Body donation is a prosocial act providing a unique learning experience to students, ultimately impacting on patient care and science. With an increasing number of training professionals, there is an increasing need for body donors, yet little is understood about donors' beliefs and preferences. A four-center study aimed to understand donors' perceptions, 843 responses highlighted a significant relationship between completing a body donor consent form and being both an organ donor and having ever donated blood (p < 0.01). In exploring donor intentions, 69% had been considering donation for fewer than five years, 40% knew another body donor, and 27% had a family member or friend currently registered. Of those who had requested donor information packs, 97% had completed body donation consent forms. Of these, 92% had not selected any time restriction for their donation and 96% had consented to images being taken. Almost all (98%) were aware that their donation might not be accepted. Donors' motives highlighted a wish to: improve education, improve health care, advance science, and contribute to the greater good. A bimodal response was observed with body donation being used to save relatives money and inconvenience. Donors felt comfortable with their bodies being used by medical, dental, and allied health professionals; however, donors were less comfortable with their bodies being used by other groups. Only 57% were comfortable with artists, beauticians and yoga teachers using their remains. Understanding donors' motivations and decision-making process is vital to ensure resources for future and to meet any changing requirements of both donors and those studying them.

In the United Kingdom (UK) and Ireland approximately 1,400 body donors for Anatomical Examination are needed per year for the education and training of medical and allied health care professionals. The current study aimed to explore prospective donors’ motives, beliefs and desires about body donation to medical schools in England, Ireland, Scotland and Wales, with the hypothesis that their attitudes had not changed since the last such study in the UK in 1995 and that their motivation remained largely altruistic. A prospective, questionnaire‐based study of 821 potential donors over a 12 month period revealed a high level of agreement in answers to a number of questions exploring their motivation. Ninety six % of donors agreed they wished to improve the education of health care professionals, 92% agreed it was to help improve health care for patients, 78% considered that it provided a ‘good ending’ to their life. However, answers to two questions demonstrated a split viewpoint. When asked if saving relatives money was a motive 43% disagreed and 32% agreed, which was a marked increase compared to the 1995 study. A similar trend was seen when it came to sparing relatives inconvenience, with 46% of potential donors answering that this was not a motivating factor, but an increased 29% agreeing that it was. Inconvenience may mean different things to different people; practical, financial and emotional. Donors also reported differing views on avoiding traditional burial rituals with 46% agreeing that body donation helped them avoid such rituals, reflecting that some donor attitudes have changed since the last survey. Understanding donors’ altruistic motives is important, but so is recognizing some of the practical considerations important to them and how these may change with time. Therefore, the results of the current study help further our understanding of how we can support socially acceptable and ethical donation practices, including improved resources for donors, as well as also match future needs of the sector.

Incivility is a common issue within healthcare in the UK and internationally. Experienced by at least one-third of staff within the UK National Health Service, incivility has been demonstrated to have significant negative implications on both patient care and healthcare staff. These include contributing to direct medical errors, diagnostic inaccuracy and team communication, with a large associated cost burden, while for staff it has significant negative impacts on retention, productivity and morale. Proposed methods do already exist to both prevent and address incivility, and it is in the interest of healthcare institutions, for their patients and staff, to investigate incivility and adopt these methods. This review explores existing literature on the effects of incivility, researched strategies to address it, as well as the proposed ways of integrating these. Through raising awareness and exploring these issues, our aim is to increase recognition of incivility, as well as inspire healthcare managers and leaders to collectively take efforts to reduce the rates of incivility.