Building capacity in palliative care for personal support workers in long‐term care through experiential learning
Notice bibliographique
Résumé
BACKGROUND: Providing palliative care in long-term care (LTC) homes is an area of growing importance. As a result, attention is being given to exploring effective palliative care learning strategies for personal support workers (PSWs) who provide the most hands-on care to LTC residents. AIM: The purpose of this intervention was to explore hospice visits as an experiential learning strategy to increase the capacity of PSWs in palliative care, specifically related to their new learning, and how they anticipated this experience changed their practices in LTC. DESIGN: This study utilised a qualitative descriptive design. METHODS: Eleven PSWs from four Ontario LTC homes were sent to their local hospice to shadow staff for one to two days. After the visit, PSWs completed a questionnaire with open-ended questions based on critical reflection. Data were analysed using thematic content analysis. RESULTS: PSWs commented on the extent of resident-focused care at the hospice and how palliative care interventions were tailored to meet the needs of residents. PSWs were surprised with the lack of routine at the hospice but felt that hospice staff prioritised their time effectively in order to meet family and client care needs. Some PSWs were pleased to see how well integrated the PSW role is on the community hospice team without any hierarchical relationships. Finally, PSWs felt that other LTC staff would benefit from palliative care education and becoming more comfortable with talking about death and dying with other staff, residents and family members. CONCLUSION: This study highlighted the benefits of PSWs attending a hospice as an experiential learning strategy. Future work is needed to evaluate this strategy using more rigorous designs as a way to build capacity within PSWs to provide optimal palliative care for LTC residents and their family members. IMPLICATIONS FOR PRACTICE: PSWs need to be recognised as important members within the interdisciplinary team. PSWs who shadow staff at hospices view this experience as a positive strategy to meet their learning needs related to palliative care.
Récupéré en direct depuis OpenAlex et désinversé. Les résumés ne sont pas conservés dans cette base de données : les index inversés représentent 8,6 Go des 9,3 Go de texte de la base, et le serveur dispose de 13 Go libres.
Comment cette classification a été obtenuedéplier
Prédiction distillée sur la base complète
Imitation des enseignantsNi prévalence calibrée, ni vérité terrain. Validation humaine à venir. Apprise à partir de 10 348 étiquettes directes de Codex et de 10 348 étiquettes directes de Gemma. Le mode candidate est l'union des têtes enseignantes seuillées; le consensus est leur intersection. Ces sorties portent le statut machine_predicted_unvalidated et ne sont ni des étiquettes humaines ni des étiquettes directes de modèles de pointe.
Scores Codex et Gemma par catégorie
| Catégorie | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Métarecherche | 0,000 | 0,000 |
| Méta-épidémiologie (sens strict) | 0,000 | 0,000 |
| Méta-épidémiologie (sens large) | 0,000 | 0,000 |
| Bibliométrie | 0,000 | 0,000 |
| Études des sciences et des technologies | 0,000 | 0,000 |
| Communication savante | 0,000 | 0,000 |
| Science ouverte | 0,000 | 0,000 |
| Intégrité de la recherche | 0,000 | 0,000 |
| Charge utile insuffisante (le modèle a refusé de juger) | 0,000 | 0,000 |
Scores machine (provisoires)
Les deux têtes enseignantes du modèle étudiant, lues sur ce travail. Un score ordonne la base pour la relecture; il n'affirme jamais une catégorie, et le statut de validation accompagne chaque rangée tel quel.
Scores de référence d'un modèle non mature (critères de maturité non atteints, 7 itérations). Un score ordonne; il n'affirme jamais une catégorie.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · tel quel depuis la passe de notation : score_only signifie que le nombre peut ordonner les travaux, et qu'aucune étiquette de catégorie n'en découleClassification
machine, non validéePrédiction automatique; un appel candidat d’une seule tête enseignante, pas un consensus.
Le détail, modèle par modèle et score par score, se trouve en fin de page sous « Comment cette classification a été obtenue ».