The aim of this article was to illuminate the issue of basic research in nursing and to problematize its relevance for our discipline. First, we asked leading nursing scholars in the Nordic countries to share their views on basic research in nursing. Thereafter, the ideas, views and suggestions of the scholars were amalgamated with insights from the literature and from the discussions in our project team. Our two guiding questions were: What role can basic research be assigned? Which, if any, forms of basic research can be identified? We found that basic nursing research may be seen as a necessary basis for applied research, as a contribution to applied research, or that the whole issue is seen as a pseudo-issue. We further found that basic nursing research can be seen as either contextual or general as well as either intradisciplinary or multidisciplinary in form. We conclude by the following three succinct remarks or assertions: that basic nursing research is not to be equated with biomedical conceptions of basic research; that basic nursing research may take place on several theoretical levels; and finally, that an indiscriminate dismissal of basic research in nursing may affect the cognitive autonomy of our discipline.
As revealed in previous empirical research, nurses describe their position in home-based nursing care (HBNC) as that of ‘guests’ in the patient's home. Such a description is problematic as ‘guests’ might not be considered to belong to the realm of professionalism. As Jacques Derrida's work on hospitality has received wide publicity, sparking theoretical and philosophical discussion about host and guest, the aim of this study was to explore how the concept ‘guests’ can be understood in the light of Derrida's philosophy of hospitality. The study revealed that (a) guest must be considered a binary concept; and (b) hospitality should be regarded as an exchange of giving and receiving between a host and a guest. The present study demonstrated that it is important to reflect on the meaning of the concepts used by nurses in HBNC. Further theoretical and empirical exploration of the concept ‘hospitality’ would be fruitful, i.e. what is patients' understanding of ‘hospitality’ and ‘hostility’ related to nurses' descriptions of themselves as ‘guests’ in the patient's home.
Although a widely used concept in health care, person-centred care remains somewhat ambiguous. In the field of palliative care, person-centred care is considered a historically distinct ideal and yet there continues to be a dearth of conceptual clarity. Person-centred care is also challenged by the pull of standardization that characterizes much of health service delivery. The conceptual ambiguity becomes especially problematic in contemporary pluralistic societies, particularly in the light of continued inequities in healthcare access and disparities in health outcomes. Our aim was to explicate premises and underlying assumptions regarding person-centred care in the context of palliative care with an attempt to bridge the apparently competing agendas of individualization versus standardization, and individuals versus populations. By positioning person-centredness in relation to the hermeneutics of the self according to Paul Ricœur, dialectics between individualization and standardization, and between individuals and populations were constructed. The competing agendas were related in a dialectic manner in the way that population health is of importance for the individual, and standardization is of importance for the population. The analysis suggests that person-centred care is an ethical stance, which gives prominence to both suffering and capability of the individual as a person. The dialectic analysis points towards the importance of extending person-centred care to encompass population and societal perspectives and thereby avoiding a problematic tendency of affiliating person-centred care with exclusively individualistic perspectives. Considerations for person-centred palliative care on micro-, meso- and macrolevels conclude the paper.
Palliative care is provided at a certain timepoint, both in a person's life and in a societal context. What is considered to be a good death can therefore vary over time depending on prevailing social values and norms, and the person's own view and interpretation of life. This means that there are many interpretations of what a good death can actually mean for an individual. On a more general level, research in palliative care shows that individuals have basic common needs, for example physical, mental, social and spiritual well-being. Therefore, in today's pluralistic Western society, it becomes important that palliative care is person centred to enable individuals to receive, as far as can be achieved, care that promotes as good a life as possible based on the person's own needs and preferences, and in accordance with evidence and current laws. For many years a research group, consisting nurse researchers together with nurses working in palliative care, has developed a model for person-centred palliative care, the 6S-model. The model's central concept is Self-image, where the starting point is the patient as a person and their own experience of the situation. The other concepts: Self-determination, Symptom relief, Social relationships, Synthesis and Strategies are all related to the patient's self-image, and often to each other. The model's development, value base and starting assumptions are reported here, as are examples of how the model is applied in palliative care in Sweden. The model has been, and still is, constantly evolving in a collaboration between researchers and clinically active nurses, and in recent years also with patients and close relatives.