — scored 0) |
| Times cited | — / 7 | No citation count (not found in OpenAlex) — left out of this score |
| Citations per year | — / 5 | No citation count or no year — left out of this score |
| Impact for its field and year | — / 6 | No field-weighted citation impact (OpenAlex has none yet) — left out of this score |
| Cited by studies here | — / 6 | Not yet checked against this library's citation graph — left out of this score |
| Still being cited | — / 4 | No yearly citation counts — left out of this score |
| Senior author's track record | — / 4 | Senior author's record not available — left out of this score |
| Institution's track record | — / 3 | No institution listed in OpenAlex — left out of this score |
| Multicenter collaboration | — / 3 | Institutions not listed — left out of this score |
| Indexed in PubMed | 2 / 2 | Indexed in PubMed (PMID 25488765) |
| Free to read | 2 / 2 | Free to read |
| Points | 27 / 58 | Scored on 11 of 20 parts. We have no data for the rest, so they are left out: 27 of the 58 points we could judge it on is 47 out of 100. |
| Total | 47 / 100 | — |
What each of these 20 components measures, and what this score is not →
Read the original
Free copy unknown: no free-copy check has an answer for this record yet. That does not mean it is paywalled.
Related
Studies in the library that share something with this one. The line above each title says what.
Related studies in End-of-life care
Also tagged “palliative”
858 studies in the library carry the topic tag “palliative”; these are this study's neighbours in a fixed, alphabetical-by-hash tour of them, not the closest in content. All 858 tagged studies.