IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/wly/nuhsci/v21y2019i4p416-421.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

Perspectives regarding what constitutes a “good death” among Thai nurses: A cross‐sectional study

Author

Listed:
  • Varalak Srinonprasert
  • Panita Limpawattana
  • Manchumad Manjavong
  • Thunchanok Kuichanuan
  • Thitikorn Juntararuangtong
  • Kongpob Yongrattanakit

Abstract

Palliative care is a crucial component in improving peoples' end‐of‐life period. It is important to understand the wishes of people at the end of life and the perceptions of their healthcare providers regarding these wishes. As nurses play a key role in patient care, in this study we set out to determine nurses' perceptions regarding what constitutes a “good death”, comparing what they thought their older patients would prefer to their own preferences for their own end‐of‐life care. Questionnaires asking about various options of end‐of‐life care were distributed to nurses, and they were asked how they thought older people would respond to each of the questions and what their own preferences would be if they were terminally ill. In total, 656 participants were enrolled and they rated relief from suffering as the most important component, both for themselves and for those in their care. More than 80% of nurses agreed with all of the statements on the questionnaire. However, some of the nurses' preferences for their own end of life differed from those they expected their patients to value.

Suggested Citation

  • Varalak Srinonprasert & Panita Limpawattana & Manchumad Manjavong & Thunchanok Kuichanuan & Thitikorn Juntararuangtong & Kongpob Yongrattanakit, 2019. "Perspectives regarding what constitutes a “good death” among Thai nurses: A cross‐sectional study," Nursing & Health Sciences, John Wiley & Sons, vol. 21(4), pages 416-421, December.
    • Handle: RePEc:wly:nuhsci:v:21:y:2019:i:4:p:416-421
    DOI: 10.1111/nhs.12634
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: https://doi.org/10.1111/nhs.12634
    Download Restriction: no
    File URL: https://libkey.io/10.1111/nhs.12634?utm_source=ideas
    LibKey link: if access is restricted and if your library uses this service, LibKey will redirect you to where you can use your library subscription to access this item
    ---><---

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. Stonington, Scott D., 2012. "On ethical locations: The good death in Thailand, where ethics sit in places," Social Science & Medicine, Elsevier, vol. 75(5), pages 836-844.
    2. Rachel Pruchno & Maureen Wilson-Genderson & Francine Cartwright, 2009. "Self-Rated Health and Depressive Symptoms in Patients With End-Stage Renal Disease and Their Spouses: A Longitudinal Dyadic Analysis of Late-Life Marriages," The Journals of Gerontology: Series B, The Gerontological Society of America, vol. 64(2), pages 212-221.
    Full references (including those not matched with items on IDEAS)

    Most related items

    These are the items that most often cite the same works as this one and are cited by the same works as this one.
    1. Woojin Chung & Roeul Kim, 2014. "Does Marriage Really Matter to Health? Intra- and Inter-Country Evidence from China, Japan, Taiwan, and the Republic of Korea," PLOS ONE, Public Library of Science, vol. 9(8), pages 1-10, August.
    2. Driessen, Annelieke & Borgstrom, Erica & Cohn, Simon, 2021. "Placing death and dying: Making place at the end of life," Social Science & Medicine, Elsevier, vol. 291(C).
    3. Peleg, Shira & Nudelman, Gabriel, 2021. "Associations between self-rated health and depressive symptoms among older adults: Does age matter?," Social Science & Medicine, Elsevier, vol. 280(C).

    More about this item

    Statistics

    Access and download statistics

    Corrections

    All material on this site has been provided by the respective publishers and authors. You can help correct errors and omissions. When requesting a correction, please mention this item's handle: RePEc:wly:nuhsci:v:21:y:2019:i:4:p:416-421. See general information about how to correct material in RePEc.

    If you have authored this item and are not yet registered with RePEc, we encourage you to do it here. This allows to link your profile to this item. It also allows you to accept potential citations to this item that we are uncertain about.

    If CitEc recognized a bibliographic reference but did not link an item in RePEc to it, you can help with this form .

    If you know of missing items citing this one, you can help us creating those links by adding the relevant references in the same way as above, for each refering item. If you are a registered author of this item, you may also want to check the "citations" tab in your RePEc Author Service profile, as there may be some citations waiting for confirmation.

    For technical questions regarding this item, or to correct its authors, title, abstract, bibliographic or download information, contact: Wiley Content Delivery (email available below). General contact details of provider: https://doi.org/10.1111/(ISSN)1442-2018 .

    Please note that corrections may take a couple of weeks to filter through the various RePEc services.

    IDEAS is a RePEc service. RePEc uses bibliographic data supplied by the respective publishers.