Inquiring into conditions for engaging in narrative relations on a geriatric ward - how interpretation matters in everyday practices.

Drawing on data from ethnographic fieldwork and interprofessional focus group discussions, this study enquires into staff's everyday life on a geriatric ward to explore and understand conditions for engaging in narrative relations in in-patient geriatric care. Avoiding individualistic understandings of narrative practices, we applied a narrative-in-action methodology built on a relational understanding of narrativity, where individual narratives are not separated from social and cultural features. This helped us explore how individual interpretations of the conditions for everyday practices come together with broader social or cultural understandings to gain situated insights about how these are continuously related and reformed by one another in everyday situations of geriatric care. The findings offer insights into the opportunities to engage in narrative relations based on how healthcare staff on a geriatric ward interpret conditions for their practices, and how they act based on such interpretations. While some interpretations were associated with attitudes and activities encouraging narrative relations, others simultaneously thwarted narrative relations by enacting task-orientation, division, or a focus on measurable biomedical or function-related outcomes. Moreover, the findings suggest and discuss consequences of the tensions created as interpretations are enacted in everyday healthcare situations, thus questioning assumptions about conditions as something static and linear.

Approved or disregarded? Exploring arenas for narrative relations in geriatric care.

PURPOSE: The use of narration in healthcare has been accentuated as a response to the requested shift towards person-centred care. The notion of narrative relations refers to a process of involving several people in mutual and ongoing narrative exchange. This study aimed to explore how and where narrative relations may be adopted and enacted in everyday healthcare practice. METHODS: The study has a qualitative, explorative design. Seven interprofessional focus group discussions with healthcare staff were prompted by vignettes. A multidisciplinary team of healthcare staff (n = 31) were recruited on a geriatric ward. Data were analysed using a constant comparative method. RESULTS: A core theme shows how narrative relations are adopted and enacted both as part of an approved practice-the work procedures commonly approved as part of healthcare, and as a disregarded practice where covert but important narrative relations take place to support fundamental qualities of healthcare. Moreover, the findings consider arenas of healthcare practice where approved or disregarded practices are enacted in the clinic frontstage and the clinic backstage. CONCLUSIONS: Narrative relations may take place in different arenas of healthcare practice yet simultaneously become a cohesive force interconnecting those arenas and uphold continuity. Impeded narrative relations in one arena may have unintended consequences in another.

Engaging in narrative relations in everyday work on a geriatric ward: A qualitative study with healthcare professionals.

AIMS AND OBJECTIVES: To explore healthcare professionals' experiences and reflections about narration in their everyday work. BACKGROUND: The need for integrated and people-centred healthcare for older adults has highlighted the relevance of narration in healthcare practice. Although theoretical foundations vary, different frameworks building on narration have been proposed for translating person-centredness philosophies into practice. However, to understand how theoretical knowledge on narration can be adopted into clinical work, we need to learn how healthcare staff understand narration from their experiential knowledge and practice. DESIGN: The research process followed guidelines from Constructivist Grounded Theory as described by Charmaz. The study adheres to the COREQ guidelines. METHODS: Data collection entailed interprofessional focus groups discussions with healthcare staff (n = 31). Vignettes depicting realistic scenarios were used to encourage participants to reflect on clinical practice. Data were analysed via a constant comparative method. RESULTS: One core theme arose from the analysis. The core theme showed how narration was a relational process that people engaged in to pursue and uphold several foundational qualities in healthcare practice presented in the following subthemes: preventing simplistic understandings of people and situations; supporting trustful relations; supporting continuity and coherence; and learning from coworkers. However, a minor theme raised awareness of narrative relations as a double-edged sword. CONCLUSIONS: By acknowledging the mutual and multifacetted nature of narration in everyday practice, this study shows how healthcare professionals' engagement in narrative relations may contribute to upholding several foundational qualities which resonate with philosophies of person-centredness in everyday healthcare practice. RELEVANCE TO CLINICAL PRACTICE: Recognition of both the advantages and possible risks embedded in narrative relations in healthcare practice emphasises the obligation to collectively reflect on the repercussions of narrative relations in any local context. PATIENT OR PUBLIC CONTRIBUTION: Healthcare professionals contributed by sharing their experiential knowledge and reflections on narration in practice.