Article Text

Download PDFPDF
From Cork to Budapest by Skype: living and dying
  1. Jodie E Battley1,
  2. Lucy Balding2,
  3. Oonagh Gilligan3,
  4. Catherine O'Connell4 and
  5. Tony O'Brien2
  1. 1Department of Medical Oncology, Mercy University Hospital, Cork, Ireland
  2. 2Department of Palliative Medicine, Marymount University Hospice, Cork, Ireland
  3. 3Department of Haematology, Cork University Hospital, Cork, Ireland
  4. 4Department of Palliative Medicine, Cork University Hospital, Cork, Ireland
  1. Correspondence to Jodie E Battley, Mercy University Hospital, Medical Oncology, Grenville Place, Cork, Ireland; jebattley{at}gmail.com

Abstract

Effective communication is a prerequisite to the delivery of good palliative care. The increasing use of web-based technologies and social media challenges us to reassess traditional communication styles and to define appropriate applications of evolving technologies. The use of Skype, blogging and webcams by patients in our hospitals and hospices is increasing. As illustrated in this case, the availability of such technology enables patients and families to communicate across wide geographical boundaries. This has particular advantages in situations where family members cannot routinely attend at the hospital because of other commitments or distance. The authors report on the varying use of Skype video-telephony over the course of a cancer patient's illness from the initial treatment phase through to the final days and hours of life. The benefits and challenges of using such technologies in a hospital setting and particularly in end-of-life circumstances are discussed.

Statistics from Altmetric.com

Request Permissions

If you wish to reuse any or all of this article please use the link below which will take you to the Copyright Clearance Center’s RightsLink service. You will be able to get a quick price and instant permission to reuse the content in many different ways.

Footnotes

  • Competing interests None.

  • Patient consent Obtained.

  • Provenance and peer review Not commissioned; internally peer reviewed.