Meta-ethnography highlights nurses' views on dignified death in end-of-life care, indicating cultural influences are significant.
Aim To systematically synthesise nurses' perspectives on dignified death, providing a culturally informed and comprehensive understanding. Design Meta‐ethnography. Methods This study was conducted using Noblit and Hare's approach, which included reciprocal translation, refutational synthesis, and line‐of‐argument synthesis. Methodological rigour and credibility were evaluated using the Critical Appraisal Skills Program (CASP) checklist. The review included peer‐reviewed qualitative studies published in English or Korean that focused on nurses' or nursing students' views on dignified death in end‐of‐life care. Data Sources A systematic search was conducted in MEDLINE, EMBASE, CINAHL, and the Web of Science in August 2023, with an updated search in August 2024. Seventeen qualitative studies published between 2010 and 2024 met the inclusion criteria. Results Four interconnected themes emerged: A death that embraces humanity, a death that preserves personal identity, a death that facilitates connection and reconciliation, and a death that affirms acceptance and spiritual serenity. These themes, including eight sub‐themes, highlight cultural influences shaping nurses' approaches to dignified death. Conclusion The findings emphasise the influence of cultural context in shaping end‐of‐life care and support the development of culturally sensitive nursing education and guidelines to enhance care quality. Implications for the Profession and Patient Care This research provides culturally grounded strategies to improve end‐of‐life care and strengthen nurses' competencies in delivering holistic support. Impact This study highlights cultural variations in nurses' approaches to balancing autonomy, family expectations, and spiritual needs, offering practical insights for holistic, patient‐centred, and culturally sensitive care. Reporting Method This review complies with the Equator and improving reporting of meta‐ethnography (eMERGe) guidelines. Patient or Public Contribution No patient or public contribution.
No takes yet. Share an insight, caveat, or question.
Chang et al. (2025) studied this question.
Synapse has enriched 5 closely related papers on similar clinical questions. Consider them for comparative context: