oru.sePublications
Change search
Link to record
Permanent link

Direct link
BETA
Heidenreich, Kaja
Publications (2 of 2) Show all publications
Svantesson Sandberg, M. & Heidenreich, K. (2018). Do analysis methods need to be altered when using software program?. In: : . Paper presented at The third Nordic Conference in Nursing Research – Methods and Networks for the future, Oslo, Norway, June 13-15, 2018.
Open this publication in new window or tab >>Do analysis methods need to be altered when using software program?
2018 (English)Conference paper, Oral presentation with published abstract (Other academic)
Abstract [en]

Background: Do analysis methods need to be altered when using software program? Software program facilitating qualitative data analysis are here to stay, but data analysis methods may not be adapted for this aid.

Objective: To reflect on the feasibility to follow qualitative data analysis methods when using data analysis software in a basic way.

Method: Presentation of three different analysis of data, using different data analysis methods, aided by QSR NVivo©.

Results: On the conference we report on own experiences of using QSR NVivo© when following the methods of content analysis according to Graneheim and Lundman [1], framework method according to Gale et. al [2] and phenomenological hermeneutical method according to Lindseth and Norberg [3]. Furthermore, we will discuss how NVivo may facilitate analysis, but also how it may threaten the sense of the whole and impede co-assessment.

National Category
Nursing
Identifiers
urn:nbn:se:oru:diva-67249 (URN)
Conference
The third Nordic Conference in Nursing Research – Methods and Networks for the future, Oslo, Norway, June 13-15, 2018
Available from: 2018-06-14 Created: 2018-06-14 Last updated: 2018-06-14Bibliographically approved
Heidenreich, K., Bremer, A., Materstvedt, L. J., Tidefelt, U. & Svantesson, M. (2018). Relational autonomy in the care of the vulnerable: health care professionals' reasoning in Moral Case Deliberation (MCD). Medicine, Health care and Philosophy, 21(4), 467-477
Open this publication in new window or tab >>Relational autonomy in the care of the vulnerable: health care professionals' reasoning in Moral Case Deliberation (MCD)
Show others...
2018 (English)In: Medicine, Health care and Philosophy, ISSN 1386-7423, E-ISSN 1572-8633, Vol. 21, no 4, p. 467-477Article in journal (Refereed) Published
Abstract [en]

In Moral Case Deliberation (MCD), healthcare professionals discuss ethically difficult patient situations in their daily practice. There is a lack of knowledge regarding the content of MCD and there is a need to shed light on this ethical reflection in the midst of clinical practice. Thus, the aim of the study was to describe the content of healthcare professionals' moral reasoning during MCD. The design was qualitative and descriptive, and data consisted of 22 audio-recorded inter-professional MCDs, analysed with content analysis. The moral reasoning centred on how to strike the balance between personal convictions about what constitutes good care, and the perceived dissonant care preferences held by the patient. The healthcare professionals deliberated about good care in relation to demands considered to be unrealistic, justifications for influencing the patient, the incapacitated patient's nebulous interests, and coping with the conflict between using coercion to achieve good while protecting human dignity. Furthermore, as a basis for the reasoning, the healthcare professionals reflected on how to establish a responsible relationship with the vulnerable person. This comprised acknowledging the patient as a susceptible human being, protecting dignity and integrity, defining their own moral responsibility, and having patience to give the patient and family time to come to terms with illness and declining health. The profound struggle to respect the patient's autonomy in clinical practice can be understood through the concept of relational autonomy, to try to secure both patients' influence and at the same time take responsibility for their needs as vulnerable humans.

Place, publisher, year, edition, pages
Dordrecht, Netherlands: Springer Netherlands, 2018
Keywords
Clinical ethics, ethics consultation, health care professionals, moral case deliberation, ualitative research
National Category
Medical Ethics
Identifiers
urn:nbn:se:oru:diva-63400 (URN)10.1007/s11019-017-9818-6 (DOI)000451022600004 ()29243015 (PubMedID)2-s2.0-85038102190 (Scopus ID)
Available from: 2018-01-08 Created: 2018-01-08 Last updated: 2018-12-05Bibliographically approved

Search in DiVA

Show all publications