Dignity and Predictors of Its Change Among Inpatients in Long-Term Care

Personal dignity in people with early-stage dementia: A longitudinal study

BACKGROUND

A psychosocial problem faced by people with early-stage dementia (PwESD) is the perception of threats to personal dignity. Insights into its dynamics are important for understanding how it changes as dementia advances and to develop suitable interventions. However, longitudinal studies on this change in PwESD are lacking.

AIMS

To determine how perceptions of dignity and selected clinical and social factors change over 1 year in home-dwelling PwESD and the predictors associated with changes in perceptions of dignity over 1 year.

RESEARCH DESIGN AND METHODS

A longitudinal study was conducted. The sample included 258 home-dwelling Czech PwESD. Data were collected using the Patient Dignity Inventory (PDI-CZ), Mini-Mental State Examination, Bristol Activities of Daily Living Scale, Geriatric Depression Scale and items related to social involvement. Questionnaires were completed by the PwESD at baseline and after 1 year.

ETHICAL CONSIDERATIONS

The study was approved by the ethics committee and informed consent was provided by the participants.

RESULTS

People with Early-Stage Dementia rated the threat to dignity as mild and the ratings did not change significantly after 1 year. Cognitive function, self-sufficiency, vision, and hearing worsened, and more PwESD lived with others rather than with a partner after 1 year. Worsened depression was the only predictor of change in perceived personal dignity after 1 year, both overall and in each of the PDI-CZ domains. Predictors of self-sufficiency and pain affected only some PDI-CZ domains.

CONCLUSIONS

Perceptions of threat to dignity were mild in PwESD after 1 year, although worsened clinical factors represented a potential threat to dignity. Our findings lead us to hypothesise that perceived threats to personal dignity are not directly influenced by health condition, but rather by the social context.

Dimensionality and risk factors of the personal stigma of depression in adults aged 50 years and older at risk of depression

Objectives: Knowledge about the mechanism of the personal stigma of depression may inform strategies to reduce stigma and promote help-seeking. We examined the dimensionality and risk factors of the personal stigma of depression in older adults at risk of depression.Methods: Seven-hundred and one Hong Kong adults aged 50 years and older at risk of depression completed the personal stigma subscale of the depression Stigma Scale (DSS-personal) at two-time points. We used exploratory factor analysis (EFA) to explore the factor structure of DSS personal and confirmatory factor analysis to examine the model fit of the EFA-informed factor structure and structures proposed in previous studies. Regression analyses examined the relationships between risk factors and personal stigma dimensions.Results: Factor analyses identified a 3-factor structure of DSS-personal resembling the social-cognitive model consistent over time and included stereotype, prejudice, and discrimination (CFI = 0.95, TLI = 0.92, RMSEA = 0.05). Regression analyses indicated all stigma dimensions were associated with older age, less education, and no personal history of depression (B = -0.44 to 0.06); discrimination was also associated with more depressive symptoms (B = 0.10 to 0.12).Conclusion: Findings illustrated the potential theoretical underpinning of DSS-personal. Stigma reduction interventions could target and tailor to older adults with risk factors to enhance effectiveness and promote help-seeking.

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

AIMS AND OBJECTIVE

The aim of this systematic review was to examine the methodological quality of dignity-related patient reported outcome measures (PROMs) used to measure patients' dignity during acute hospitalisation using the Consensus-based Standards for the selection of health Measurement Instruments (COSMIN) methodology for systematic review of PROMs.

BACKGROUND

Previous scoping review studies on the methodological quality of dignity-related PROMs lack specificity for dignity during acute hospital admission. They included PROMs that were developed to measure constructs of care other than patient dignity or designed to measure dignity in contexts outside of the acute hospital setting.

STUDY DESIGN

A systematic review based on COSMIN methodology.

METHODS

A systematic search was undertaken using five databases (CINAHL Complete, Medline Complete, EMBASE, PsycINFo and AgeLine) for articles published between 2000 and 2022. Relevant papers were identified using strict adherence to eligibility criteria, and studies that included development of dignity-related PROMs for use in acute hospital settings were selected. Two reviewers independently screened the identified papers, extracted data and examined the quality of studies.

RESULTS

Six papers met the inclusion criteria. Two PROMs, the 25-item Patient Dignity Inventory and the 34-item Inpatient Dignity Scale, met the COSMIN quality criteria because of their sufficient quality of evidence for content validity and reliable internal consistency. None of the PROMs met the quality criteria for assessment of measurement error, criterion validity, cross-cultural validity and responsiveness.

CONCLUSION

We recommend the Patient Dignity Inventory and the Inpatient Dignity Scale as the PROMs of choice for evaluating patients' dignity and/or dignified care during acute hospital admissions. These PROMs were developed using robust procedures with sufficient overall quality for content validity, internal consistency reliability and other measurement properties, and with moderate to high quality of evidence for these measurement properties. Researchers and clinicians who wish to use other dignity-related PROMs identified in this review should consider the methodological limitations of these PROMs, as highlighted in the present systematic review.

RELEVANCE TO CLINICAL PRACTICE

The review findings will guide healthcare professionals about their choice of patient reported outcome measures for evaluating patients' dignity or dignified care during acute hospitalisation.

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

AIMS

To synthesize quantitative evidence on levels of dignity during acute hospital admission and identify barriers and facilitators to patients' dignity or dignified care from the perspective of hospitalized patients. The secondary aim was to examine the relationship between dignity and demographic, clinical and psychological characteristics of patients.

DESIGN

A systematic review based on the protocol of the Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic reviews and Meta-Analyses guideline for reporting systematic reviews.

DATA SOURCES

Five electronic databases (PubMed, CINAHL, Embase, PsycINFO, AgeLine) were searched in February 2021, followed by backward-forward searching using Web of Science and Scopus databases.

REVIEW METHODS

Potentially eligible articles were scrutinized by two reviewers. Articles that met the eligibility criteria were appraised for quality using the Critical Appraisal Tool for Cross-Sectional Studies. Two reviewers extracted data for the review and resolved differences by consensus.

RESULTS

Out of 3052 potentially eligible studies, 25 met the inclusion criteria. Levels of dignity for hospitalized patients vary widely across geographic locations. Patients' dignity is upheld when healthcare professionals communicate effectively, maintain their privacy, and provide dignity therapy. Patients' perceptions of dignity were, in some studies, reported to be associated with demographic (e.g. age, marital status, gender, employment, educational status), clinical (e.g. hospitalization, functional impairment, physical symptoms) and psychological (e.g. depression, anxiety, demoralization, coping mechanisms) variables whilst other studies did not observe such associations.

CONCLUSION

Patients in acute care settings experience mild to a severe loss of dignity across different geographic locations. Patients' dignity is influenced by several demographic, clinical and psychological characteristics of patients.

IMPACT

The findings of the review support impetus for improvement in dignified care for hospitalized patients, addressing factors that facilitate or impede patients' dignity. Measures aimed at alleviating suffering, fostering functional independence and addressing patients' psychosocial needs can be used to promote dignity.

Factors associated with older persons' perceptions of dignity and well-being over a three-year period. A retrospective national study in residential care facilities

BACKGROUND

Dignity and well-being are central concepts in the care of older people, 65 years and older, worldwide. The person-centred practice framework identifies dignity and well-being as person-centred outcomes. Older persons living in residential care facilities, residents, have described that they sometimes lack a sense of dignity and well-being, and there is a need to understand which modifiable factors to target to improve this. The aim of this study was to examine the associations between perceptions of dignity and well-being and the independent variables of the attitudes of staff, the indoor-outdoor-mealtime environments, and individual factors for residents over a three-year period.

METHODS

A national retrospective longitudinal mixed cohort study was conducted in all residential care facilities within 290 municipalities in Sweden. All residents aged 65 years and older in 2016, 2017 and 2018 were invited to responded to a survey; including questions regarding self-rated health and mobility, the attitudes of staff, the indoor-outdoor-mealtime environments, safety, and social activities. Data regarding age, sex and diagnosed dementia/prescribed medication for dementia were collected from two national databases. Descriptive statistics and ordinal logistic regression models were used to analyse the data.

RESULTS

A total of 13 763 (2016), 13 251 (2017) and 12 620 (2018) residents answered the survey. Most of them (69%) were women and the median age was 88 years. The odds for satisfaction with dignity did not differ over the three-year period, but the odds for satisfaction with well-being decreased over time. Residents who rated their health as good, who were not diagnosed with dementia/had no prescribed medication for dementia, who had not experienced disrespectful attitudes of staff and who found the indoor-outdoor-mealtime environments to be pleasant had higher odds of being satisfied with aspects of dignity and well-being over the three-year period.

CONCLUSIONS

The person-centred practice framework, which targets the attitudes of staff and the care environment, can be used as a theoretical framework when designing improvement strategies to promote dignity and well-being. Registered nurses, due to their core competencies, focusing on person-centred care and quality improvement work, should be given an active role as facilitators in such improvement strategies.

Improving the perception of respect for and the dignity of inpatients: a systematic review

OBJECTIVES

The aim of this systematic review is to find evidence to determine which strategies are effective for improving hospitalised patients' perception of respect and dignity.

METHODS

A systematic review of the literature was conducted in accordance with Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses 2020 guidelines. The MEDLINE/PubMed, PsycINFO and Cochrane Library databases were searched on 9 March 2021. Observational studies, prospective studies, retrospective studies, controlled trials and randomised controlled trials with interventions focused on improving respect for patients and maintaining their dignity were included. Case reports, editorials, opinion articles, studies <10 subjects, responses/replies to authors, responses/replies to editors and review articles were excluded. The study population included inpatients at any health facility. Two evaluators assessed risk of bias according to the Cochrane Handbook of Systematic Reviews of Interventions criteria: allocation, randomisation, blinding and internal validity. The reviewers were blinded during the selection of studies as well as during the quality appraisal. Disagreements were resolved by consensus.

RESULTS

2515 articles were retrieved from databases and 44 articles were included in this review. We conducted a quality appraisal of the studies (27 qualitative studies, 14 cross-sectional studies, 1 cohort study, 1 quali-quantitative study and 1 convergent parallel mixed-method study).

DISCUSSION

A limitation of this study is that it may not be generalisable to all cultures. Most of the included studies are of good quality according to the quality appraisal. To improve medical and hospital care in most countries, it is necessary to improve the training of doctors and other health professionals.

CONCLUSION

Many strategies could improve the perception of respect for and the dignity of the inpatient. The lack of interventional studies in this field has led to a gap in knowledge to be filled with better designed studies and effect measurements.

PROSPERO REGISTRATION NUMBER

CRD42021241805.