Healthcare providers’ perspectives on perceived barriers and facilitators of compassion: Results from a grounded theory study
Notice bibliographique
Résumé
AIMS AND OBJECTIVES: To explore healthcare provider perspectives and experiences of perceived barriers and facilitators of compassion. BACKGROUND: Compassion is considered a component of quality health care that healthcare providers are increasingly expected to provide. While there have been some studies exploring facets of healthcare providers' perspectives on the barriers and facilitators to providing compassion, a comprehensive understanding based on direct reports from healthcare providers is lacking. DESIGN: Data were collected via focus groups and semi-structured interviews. Data was analyzed in accordance with Straussian grounded theory. METHODS: Semistructured focus groups with frontline healthcare providers and individual interviews with peer-nominated exemplary compassionate care providers were audio-recorded, professionally transcribed and analysed. Fifty-seven participants were recruited from three healthcare settings within both rural and urban settings in Alberta, Canada, using convenience, snowball and theoretical sampling. RESULTS: Qualitative analysis of the data generated two categories and associated themes and subthemes delineating perceived barriers and facilitators to compassion. The first category, challenges to compassion, reflects participants' discomfort associating the notion of barriers to compassion and contained several themes participants conceptualised as challenges: personal challenges, relational challenges, systemic challenges and maladaptive responses. The second category, facilitators of compassion, included the themes of personal facilitators, relational facilitators, systemic facilitators and adaptive responses of intentional action. CONCLUSION: Although participants described certain factors such as system and time constraints along with interaction styles of patients and families that can challenge healthcare provider compassion, these challenges were not considered insurmountable. While acknowledging these as challenges, participants identified healthcare providers themselves, including their responses towards the identified challenges of compassion, as significant factors in this process-a novel finding from this study. This study provides insight into healthcare providers' perspectives on the notion of barriers and facilitators in the provision of compassion. RELEVANCE TO CLINICAL PRACTICE: This study provides a blueprint for optimising compassion on a personal, relational and system level.
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 | 0,002 | 0,001 |
| Méta-épidémiologie (sens strict) | 0,000 | 0,000 |
| Méta-épidémiologie (sens large) | 0,001 | 0,000 |
| Bibliométrie | 0,000 | 0,000 |
| Études des sciences et des technologies | 0,000 | 0,001 |
| Communication savante | 0,000 | 0,000 |
| Science ouverte | 0,000 | 0,000 |
| Intégrité de la recherche | 0,000 | 0,001 |
| Charge utile insuffisante (le modèle a refusé de juger) | 0,001 | 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 ».