The online version of this article (doi:10.1186/s12904-015-0013-3) contains supplementary material, which is available to authorized users.
The authors declare that they have no competing interests.
BJ and DB designed the study; BJ and DB supervised the study; BJ, DB and MG gathered data; JP and MN collated and analysed the data, with input from BJ and DB; BJ and JP drafted the article, with critical revisions by DB, MG, MN and MMcG. All authors approved the final manuscript.
Providing person-centred, dignity-conserving care for hospitalised patients is central to many healthcare policies and essential to the provision of effective palliative care. The Patient Dignity Question (PDQ) “What do I need to know about you as a person to take the best care of you that I can?” was designed from empirical research on patients’ perceptions of their dignity at end of life to help healthcare professionals (HCPs) understand the patient as a person.
This mixed method pilot study was designed to inform a larger multisite study in the future. It tests the hypothesis that the PDQ intervention could be used to enhance a more person-centred climate for people with palliative care needs in the acute hospital setting, and provide evidence regarding its acceptability. Outcome measures pre and post intervention Person-centred Climate Questionnaire – patient version (PCQ-P), and the Consultation and Relational Empathy (CARE) measure; PDQ feedback questionnaires were used for all participants post intervention, in addition to qualitative interviews.
30 patients, 17 HCPs, and 4 family members participated. Results showed a positive correlation between higher PCQ-P scores and higher CARE scores, indicating that the PDQ can make improvements to a person-centred environment and levels of empathy perceived by patients. Individual results from the PCQ-P and the CARE indicated overall improvements in the majority of fields. The PDQ supported disclosure of information previously unknown to HCPs, has implications for improving person-centred care. Positive results from PDQ feedback questionnaires were received from all participants.
Qualitative findings indicated patients’ appreciation of staff (Attributes and attitudes), that patients wanted staff to have awareness of them (Know me as a person), take the time to talk, and work flexibly, to allow for patient individuality (Time and place).
The PDQ has potential to improve patients’ perceptions of care, and HCP attitudes. Furthermore, it was well received by participants. The PDQ could be incorporated into clinical practice for the care of palliative care patients in the acute setting to the benefit of personalized and dignified care.
Further research using the PDQ across wider geographical areas, and more diverse settings, would be beneficial.
Additional file 1: Abbreviations.12904_2015_13_MOESM1_ESM.docx
Johnston B, Gaffney M, Pringle J, Buchanan D. The person behind the patient: a feasibility study using the Patient Dignity Question for patients with palliative care needs in hospital. Int J Palliat Nurs. 2015;22:24–30.
Whitehead AL, Sully BGO, Campbell MJ. Pilot and feasibility studies: Is there a difference from each other and from a randomised controlled trial? Contemp Clin Trials. 2014;28:130–3. CrossRef
Department of Health and NHS Commissioning Board. Compassion in practice- nursing, midwifery and care staff- our vision and strategy. Redditch: NHS England; 2012.
Gaffney M, Johnston B, Buchanan D. Using the “patient dignity question” as a person-centred intervention for patients with palliative care needs in an acute hospital setting. BMJ Supportive Palliat Care. 2014;4 Suppl 1:A13–4. CrossRef
Friedman L. Commentary: Why we should report results from clinical trial pilot studies. Trials. 2013;14:1–2. CrossRef
Anderson F, Downing GM, Hill J, Casorso L, Lerch N. Palliative performance scale (PPS): a new tool. J Palliat Care. 1995;12:5–11.
Field A. Discovering statistics using SPSS. 3rd ed. London: Sage; 2009.
Ritchie J, Lewis J, Nicholls CM, Ormston R, editors. Qualitative research practice: A guide for social science students and researchers. London: Sage; 2013.
Pallant J. SPSS survival manual. 4th ed. Berkshire: Open University Press; 2010.
World Health Organization (WHO). Patients’ rights, Genomic Resource Centre. Geneva: WHO; 2014.
Stomel D: Comprehensive Assessment and Specific Learning Disabilities: a Comparison of Discrepancy Versus RTI Psychological Reports. UC Riverside Electronic Theses and Dissertations; 2012
Collins A. Measuring what really matters: towards a coherent measurement system to support person-centred care. London: The Health Foundation; 2014.
NHS. Feeling better? Improving patient experience in hospital. London: NHS Confederation; 2010.
Knights D, Wood D, Barclay S. The Liverpool Care Pathway for the Dying: What Went Wrong? British J Gen Pract. 2013;2013:509–10. CrossRef
Health Improvement Scotland. Releasing time to care: making priorities happen. Final report. Edinburgh: Health Improvement Scotland and NHS Education for Scotland; 2013.
Detsky AS, Krumholz HM. Reducing the Trauma of Hospitalization. J Am Med Assoc. 2014;4(Suppl 1): A13-4. doi:10.1136/bmjspcare-2014-000654.36.
Macmillan Cancer Support. MacMillan values based standard TM. London: MacMillan Cancer Support; 2013.
The Safe Staffing Alliance. A nursing alliance with a firm and simple message: Numbers matter. Middlesex: Royal College of Nursing; 2013.
- The dignified approach to care: a pilot study using the patient dignity question as an intervention to enhance dignity and person-centred care for people with palliative care needs in the acute hospital setting
- BioMed Central
Neu im Fachgebiet AINS
Meistgelesene Bücher aus dem Fachgebiet AINS
Mail Icon II