Human rights education in palliative care – an evaluation of a national training programme

IF 1.2 Q4 HEALTH POLICY & SERVICES International Journal of Human Rights in Healthcare Pub Date : 2021-08-13 DOI:10.1108/ijhrh-08-2020-0066
Jacqueline Graves, A. Boyal, T. Shields, Roger Newham, A. Hewison, L. Terry
{"title":"Human rights education in palliative care – an evaluation of a national training programme","authors":"Jacqueline Graves, A. Boyal, T. Shields, Roger Newham, A. Hewison, L. Terry","doi":"10.1108/ijhrh-08-2020-0066","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"\nPurpose\nThis paper aims to report findings of a service evaluation using a human rights-based approach in the training and education of staff in palliative settings.\n\n\nDesign/methodology/approach\nA non-randomly sampled, uncontrolled, pre- and post-test design. Data was collected at three points over a six-month period during the period April 2017 to September 2019. As a service evaluation no ethical approval was required. Consent was implied by self-completion and submission of questionnaires. In total, 1,402 people attended the training, 480 completed pre- and post-training questionnaires (146 completed the questionnaire at six months), with 86 completing a questionnaire at all three data collection points.\n\n\nFindings\nFindings show increased levels of self-reported knowledge and confidence at two weeks and six months post-training. Implementing human rights in the workplace is complex. Difficulties maintaining knowledge and keeping up to date with changes in legislation and traditional ways of working were cited as barriers to service users’ human rights.\n\n\nResearch limitations/implications\nMore evaluation is required to ensure the positive elements in this evaluation can be applied more widely.\n\n\nPractical implications\nHuman rights education has a contribution to make in supporting staff to manage the challenges involved. It may also increase the complexity of decision-making. Training needs to incorporate systems wide approaches and its benefits measured.\n\n\nSocial implications\nThe aim was to provide staff with the knowledge to make objective and proportionate decisions about personalised care. The assumption was this would help improve the experience of end of life care.\n\n\nOriginality/value\nThis is the first evaluation in the UK that we are aware of that has examined the impact of human rights education on end of life care.\n","PeriodicalId":14129,"journal":{"name":"International Journal of Human Rights in Healthcare","volume":" ","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":1.2000,"publicationDate":"2021-08-13","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"International Journal of Human Rights in Healthcare","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1108/ijhrh-08-2020-0066","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q4","JCRName":"HEALTH POLICY & SERVICES","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

Purpose This paper aims to report findings of a service evaluation using a human rights-based approach in the training and education of staff in palliative settings. Design/methodology/approach A non-randomly sampled, uncontrolled, pre- and post-test design. Data was collected at three points over a six-month period during the period April 2017 to September 2019. As a service evaluation no ethical approval was required. Consent was implied by self-completion and submission of questionnaires. In total, 1,402 people attended the training, 480 completed pre- and post-training questionnaires (146 completed the questionnaire at six months), with 86 completing a questionnaire at all three data collection points. Findings Findings show increased levels of self-reported knowledge and confidence at two weeks and six months post-training. Implementing human rights in the workplace is complex. Difficulties maintaining knowledge and keeping up to date with changes in legislation and traditional ways of working were cited as barriers to service users’ human rights. Research limitations/implications More evaluation is required to ensure the positive elements in this evaluation can be applied more widely. Practical implications Human rights education has a contribution to make in supporting staff to manage the challenges involved. It may also increase the complexity of decision-making. Training needs to incorporate systems wide approaches and its benefits measured. Social implications The aim was to provide staff with the knowledge to make objective and proportionate decisions about personalised care. The assumption was this would help improve the experience of end of life care. Originality/value This is the first evaluation in the UK that we are aware of that has examined the impact of human rights education on end of life care.
查看原文
分享 分享
微信好友 朋友圈 QQ好友 复制链接
本刊更多论文
姑息治疗中的人权教育——对国家培训方案的评估
目的本文旨在报告在姑息治疗环境中使用基于人权的方法对工作人员进行培训和教育的服务评估结果。设计/方法/方法非随机抽样、非控制、测试前后的设计。数据是在2017年4月至2019年9月期间的六个月内的三个点收集的。作为一项服务评估,不需要伦理批准。通过自我完成和提交问卷来暗示同意。总共有1,402人参加了培训,480人完成了培训前和培训后的问卷调查(146人在六个月时完成了问卷调查),86人在所有三个数据收集点完成了问卷调查。研究结果显示,在训练后两周和六个月,自我报告的知识和信心水平有所提高。在工作场所落实人权是复杂的。与会者指出,在保持知识和跟上立法和传统工作方式变化方面的困难是服务使用者人权的障碍。研究限制/影响需要更多的评估,以确保该评估中的积极因素可以更广泛地应用。实际影响人权教育有助于支助工作人员应付所涉及的挑战。它还可能增加决策的复杂性。培训需要纳入全系统的方法并衡量其效益。社会意义目的是为员工提供知识,使他们能够就个性化护理做出客观和适当的决定。假设这将有助于改善临终关怀的体验。原创性/价值据我们所知,这是英国首次对人权教育对临终关怀的影响进行评估。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 去求助
来源期刊
CiteScore
2.90
自引率
7.10%
发文量
48
期刊介绍: nternational Journal of Human Rights in Healthcare (IJHRH) is an international, peer reviewed journal with a unique practical approach to promoting race equality, inclusion and human rights in health and social care. The journal publishes scholarly and double blind peer-reviewed papers of the highest standard, including case studies and book reviews. IJHRH aims include: -To explore what is currently known about discrimination and disadvantage with a particular focus on health and social care -Push the barriers of the human rights discourse by identifying new avenues for healthcare practice and policy internationally -Create bridges between policymakers, practitioners and researchers -Identify and understand the social determinants of health equity and practical interventions to overcome barriers at national and international levels. The journal welcomes papers which use varied approaches, including discussion of theory, comparative studies, systematic evaluation of interventions, analysis of qualitative data and study of health and social care institutions and the political process. Papers published in IJHRH: -Clearly demonstrate the implications of the research -Provide evidence-rich information -Provoke reflection and support critical analysis of both challenges and strengths -Share examples of best practice and ‘what works’, including user perspectives IJHRH is a hugely valuable source of information for researchers, academics, students, practitioners, managers, policy-makers, commissioning bodies, social workers, psychologists, nurses, voluntary sector workers, service users and carers internationally.
期刊最新文献
The assessment of national conduct in realizing the right to heath: using the framework of United Nations Redirecting to sustainable menstrual products – a holistic approach for improving public health Sandstone mining and silicosis deaths in Rajasthan: a critical legal and policy analysis Midwifery students’ perceptions on ethical rights of women using assisted reproductive technologies Improving healthcare for substance users: the moderating role of psychological flexibility on stigma, mental health, and quality of life
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
现在去查看 取消
×
提示
确定
0
微信
客服QQ
Book学术公众号 扫码关注我们
反馈
×
意见反馈
请填写您的意见或建议
请填写您的手机或邮箱
已复制链接
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
×
扫码分享
扫码分享
Book学术官方微信
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术
文献互助 智能选刊 最新文献 互助须知 联系我们:info@booksci.cn
Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。
Copyright © 2023 Book学术 All rights reserved.
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号 京ICP备2023020795号-1