PURPOSE: The purposes of this study were to identify the types of widow's bereavement experience and understand the nature of it's bereavement by using Q-methodological approach. METHODS: Contents Q sample included 46 statements obtained from literatures and interviews with 5 widows. P sample consisted of 13 widows who bereaved within 2 years. The data were collected from October 2004 to December 2006 and analyzed using Quanal program. RESULTS: Two types of widow's experience were found. Type 1 was characterized by loss suffering, and type 2 was characterized by acceptance and adaptation CONCLUSION: Widows were found to experience different types of bereavement. Therefore, bereavement care team should assess the types of suffering pain and provide appropriate care to the widows. Also, need to be developed programs to relieve or prevent suffering of bereavement.
Bereavement ; Hospice Care ; Stress, Psychological ; Widowhood

In the era of coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19), social distancing and strict visitation policies at hospitals have made it difficult for medical staff to provide high-quality endof-life (EOL) care to dying patients and their families. There are various issues related to EOL care, including psychological problems of patients and their families, difficulties in EOL decision-making, the complicated grief of the bereaved family, moral distress, and exhaustion of medical staff. In relation to these issues, we aimed to discuss practical considerations in providing high-quality EOL care in the COVID-19 pandemic. First, medical staff should discuss advance care planning as early as possible and use the parallel planning strategy. Second, medical staff should play a role in facilitating patient-family communication. Third, medical staff should actively and proactively evaluate and alleviate dying patients’ symptoms using non-verbal communication. Lastly, medical staff should provide care for family members of the dying patient, who may be particularly vulnerable to postbereavement problems in the COVID-19 era. Establishing a system of screening highrisk individuals for complicated grief and connecting them to bereavement support services might be considered. Despite the challenging and limited environment, providing EOL care is essential for patients to die with dignity in peace and for the remaining family to return to life after the loved one’s death. Efforts considering the practical issues faced by all medical staff and healthcare institutions caring for dying patients should be made.

In the era of coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19), social distancing and strict visitation policies at hospitals have made it difficult for medical staff to provide high-quality endof-life (EOL) care to dying patients and their families. There are various issues related to EOL care, including psychological problems of patients and their families, difficulties in EOL decision-making, the complicated grief of the bereaved family, moral distress, and exhaustion of medical staff. In relation to these issues, we aimed to discuss practical considerations in providing high-quality EOL care in the COVID-19 pandemic. First, medical staff should discuss advance care planning as early as possible and use the parallel planning strategy. Second, medical staff should play a role in facilitating patient-family communication. Third, medical staff should actively and proactively evaluate and alleviate dying patients’ symptoms using non-verbal communication. Lastly, medical staff should provide care for family members of the dying patient, who may be particularly vulnerable to postbereavement problems in the COVID-19 era. Establishing a system of screening highrisk individuals for complicated grief and connecting them to bereavement support services might be considered. Despite the challenging and limited environment, providing EOL care is essential for patients to die with dignity in peace and for the remaining family to return to life after the loved one’s death. Efforts considering the practical issues faced by all medical staff and healthcare institutions caring for dying patients should be made.

Background: Healthcare professionals often experience moral distress while providing endof-life care. This study explored how physicians and nurses experienced moral distress when they cared for critically and terminally ill patients in tertiary hospitals in South Korea. Methods: This study used semi-structured in-depth interviews. A total of 22 people in two tertiary hospitals were interviewed, nine (40.9%) of which were physicians and 13 (59.1%) were nurses. The recorded interview files and memos were analyzed using grounded theory. Results: Most physicians and nurses encountered similar feelings of anger, helplessness, and burden owing to a lack of appropriate resources for end-of-life care. However, the factors and contexts of their moral distress differed. Nurses mainly addressed poorly organized end-of-life care, intensive labor conditions without support for nurses, and providing care without participation in decision-making. Meanwhile, physicians addressed the prevailing misperceptions on end-of-life care, communication failure between physicians owing to hierarchy and fragmented disciplines, the burden of responsibility in making difficult decisions, and the burden of resource allocation. Conclusion Differences in moral distress between physicians and nurses leave them isolated and can affect communication regarding healthcare. Mutual understanding between job disciplines will enhance their communication and help resolve conflicts in end-of-life care.

Purpose: Life-sustaining treatment (LST) decisions for patients and caregivers at the end-of-life (EOL) process are supported by the “Act on Hospice and Palliative Care and Decisions on LST for Patients at the EOL,” enforced in February 2018. Itremains unclearwhetherthe act changes EOL decisions and LST implementation in clinical practice. For this study, we investigated patients’ decision-making regarding LSTs during the EOL process since the act’s enforcement. Materials and Methods: Retrospective reviews were conducted on adult patients who were able to decide to terminate LST and died at Seoul National University Hospital between February 5, 2018, and February 5, 2019. We examined demographics, who made the decisions, the type and date of documentation confirming patient's LST, and whether the LST was withheld or withdrawn. Results: Of 809 patients who were enrolled, 29% (n=231) completed forms regarding LST themselves, and 71% (n=578) needed family members to decide. The median time from confirmation of the EOL process to death and from the Advance Statement to death were 2 and 5 days, respectively (both ranges, 0 to 244). In total, 90% (n=727) of patients withheld treatment, and 10% (n=82)withdrewit. We found a higherwithdrawalratewhen family members made the decisions (13.3% vs. 1.7%, p < 0.001). Conclusion After the act’s enforcement, withdrawing LSTs became lawful and self-determination rates increased. Family members still make 71% of decisions regarding LSTs, but these are often inconsistent with the patients’ wishes; thus, further efforts are needed to integrate the new act into clinical practice.