Conference Proceedings - School of Nursing & Midwifery - Trinity ...

School of Nursing & Midwifery, Trinity College Dublin: 8 th Annual Interdisciplinary Research Conference
Transforming Healthcare Through Research, Education & Technology: 7 th – 9 th November 2007
Conference Proceedings
(1999). The researcher transcribed the interviews verbatim within
two days of each interview for further review of the data collected.
The interviews took place over an 8 week period.
The researcher chose to follow some of Lincoln and Guba (1985)
ideas about trustworthiness to enhance the rigour, including
Credibility, Dependability and Confirmability. However Guba and
Lincoln (1989) expressed reservations about their own criteria and
felt they relied too heavenly on positivist assumptions and added
the concept of authenticity, which was also included. The researcher
felt it was necessary to include the concept of reflexivity within this
study. Member Checking or validity check: as suggested by Green
and Thorogood (2004) involves taking the findings back to the
participants and guaranteeing that they agree. The researcher
carried out member checking with the agreement of the
participants. Lincoln and Guba (1985), Burnard (1991), Ashworth
(1993), Holloway and Wheeler (1996) and Slevin and Sines (2000)
consider it one of the most robust ways of promising truth and
consistency in qualitative research. Peer Debriefing: is where
another researcher is asked to verify the codes or analysis the data
to ensure they would obtain similar themes. The researcher had a
very experienced ICU qualitative health researcher, to peer debrief
the themes. The researcher has a complete record of the decisions
completed before and during the study and an explanation of the
research process. There are many ethical considerations to take into
account when carrying out research. These include autonomy of
participants, protection of participants (nonmaleficence, beneficence
and justice) and ethical approval in order to perform the research.
Findings: In conclusion the findings of the study were extremely
interesting. While each participant had their own view on what the
term E.O.L.C. was there were common themes which emerged from
their responses. The nurses talked about what factors facilitated
good E.O.L.C.: “peaceful passage”, “good communication”, “having
a specific plan of care”, “experience/education”, “family present”,
“continuity of care”, “good support”, “organ donation” and “personal
experience of losing someone”. The participants also highlighted the
barriers to a patient receiving good E.O.L.C.: “poor communication”,
“no support”, “disregarding patient/ family wishes”, “types of
death”, “poor family dynamics”, “hi-tech stuff”, “pushing things”,
“no guidance”, “inexperience” and “dying in pain”. Looking after the
family was addressed by every participant. The nurses described
how stress was caused by several factors, the ways they coped and
supportive measures available in ICU and what could be introduced
to relieve some stressors. Finally the participants expressed
concerns about medical and nursing ethical and legal issues for
E.O.L.C.
- 429 -