Aims and objectives To report the findings from interviews conducted as part of a wider study on interventions to support dignified care in older people in acute hospital care. The data in this study present the interview data. Background Dignity is a complex concept. Despite a plethora of recommendations on how to achieve dignified care, it remains unclear how to attain this in practice and what the priorities of patients and staff are in relation to dignity. Design A purposive sample of older patients and staff took part in semi‐structured interviews and gave their insight on the meaning of dignity and examples of what sustains and breaches a patient's dignity in acute hospital care. Method Thirteen patients and 38 healthcare professionals in a single metropolitan hospital in the UK interviewed. Interviews were transcribed verbatim and underwent a thematic analysis. Results The meaning of dignity was broadly agreed on by patients and staff. Three broad themes were identified: the meaning of dignity, staffing level and its impact on dignity, and organisational culture and dignity. Registered staff of all healthcare discipline and student nurses report very little training on dignity or care of the older person. Conclusion There remain inconsistencies in the application of dignified care. Staff behaviour, a lack of training and the organisational processes continue to result in breaches to dignity of older people. Clinical nurses have a major role in ensuring dignified care for older people in hospital. Relevance to clinical practice There needs to be systematic dignity‐related training with regular refreshers. This education coupled with measures to change the cultural attitudes in an organisation towards older peoples’ care should result in long‐term improvements in the level of dignified care. Hospital managers have an important role in changing system to ensure that staff deliver the levels of care they aspire to.

We have developed a simple format for a dignity survey and observations. Overall, most patients reported electronically that they received dignified care in hospital. However, observations identified a high percentage of interactions categorised as neutral/basic care, which, while not actively diminishing dignity, will not enhance dignity. There is an opportunity to make these interactions more positive.

Aims and objectives: To review the evidence for interventions to improve dignity for older patients in acute care.Background: High profile cases have highlighted failure to provide dignified care for older people in hospitals. There is good evidence on what older people consider is important for dignified care and abundant recommendations on improving dignity, but it is unclear which interventions are effective.Design: Narrative systematic reviewMethods: The Cochrane library, MEDLINE, EMBASE, CINAHL, BNI, and HMIC electronic databases were searched for intervention studies of any design aiming to improve inpatients' dignity. The main population of interest was older patients, but the search included all patients. Studies that focused on "dignity therapy" were excluded.Results: There were no intervention studies found in any country which aimed to improve patient dignity in hospitals which included evaluation of the effect. A narrative overview of papers that described implementing dignity interventions in practice but included no formal evaluation was, therefore, undertaken. Five papers were identified. Three themes were identified: knowing the person; partnership between older people and healthcare professionals; and, effective communication and clinical leadership. The effect on dignity of improving these is untested.Conclusions: There are currently no studies that have tested interventions to improve the dignity of older people (nor anyone else) in hospitals. Further research using well designed trials of interventions is needed. There is also a need to develop and validate outcome measures for interventions to improve dignity.Relevance for practice: At present nurses lack robust evidence on how to improve dignity. There is ample evidence on what undermines patients' dignity and there is a need to develop and test interventions designed to improve patient dignity.

Priapism is defined as prolonged and painful penile erection that does not subside on orgasm. It is considered to be a urological emergency. However, patients do not always seek prompt medical help. The incidence of priapism is increased by sickle cell disease, where it is a complication of the characteristic sickling of the red blood cells. Little is known about the psychological or social implications of this complication or the strategies that sickle cell patients use to manage it. A qualitative study was carried out in order to investigate these topics. Semi-structured interviews were carried out with adult male patients of the Sickle Cell and Thalassaemia Centre in Birmingham in the UK who experienced priapism. These were subsequently analysed using grounded theory. Ten themes were elicited: first occurrence of priapism, pain, precipitants, emotional consequences, self-management, experience of hospital, impact on work and social life, impact on sexual relationships, erectile dysfunction, and disclosure. The dominant experiences were ones of despair, embarrassment, and isolation. Participants described finding it difficult to disclose priapism, with the result that it was often unreported until late in its course. Attempts to manage priapism at home varied, with there being little consensus on their efficacy. The results are discussed with respect to the healthcare services that cater for these patients.

No abstract