ABSTRACT
OBJECTIVE: We developed a specific cognitive-existential intervention to improve existential distress in nonmetastatic cancer patients. The present study reports the feasibility of implementing and evaluating this intervention, which involved 12 weekly sessions in both individual and group formats, and explores the efficacy of the intervention on existential and global quality of life (QoL) measures. METHOD: Some 33 nonmetastatic cancer patients were randomized between the group intervention, the individual intervention, and the usual condition of care. Evaluation of the intervention on the existential and global QoL of patients was performed using the existential well-being subscale and the global scale of the McGill Quality of Life (MQoL) Questionnaire. RESULTS: All participants agreed that their participation in the program helped them deal with their illness and their personal life. Some 88.9% of participants agreed that this program should be proposed for all cancer patients, and 94.5% agreed that this intervention helped them to reflect on the meaning of their life. At post-intervention, both existential and psychological QoL improved in the group intervention versus usual care (p = 0.086 and 0.077, respectively). At the three-month follow-up, global and psychological QoL improved in the individual intervention versus usual care (p = 0.056 and 0.047, respectively). SIGNIFICANCE OF RESULTS: This pilot study confirms the relevance of the intervention and the feasibility of the recruitment and randomization processes. The data strongly suggest a potential efficacy of the intervention for existential and global quality of life, which will have to be confirmed in a larger study.
Subject(s)
Cognitive Behavioral Therapy/methods , Existentialism/psychology , Neoplasms/therapy , Palliative Care/methods , Quality of Life , Adult , Aged , Female , Humans , Male , Middle Aged , Neoplasms/psychology , Palliative Care/psychology , Pilot Projects , Quebec , Surveys and QuestionnairesABSTRACT
The purpose of this study was to describe stressors experienced by nurses in providing end-of-life palliative care (EoL/PC) in intensive care units (ICUs). A descriptive qualitative design was used. A total of 42 nurses from 5 ICUs in the province of Quebec, Canada, participated in 10 focus groups. Stressors were found to be clustered in 3 categories: organizational, professional, and emotional. The major organizational stressors were lack of a palliative care approach, interprofessional difficulty, lack of continuity in life-support and treatment plans, and conflicting demands. Professional stressors included lack of EoL/PC competencies and difficulty communicating with families and collaborating with the medical team. Emotional stressors were described as value conflicts, lack of emotional support, and dealing with patient and family suffering.The authors conclude that providing EoL/PC is stressful for ICU nurses and that education and support programs should be developed to ensure quality EoL/PC in the critical care environment.
Subject(s)
Intensive Care Units , Nursing Staff, Hospital/psychology , Palliative Care , Stress, Psychological , Focus Groups , Humans , QuebecSubject(s)
Attitude of Health Personnel , Burnout, Professional , Job Satisfaction , Nursing Staff , Palliative Care , Burnout, Professional/prevention & control , Burnout, Professional/psychology , Humans , Nursing Methodology Research/organization & administration , Nursing Staff/organization & administration , Nursing Staff/psychology , Occupational Health , Palliative Care/organization & administration , Palliative Care/psychology , Qualitative Research , Risk FactorsABSTRACT
Faculties (i.e., schools) of medicine along with their sister health discipline faculties can be important organizational vehicles to promote, cultivate, and direct interprofessional education (IPE). The authors present information they gathered in 2007 about five Canadian IPE programs to identify key factors facilitating transformational change within institutional settings toward successful IPE, including (1) how successful programs start, (2) the ways successful programs influence academia to bias toward change, and (3) the ways academia supports and perpetuates the success of programs. Initially, they examine evidence regarding key factors that facilitate IPE implementation, which include (1) common vision, values, and goal sharing, (2) opportunities for collaborative work in practice and learning, (3) professional development of faculty members, (4) individuals who are champions of IPE in practice and in organizational leadership, and (5) attention to sustainability. Subsequently, they review literature-based insights regarding barriers and challenges in IPE that must be addressed for success, including barriers and challenges (1) between professional practices, (2) between academia and the professions, and (3) between individuals and faculty members; they also discuss the social context of the participants and institutions. The authors conclude by recommending what is needed for institutions to entrench IPE into core education at three levels: micro (what individuals in the faculty can do); meso (what a faculty can promote); and macro (how academic institutions can exert its influence in the health education and practice system).
