Click here to stream the public defence
Due to copyright issues, an electronic copy of the thesis must be ordered from the faculty. For the faculty to have time to process the order, the order must be received by the faculty at the latest 2 days before the public defence. Orders received later than 2 days before the defence will not be processed. After the public defence, please address any inquiries regarding the thesis to the candidate.
Trial Lecture – time and place
See Trial Lecture.
Adjudication committee
- First opponent: Professor Karin Brochstedt Dieperink, University of Southern Denmark,
- Second opponent: Professor Cecilie Varsi, USN - University of South-Eastern Norway,
- Third member and chair of the evaluation committee: Professor emeritus Per Nortvedt, University of Oslo
Chair of the Defence
Associate Professor Anne Kari Tolo Heggestad, University of Oslo
Principal Supervisor
Professor Simen Alexander Steindal, Lovisenberg Diaconal Hospital
Summary
The global increase in patients with cancer has led to a greater demand for palliative care, a need intensified by the shortage of healthcare professionals (HCPs). Norwegian health policy is responding by promoting in-home palliative care facilitated through welfare technology such as "remote home care" (RHC). However, slow adoption of such technology points to a knowledge gap in their effective use. This study explored the experiences of patients with cancer and HCPs regarding the use and implementation of RHC. The study employed a qualitative method with focus groups and individual interviews.
The results suggest that RHC holds the potential to improve symptom control and home routines for patients, which may enhance their self-conception and facilitate self-determination and autonomy. RHC can serve as a supportive tool enabling patients to remain at home and sustain social connections. A tailored adaptation of RHC to meet patients' evolving needs is essential for delivering person-centered care. However, ensuring patient autonomy and self-determination is paramount. An inadequacy in the digital infrastructure for the transmission of patient information poses a risk for upholding patient security, where patients bear the responsibility for conveying crucial care information. Finally, the complexity of the RHC intervention, especially when introduced to individuals in vulnerable life situations such as patients with cancer in need of palliative care, must be emphasized during implementation.
Overall, the study suggests that RHC could serve as a viable alternative to conventional palliative care for home-dwelling patients with cancer. However, it is imperative that the service is customized to meet individual patient needs and adhere to the principles of person-centered care.
Additional information
Contact the research support staff.