MétaCan
Menu
Retour à la cohorte
Enregistrement W7065948363

Everyday ethics in case management : experiences of moral distress by professionals in a community health care setting / by Kristen Dawn Jessiman.

2017· dissertation· en· W7065948363 sur OpenAlexaboutno aff

Notice bibliographique

RevueKnowledge Commons (Lakehead University) · 2017
Typedissertation
Langueen
DomainePhysics and Astronomy
ThématiqueMagnetic confinement fusion research
Établissements canadiensnon disponible
Organismes subventionnairesnon disponible
Mots-clésHealth careEthics of careDistressQualitative researchResearch ethicsNursing ethicsEthical decision
DOInon disponible

Résumé

récupéré en direct d'OpenAlex

Academic research has recognized and explored ethical issues and experiences of moral distress in acute care settings for many years now. The same cannot be said for ethical issues in the community care setting. Perhaps more than ever, as treatments and care are shifted out of institutions and into the home, today?s health care professionals face unique and difficult ethical issues. The purpose of this study was to examine
\nexperiences of moral distress related to everyday ethical issues by analyzing data collected from a cohort of professional case managers working in a community health care setting in northern Ontario, Canada. The objectives of the study were to investigate the nature of ethical issues in the community health care setting; explore experiences of everyday ethical issues and moral distress; identify barriers to ethical practice and
\nevaluate the available resources.
\nQuantitative and qualitative data were gathered using an original, selfadministered questionnaire developed by the researcher. This questionnaire was distributed to case managers employed at North West (Thunder Bay and region) and North East (Sudbury and region) Community Care Access Centres. The response rate to the questionnaire was 31%, representing 66 participants from a pool of 215 potential participants. The results showed that everyday ethical issues were prevalent in this professional setting, often encountered on a weekly basis. Participants described a moderate to high level of confidence to identify, address, and resolve everyday ethical issues in their practice. Ethical issues were described as a combination of the theoretical categories of autonomy, beneficence, nonmaleficence, and justice, therefore representing
\ncomplex, multi-factorial scenarios.
\nExperiences of moral distress were described as occurring with moderate to high frequency and intensity, most commonly expressed with emotional symptoms. The most influential coping strategies were identified as ?talking to colleagues? and utilizing ?supportive leaders?. Barriers to ethical practice included the lack of resources, restrictions based on policy and regulations, and issues related to conflict and communication. Experiences of moral distress were closely related to a lack of resources and time constraints.
\nRecommendations for further research include the need to identify interventions to increase ethical competence and to provide opportunities to encourage healing from experiences of moral distress. The researcher recommends that community agencies adopt strategies which foster opportunities to identify and discuss experiences of everyday ethical issues and moral distress. Avenues which may increase capacity for ethical competence may include; formal educational opportunities; agency commitment to the ongoing development of an active ethics committee; informal collaboration among colleagues, supervisors, and organizational leaders; and attention to maintaining or improving the work environment to encourage successful coping, enhanced confidence and empowerment. While issues of increased workload, lack of time, and inadequate
\nresources are unlikely to ever be resolved in the near future, opportunities to problem solve and share strategies provide much needed support for health care professionals working in the community care setting. Further studies using qualitative methodologies of storytelling and reflection will provide further insight into experiences of moral distress and its unique manifestation in the community care setting in northern Ontario.
\nStudy area : Northwestern Ontario (Thunder Bay region) and Northeastern Ontario (Sudbury region).

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 enseignants

Ni 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.

score de la tête « metaresearch » (Codex)0,001
score de la tête « metaresearch » (Gemma)0,000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aStatut de validation: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Catégories candidatesMéta-épidémiologie (sens strict), Charge utile insuffisante (le modèle a refusé de juger)
Catégories consensuellesaucune
DomaineSignal candidat: aucune · Signal consensuel: aucune
Devis d'étudeSignal candidat: Qualitatif · Signal consensuel: Qualitatif
GenreSignal candidat: Empirique · Signal consensuel: Empirique
Score de désaccord entre enseignants0,537
Score d'incertitude au seuil1,000

Scores Codex et Gemma par catégorie

CatégorieCodexGemma
Métarecherche0,0010,000
Méta-épidémiologie (sens strict)0,0000,000
Méta-épidémiologie (sens large)0,0010,000
Bibliométrie0,0010,000
Études des sciences et des technologies0,0010,000
Communication savante0,0000,000
Science ouverte0,0010,000
Intégrité de la recherche0,0000,002
Charge utile insuffisante (le modèle a refusé de juger)0,0020,000

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.

Tête enseignante Opus0,033
Tête enseignante GPT0,345
Écart entre enseignants0,313 · la distance entre les deux têtes enseignantes sur ce seul travail
Statut de validationscore_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 découle

Classification

machine, non validée

Prédiction automatique; un appel candidat d’une seule tête enseignante, pas un consensus.

Devis d'étudeQualitatif
Domainenon disponible
GenreEmpirique

Le détail, modèle par modèle et score par score, se trouve en fin de page sous « Comment cette classification a été obtenue ».

En bref

Citations0
Publié2017
Routes d'admission1
Résumé présentoui

Explorer davantage

Même revueKnowledge Commons (Lakehead University)Même sujetMagnetic confinement fusion researchTravaux en français237 207