Human dignity research in clinical practice - a systematic literature review.
caring science
clinical practice
human dignity
systematic literature review
Journal
Scandinavian journal of caring sciences
ISSN: 1471-6712
Titre abrégé: Scand J Caring Sci
Pays: Sweden
ID NLM: 8804206
Informations de publication
Date de publication:
Dec 2021
Dec 2021
Historique:
revised:
08
09
2020
received:
24
04
2020
accepted:
05
10
2020
pubmed:
27
10
2020
medline:
16
11
2021
entrez:
26
10
2020
Statut:
ppublish
Résumé
This literature study describes caring science research on human dignity in different clinical practice. We already know a good deal about human dignity in nursing care but how do patients, nurses, healthcare professionals and next of kin experience human dignity in clinical practice? To summarise studies on human dignity to gain a deeper understanding of how it can be achieved in caring science research and to gain a broader understanding of the differences and similarities across caring contexts. The aim was also to gain a broader understanding of the differences and similarities of human dignity across different clinical practice. The literature review re-analysed 28 empirical studies on human dignity are experienced from acute, psychiatric, elderly and rehabilitation care. The data analysis strategy was conducted in a systematic and critical way and consisted of a five-step method. Maintaining dignity was described when caregivers had the time and the will to see and listen to patient and had the courage to see what they did not want to see, allowing their inner powers to act with the purpose of doing good. In elderly care, it was important that elderly persons are involved as members of society and experience respect, confidence, security and charity. Indignity was described when caregivers did not allow patients to have their will and when they had unethical attitudes, ignoring patients and creating powerlessness. The feeling of being abandoned and not being taken seriously are also described in elderly care. Findings show how caregivers fulfil their ethical responsibility by seeing, listening and being a part of the time and place. The will to do good includes the courage to preserve dignity and human value rests on being created as a human being. More research is needed about ethical and moral responsibility in clinical practice.
Sections du résumé
BACKGROUND
BACKGROUND
This literature study describes caring science research on human dignity in different clinical practice. We already know a good deal about human dignity in nursing care but how do patients, nurses, healthcare professionals and next of kin experience human dignity in clinical practice?
AIM
OBJECTIVE
To summarise studies on human dignity to gain a deeper understanding of how it can be achieved in caring science research and to gain a broader understanding of the differences and similarities across caring contexts. The aim was also to gain a broader understanding of the differences and similarities of human dignity across different clinical practice.
METHOD
METHODS
The literature review re-analysed 28 empirical studies on human dignity are experienced from acute, psychiatric, elderly and rehabilitation care. The data analysis strategy was conducted in a systematic and critical way and consisted of a five-step method.
RESULT
RESULTS
Maintaining dignity was described when caregivers had the time and the will to see and listen to patient and had the courage to see what they did not want to see, allowing their inner powers to act with the purpose of doing good. In elderly care, it was important that elderly persons are involved as members of society and experience respect, confidence, security and charity. Indignity was described when caregivers did not allow patients to have their will and when they had unethical attitudes, ignoring patients and creating powerlessness. The feeling of being abandoned and not being taken seriously are also described in elderly care.
CONCLUSION
CONCLUSIONS
Findings show how caregivers fulfil their ethical responsibility by seeing, listening and being a part of the time and place. The will to do good includes the courage to preserve dignity and human value rests on being created as a human being. More research is needed about ethical and moral responsibility in clinical practice.
Identifiants
pubmed: 33104271
doi: 10.1111/scs.12922
pmc: PMC9290914
doi:
Types de publication
Journal Article
Review
Systematic Review
Langues
eng
Pagination
1038-1049Subventions
Organisme : Research Council of Norway
ID : 190889/V50
Informations de copyright
© 2020 The Authors. Scandinavian Journal of Caring Sciences published by John Wiley & Sons Ltd on behalf of Nordic College of Caring Science.
Références
J Psychiatr Ment Health Nurs. 2013 Feb;20(1):1-8
pubmed: 22417206
Nurs Sci Q. 2004 Jan;17(1):86-91
pubmed: 14752958
Holist Nurs Pract. 2016 May-Jun;30(3):139-47
pubmed: 27078808
J Adv Nurs. 2009 Nov;65(11):2426-33
pubmed: 19747293
Nurs Ethics. 2015 Sep;22(6):688-99
pubmed: 25106457
Nurs Ethics. 2013 Dec;20(8):851-60
pubmed: 23812559
Int J Nurs Stud. 2016 Aug;60:91-8
pubmed: 27297371
Scand J Caring Sci. 2017 Dec;31(4):718-726
pubmed: 27910119
Nurs Ethics. 2014 Aug;21(5):507-17
pubmed: 24418740
Res Gerontol Nurs. 2014 Nov-Dec;7(6):265-72
pubmed: 24695411
J Psychiatr Ment Health Nurs. 2012 Sep;19(7):569-76
pubmed: 22074230
Nurs Ethics. 2019 Nov-Dec;26(7-8):2213-2224
pubmed: 30345880
Nurs Open. 2018 Apr 27;5(3):414-421
pubmed: 30062035
Psychol Bull. 1954 Jul;51(4):327-58
pubmed: 13177800
Nurs Ethics. 2017 May;24(3):268-278
pubmed: 26260441
Scand J Caring Sci. 2006 Sep;20(3):239-40
pubmed: 16922976
Nurs Ethics. 2013 Nov;20(7):748-61
pubmed: 23462504
Scand J Caring Sci. 2021 Dec;35(4):1038-1049
pubmed: 33104271
Nurs Ethics. 2010 May;17(3):313-24
pubmed: 20444773
Nurs Ethics. 2014 Mar;21(2):176-86
pubmed: 23820018
Nurs Open. 2017 Nov 30;5(1):53-61
pubmed: 29344395
J Evid Based Med. 2011 May;4(2):130-4
pubmed: 23672703
Nurs Ethics. 2010 May;17(3):301-11
pubmed: 20444772
J Clin Nurs. 2013 Aug;22(15-16):2318-26
pubmed: 23651360
Nurs Ethics. 2014 May;21(3):335-46
pubmed: 24107433
Nurs Ethics. 2017 Nov;24(7):778-788
pubmed: 26850071