Search

This exploratory study examined general practitioners' (GPs) perspectives on delivering end-of-life care in the New Zealand residential aged care context. A general inductive approach to the data collected from semi-structured interviews with 17 GPs from 15 different New Zealand general practices was taken. Findings examine: (1) GPs' life experience; (2) the GP relationship with the facilities and provision of end-of-life care; (3) the GP interaction with families of dying residents; and (4) GP relationship with hospice. The nature of the GP relationship with the facility influenced GP involvement in end-of-life care in aged care facilities, with GPs not always able to direct a facility's end-of-life care decisions for specific residents. GP participation in end-of-life care was constrained by GP time availability and the costs to the facilities for that time. GPs reported seldom using hospice services for residents, but did use the reputation (cachet) associated with hospice practices to provide an authoritative buffer for their end-of-life clinical decisions when talking with families and residents. GP training in end-of-life care, especially for those with dementia, was reported as ad hoc and done through informal mentoring between GPs. This paper is on a topic of increasing policy importance. With the aging of the population, the pressure on our aged care facilities will become intense. This paper highlights how GPs, the main source of clinical supervision in residential aged care, do their job and what the issues are that facilitate and impede their participation. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Family members continue to be used as interpreters in medical consultations despite the well-known risks. This paper examines participant perceptions of this practice in three New Zealand clinics chosen for their frequent use of interpreters and their skill in using them. It is based on a detailed study of 17 video-recorded interpreted consultations and 48 post-consultation interviews with participants (5 doctors, 16 patients and 12 interpreters, including 6 family members). All participants expressed satisfaction with the communication. Analysis of the interviews explored what participants liked or valued about family member interpreters (FMIs). Key themes were the FMIs' personal relationship and knowledge, patient comfort, trust, cultural norms, time efficiency and continued help outside the consultation. General practitioners (GPs) expressed awareness of potential risks and how to manage them, in contrast to patients and FMIs. Although the use of professional interpreters needs to be strongly promoted, a well-informed decision to use a family member is appropriate in some situations. GPs need to be well trained in how to assess and manage the risks. Rather than striving for 'best practice' (i.e. universal use of professional interpreters), it is better to aim for 'good practice' where a considered judgement is made about each situation on an individual basis. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]