Dignity, privacy, respect and choice—A scoping review of measurement of these concepts within acute healthcare practice

Abstract

Aims and objectives:To synthesise and review literature related to instruments that measure psychosocial aspects of fundamental care in acute hospital care settings.Background: Psychosocial aspects of care often receive less priority in terms of care provision in acute care environments. At the same time, if these elements are overlooked, there may be consequences. Despite the availability of many instruments designed to measure specific aspects of care, these concepts are often not studied within the broader context of fundamentals of care, but rather coexist as isolated explorations of specific subelements. Design:A scoping review was conducted, based on Arksey & O'Malley's (2005) methodological framework and following the PRISMA checklist. Methods: Using the five recommended steps-identifying the research question; identifying relevant studies; study selection; charting the data; and summarising and reporting the results-three databases were searched: MEDLINE/PubMed, CINAHL and EMBASE, in February 2019.Results: Following independent screening by two of the authors, 48 papers were included. From these 48 papers, 33 instruments were identified. Only five of these tools thoroughly assessed psychosocial aspects elements of care (dignity, respect, privacy and patients' choice) through dedicated items. Conclusions:This review provides nurses with a synthesis of 33 instruments that assess the psychosocial aspects of care. This provides an important resource to guide measurement of dignity, respect, privacy and patients' choice. The findings also provide guidance to future research in this field. | 1833 BAGNASCO et Al. S U PP O RTI N G I N FO R M ATI O N Additional supporting information may be found online in the Supporting Information section. How to cite this article: Bagnasco A, Zanini M, Dasso N, et al. Dignity, privacy, respect and choice-A scoping review of measurement of these concepts within acute healthcare practice.

A systematic review of patient‐reported dignity and dignified care during acute hospital admission

“…The current review identified the PDI as the most widely used dignity‐related instrument accounting for more than half of studies, with most research on patient dignity focused on patients with cancer, highlighting a gap in understanding of differences between care settings. Previous research has attributed the dominance of the PDI to its availability in several languages which makes it readily accessible and available for HCPs and researchers across countries (Bagnasco et al, 2020 ).…”

Factors which influence the effectiveness of clinical supervision for student nurses in Sri Lanka: A qualitative research study

“…Nurses are accountable for their practice and ensuring patients' dignity and safety are fundamental to codes of nursing practice and ethics (Nursing and Midwifery Council (NMC), 2018). Failing to meet ethical standards is morally distressing and increases the risk of staff burnout (Bradshaw, 2019;Bagnasco et al, 2020).…”

Methodological quality of dignity‐related patient reported outcome measures used in acute hospital settings: A systematic review using the COSMIN methodology

“…Scoping reviews have assessed the methodological quality of dignity‐related PROMs designed for use in acute care (Bagnasco et al, 2020) and palliative care (Johnston et al, 2017) settings. A critical analysis of these scoping reviews, however, revealed that they lack specificity for dignity and/or dignified care in acute hospital settings as they included PROMs that measured constructs of care other than patient dignity or dignified care (Osse et al, 2007; Schwartz et al, 2005) or they measured dignity in contexts outside of the acute care setting (Jacelon et al, 2009; Periyakoil et al, 2009).…”