CoChat
Sign Up
Cited by 13Palliative Care and End-of-Life IssuesPalliative and Oncologic CareFamily and Patient Care in Intensive Care Units

Mutual support between patients and family caregivers in palliative care: A qualitative study

Open access
McCauley, Rachel, Ryan, Karen, McQuillan, Regina, Foley, Geraldine·2023·Palliative Medicine
DOI 10.1177/02692163231205130PMC PMC10657498
Open this paper in CoChat — free account

Abstract

Background: Patients in receipt of palliative care services are often viewed primarily as recipients of support from their family caregiver. There is a dearth of evidence in palliative care on what comprises mutual support between patients and their family caregivers in palliative care. Aim: To identify processes of mutual support between patients and family caregivers in palliative care. Design: Qualitative study comprising semi-structured interviews. Data were analysed using grounded theory procedures. Setting/participants: Fifteen patients with advanced illness (cancer n = 14, neurodegenerative n = 1) and 21 family caregivers recruited from a large regional-based hospice. Results: Mutual support between patients and family caregivers comprised two primary modes in which support was provided and received. Mutual support involved both patients and family caregivers providing similar types of support to each other, and which typically manifested as emotional support. However, mutual support also occurred when patients reciprocated by providing emotional support to their family caregivers to compensate for other forms of support which they felt no longer able to provide. Patients supported family caregivers by involving them in decision-making for care and both patient and family caregiver preferences were influenced by obligation to their respective other. Mutual support comprised both disclosure and concealment. Involving family caregivers in patient care decision-making was intended by patients to help family caregivers adjust to a caregiving role. Conclusions: The findings inform the development and delivery of psychosocial interventions for patients and family caregivers in palliative care aimed at facilitating supportive relations between them.

The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.

Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.

A few free checks a day · papers already verified open instantly · results are public

Integrity signals

Registry

Crossref · 10.1177/02692163231205130

Cites

Statistics

Claims the paper makes

The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.

Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.

A few free checks a day · papers already verified open instantly · results are public

Claims other papers make about this one

Each is checked against this paper’s own text: does it say what the citing paper says it does?

Self-check

Percentages, sums and reported differences re-computed from the paper’s own numbers.

The self-check needs the paper’s full text.

No citation lists for this paper

No citation lists for this paper yet — checked again daily.

References 32 · Cited by 13

Research works printed but not linked: 32

  1. [1]Ates G Ebenau AF Busa C, et al. “Never at ease” – family carers within integrated palliative care: a multinational, mixed method study. BMC Palliat Care 2018; 17(1): 39. 29490657 PMC5831577
  2. [2]Morris SM King C Turner M, et al. Family carers providing support to a person dying in the home setting: a narrative literature review. Palliat Med 2015; 29(6): 487– 495. 25634635 PMC4436280
  3. [3]Hudson P Payne S. The future of family caregiving: research, social policy and clinical practice. In: Hudson P and Payne S (eds) Family carers in palliative care: a guide for health and social care professionals. Oxford: Oxford University Press, 2009, pp. 277– 304.
  4. [4]Burns CM Abernethy AP Dal Grande E, et al. Uncovering an invisible network of direct caregivers at the end of life: a population study. Palliat Med 2013; 27(7): 608– 615. 23587738
  5. [5]Oechsle K. Current advances in palliative and hospice care: problems and needs of relatives and family caregivers during palliative and hospice care – an overview of current literature. Med Sci 2019; 7(3): 43. PMC6473856 30871105
  6. [6]Reigada C Pais-Ribeiro JL Novella S, et al. The caregiver role in palliative care: a systematic review of the literature. Health Care Curr Rev 2015; 3(2): 1– 6.
  7. [7]van Oosterhout SPC Ermers DJM Ploos van Amstel FK, et al. Experiences of bereaved family caregivers with shared decision making in palliative cancer treatment: a qualitative interview study. BMC Palliat Care 2021; 20(1): 137. 34493262 PMC8423331
  8. [8]Foley G. The supportive relationship between palliative patients and family caregivers. BMJ Support Palliat Care 2018; 8(2): 184– 186. 29353254
  9. [9]Hauser JM Chang CH Alpert H, et al. Who’s caring for whom? Differing perspectives between seriously ill patients and their family caregivers. Am J Hosp Palliat Care 2006; 23(2): 105– 112. 16572748
  10. [10]Bassola B Cilluffo S Lusignani M. Going inside the relationship between caregiver and care-receiver with Amyotrophic Lateral Sclerosis in Italy, a Grounded Theory study. Health Soc Care Community 2021; 29(4): 1083– 1090. 32876339
  11. [11]Gardner DS. Cancer in a dyadic context: older couples’ negotiation of ambiguity and search for meaning at the end of life. J Soc Work End Life Palliat Care 2008; 4(2): 135– 159. 19042897
  12. [12]Broom A Cavenagh J. Masculinity, moralities and being cared for: an exploration of experiences of living and dying in a hospice. Soc Sci Med 2010; 71(5): 869– 876. 20573434
  13. [13]Broom A Kirby E Kenny K, et al. Moral ambivalence and informal care for the dying. Sociol Review 2016; 64(4): 987– 1004.
  14. [14]Lewis S Kenny K Broom A, et al. Social meanings of choice in living-with advanced breast cancer. Soc Sci Med 2021; 280: 114047. 34090104
  15. [15]McCauley R McQuillan R Ryan K, et al. Mutual support between patients and family caregivers in palliative care: a systematic review and narrative synthesis. Palliat Med 2021; 35(5): 875– 885. 33794713 PMC8114453
  16. [16]Corbin J Strauss A. Basics of qualitative research. Techniques and procedures for developing grounded theory. 4th ed.. Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage Publications, 2015.
  17. [17]Timonen V Foley G Conlon C. Challenges when using Grounded Theory: a pragmatic introduction to doing GT research. Int J Qual Methods 2018; 17(1): 1– 10.
  18. [19]National Clinical Programme for Palliative Care. Adult palliative care services model of care for Ireland [Internet], http://hdl.handle.net/10147/624170 (2019, 2 March 2023).
  19. [22]Montgomery P Bailey PH. Field notes and theoretical memos in grounded theory. West J Nurs Res 2007; 29(1): 65– 79. 17228061
  20. [23]Mulcahy Symmons S Ryan K Aoun SM, et al. Decision-making in palliative care: patient and family caregiver concordance and discordance – systematic review and narrative synthesis. BMJ Support Palliat Care. Epub ahead of print 22 March 2022. DOI: 10.1136/bmjspcare-2022-003525. PMC10804031 35318213 · DOI
  21. [24]Li Q Lin Y Chen Y, et al. Mutual support and challenges among Chinese couples living with colorectal cancer: a qualitative study. Cancer Nurs 2018; 41(5): 50– 60. 29200000
  22. [25]Dagan M Sanderman R Hoff C, et al. The interplay between partners’ responsiveness and patients’ need for emotional expression in couples coping with cancer. J Behav Med 2014; 37(5): 828– 838. 24113912
  23. [26]Ketcher D Thompson C Otto AK, et al. The Me in We dyadic communication intervention is feasible and acceptable among advanced cancer patients and their family caregivers. Palliat Med 2021; 35(2): 389– 396. 33225821 PMC8258799
  24. [27]Foley G Timonen V Hardiman O. Acceptance and decision making in amyotrophic lateral sclerosis from a life-course perspective. Qual Health Res 2014; 24(1): 67– 77. 24336481
  25. [28]Gibson FG Broom A Kirby E, et al. ‘... My biggest worry now is how my husband is going to cope’: women’s relational experiences of cancer ‘care’ during illness. J Gend Stud 2018; 27(8): 901– 913.
  26. [29]Foley G Hynes G. Decision-making among patients and their family in ALS care: a review. Amyotroph Lateral Scler Frontotemporal Degener 2018; 19(3–4): 173– 193. 28799808
  27. [31]Munck B Fridlund B Mårtensson J. Next-of-kin caregivers in palliative home care – from control to loss of control. J Adv Nurs 2008; 64(6): 578– 586. 19120572
  28. [32]Lemus-Riscanevo P Carreno-Moreno S Arias-Rojas M. Conspiracy of silence in palliative care: a concept analysis. Indian J Palliat Care 2019; 25(1): 24– 29. 30820097 PMC6388587
  29. [33]Von Heymann-Horan AB Puggaard LB Nissen KG, et al. Dyadic psychological intervention for patients with cancer and caregivers in home-based specialized palliative care: The Domus model. Palliat Support Care 2018; 16(2): 189– 197. 28357972
  30. [34]Titler MG Visovatti MA Shuman C, et al. Effectiveness of implementing a dyadic psychoeducational intervention for cancer patients and family caregivers. Support Care Cancer 2017; 25(11): 3395– 3406. 28612157 PMC5610667
  31. [35]Foley G. Video-based online interviews for palliative care research: a new normal in COVID-19? Palliat Med 2021; 35(3): 625– 626. 33475026 PMC8072795
  32. [36]Lobe B Morgan D Hoffman KA. Qualitative data collection in an era of social distancing. Int J Qual Methods 2020; 19: 1– 8.

Authors
McCauley, R., Ryan, K., McQuillan, R., & Foley, G.
Affiliations
  • Trinity College Dublin (IE)
  • University College Dublin (IE)
  • Royal College of Surgeons in Ireland (IE)
Corresponding author
Foley, Geraldine
ORCID
Venue
Palliative Medicine
Publisher
SAGE Publications
Published
2023-10-13
Volume
37
Issue
10
Pages
1520-1528
ISSN
  • 0269-2163 (ISSN-L)
  • 1477-030X
DOI
10.1177/02692163231205130
PMC
PMC10657498
OpenAlex
W4387598679
Cited by
13
References
32
Citations by year
2026: 5 · 2025: 5 · 2024: 3
FWCI
3.30
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
Licence
Locations
  • Palliative Medicine (publishedVersion, cc-by)
  • PubMed Central (publishedVersion, cc-by)
  • PubMed (publishedVersion)
  • Figshare (submittedVersion, cc-by)
Funders
trinity college dublin (Provost's Project Award)
Topics
  • Health Sciences › Medicine › Public Health, Environmental and Occupational Health › Palliative Care and End-of-Life Issues
  • Health Sciences › Medicine › Public Health, Environmental and Occupational Health › Palliative and Oncologic Care
  • Health Sciences › Health Professions › Radiological and Ultrasound Technology › Family and Patient Care in Intensive Care Units
Keywords
mutual support, palliative care, family caregivers, emotional support, caregiver decision-making, psychosocial interventions, hospice care
MeSH terms
Family, Humans, Palliative Care, Caregivers, Hospice Care, Qualitative Research, Hospice and Palliative Care Nursing

About these checks

Registry, retraction, Cites and statistics results are computed, not judged, with one exception: a printed reference that no index lists is read once by a model before it counts as a citation error. Claims are extracted by a model and kept only when their quote appears verbatim in the text; each cited source is then checked, with a model’s help, for whether it says what the claim relies on. Those verdicts can be wrong — read the claim’s quote and the cited source before relying on one.

Statistics and arithmetic are recomputed, not judged.

Confidence bands are shown only for fields calibrated on our annotated test set. None is calibrated yet, so no band is shown.

What counts as a claim ›How we measure confidence ›How we check this ›

Are you an author, or do you see a problem with this page? Request a review