They do their utmost: promise and limits of palliative care in two refugee camps in Rwanda, a qualitative study.

After often gruelling journeys, some refugees arrive at secure locations with severe injury or illness. Others find themselves shortly thereafter facing a life-limiting health condition. Palliative care has been the focus of recent research, and of academic and aid sector dialogue. In this study, we ask: What are experiences and needs of patients and care providers? What opportunities and obstacles exist to enhance or introduce means of reducing suffering for patients facing serious illness and injury in crisis settings? We present findings of a qualitative sub-study within a larger programme of research exploring moral and practical dimensions of palliative care in humanitarian crisis contexts. This paper presents vignettes about palliative care from refugees and care providers in two refugee camps in Rwanda, and is among the first to provide empirical evidence on first-hand experiences of individuals who have fled protracted conflict and face dying far from home. Along with narratives of their experiences, participants provided a range of recommendations from small (micro) interventions that are low cost, but high impact, through to larger (macro) changes at the systems and societal levels of benefit to policy developers and decision-makers.

A case analysis of partnered research on palliative care for refugees in Jordan and Rwanda.

BACKGROUND: This case analysis describes dilemmas and challenges of ethical partnering encountered in the process of conducting a research study that explored moral and practical dimensions of palliative care in humanitarian crisis settings. Two contexts are the focus of this case analysis: Jordan, an acute conflict-induced refugee situation, and Rwanda, a protracted conflict-induced refugee setting. The study's main goal was to better understand ways humanitarian organizations and health care providers might best support ethically and contextually appropriate palliative care in humanitarian contexts. An unintended outcome of the research was learning lessons about ethical dimensions of transnational research partnerships, which is the focus of this case analysis. DISCUSSION: There exist ongoing challenges for international collaborative research in humanitarian conflict-induced settings. Research partnerships were crucial for connecting with key stakeholders associated with the full study (e.g., refugees with life limiting illness, local healthcare providers, aid organization representatives). While important relationships were established, obstacles limited our abilities to fully attain the type of mutual partnership we aimed for. Unique challenges faced during the research included: (a) building, nurturing and sustaining respectful and equitable research partnerships between collaborators in contexts of cultural difference and global inequality; (b) appropriate ethics review and challenges of responding to local decision-maker's research needs; and (c) equity and fairness towards vulnerable populations. Research strategies were adapted and applied to respond to these challenges with a specific focus on (d) research rewards and restitution. CONCLUSIONS: This case analysis sheds light on the importance of understanding cultural norms in all research roles, building relationships with decision makers, and developing teams that include researchers from within humanitarian crisis settings to ensure that mutually beneficial research outcomes are ethical as well as culturally and contextually relevant.