4.5 Article

Religious Beliefs and Practices in End-Stage Renal Disease: Implications for Clinicians

期刊

JOURNAL OF PAIN AND SYMPTOM MANAGEMENT
卷 44, 期 3, 页码 400-409

出版社

ELSEVIER SCIENCE INC
DOI: 10.1016/j.jpainsymman.2011.09.019

关键词

End-of-life decision making; religion; spirituality; end-stage renal disease; palliative care

资金

  1. Miller-Dwan Foundation in Duluth, Minnesota

向作者/读者索取更多资源

Context. Several components of palliative care are particularly applicable in end-stage renal disease (ESRD), including the spiritual domain. Objectives. To investigate how ESRD patients and their families make decisions and cope with their circumstances and dialysis treatment. Methods. A prospective qualitative study interviewed 31 elderly dialysis patients and their family members; interviews lasted 30-90 minutes. Interviews were transcribed and coded independently by three investigators. The codes were collected into content-specific nodes and themes. Investigators identified and reconciled their interpretations by returning to the transcripts to assure that conclusions reflected participants' sentiments. Results. Five themes pertaining to religious beliefs and practices emerged. Two themes were related to decision making: their faith-based beliefs and the meaning that emerges from these beliefs; two described how their coping is impacted: the participants' religious practices and their perceived support from the church community; and one described the participants' spiritual distress. Conclusion. These findings offer insights into chaplains' roles in the ESRD setting and the issues that they and other palliative care team members can anticipate and address in patient support and decision making. The results also support recent work to develop methodologies for research on religious and spiritual issues in medical settings. J Pain Symptom Manage 2012;44:400-409. (C) 2012 U. S. Cancer Pain Relief Committee. Published by Elsevier Inc. All rights reserved.

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

4.5
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