Evidence map›Paper›PMID 39871608›Full record

ArticlePalliative & supportive care2025

Addressing the concept of total pain in palliative care: A postcolonial South African hospice view.

Michelle Petersen-Damon, Leslie Swartz

Abstract read
In one paragraph

Article in Palliative & supportive care, 2025. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 1 paper.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
1citing papers in PubMed
–field-weighted citation impact
1 · What the graph read from it

What it found

Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.

The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.

2 · The registry

The trial behind it

Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.

Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.

3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

1 citing paper in PubMed.

  1. Review
4 · The record

Corrections and comments

PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

2 authors.

Michelle Petersen-DamonDepartment of Psychology, Stellenbosch University, Stellenbosch, South Africa.ORCID https://orcid.org/0009-0007-3355-6573
Leslie SwartzDepartment of Psychology, Stellenbosch University, Stellenbosch, South Africa.ORCID https://orcid.org/0000-0003-1741-5897

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

objectivesPalliative care, which was formally established in the Global North, is now recognized globally as part of health care. As part of a larger study, we were interested in how decision-makers at a leading hospice in South Africa understood the changing local context and its influence on the delivery of services. We were interested in how the concept of "total pain," as outlined by Saunders, applies in a very unequal and under-resourced society in the shadow of a long, oppressive colonial, and apartheid past.

methodsWe conducted face-to-face semi-structured interviews with 12 staff at St Luke's Combined Hospices in Cape Town, South Africa, and analyzed the data following Braun and Clarke's thematic analysis approach.

resultsFour major themes emerged from the data. First, St Luke's has faced the challenge of serving a larger and far more diverse population than it had under apartheid. Second, the organization has undergone a process of rethinking holism and holistic services offered to palliative care patients in this context. Third, diversity and cultural sensitivity are key to how services are offered, and finally, the concept of "total pain" in this context is linked to questions of power and empowerment. SIGNIFICANCE OF

resultsThis study is small and situated within a particular context, and it is clear that more data are needed. Nevertheless, the study shows that considering the Global South and postcolonial context is important for thinking about total pain and a global system of palliative care which is sensitive to the majority world context.

Indexed as

PainPain ManagementPalliative CareColonialismFemaleHospicesHumansInterviews as TopicMaleQualitative ResearchSouth AfricadiversityholismhospicePalliative carepostcolonialSouth Africa

Identifiers

PMID39871608
PMCPMC13166660

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY
Read underepoch 390

Registered trials

None linked

Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.