Medical Practice and the Phenomenon of Patient Dignity

NB: We do not resell your papers. Upon ordering, we do an original paper exclusively for you.

NB: All your data is kept safe from the public.

Conceptual Background (30%) Phenomenon Purpose	The source by Papastavrou, Efstathiou, and Andreou (2016) is devoted to the phenomenon of patient dignity. In the introduction section, the topic is discussed concerning its history, the dimensions of dignity in nursing, and its subjective nature. Moreover, introducing the notion of patient dignity, the researchers review the arguments of different scholars and present the most important controversies surrounding the problem. The purpose of this study is to improve the current knowledge about patient dignity by studying the experiences of student nurses related to the concept. The information concerning practice gaps and dignity is supposed to help improve the process of curriculum development.
Design (30%) Methodology Sampling Data Collection Interviews	The study utilizes a qualitative approach and explores the topic with the help of focus groups. The method seems appropriate if the authors’ goal is taken into account. The potential weaknesses of this method include associated expenses and researchers’ impact on the credibility of answers. However, it also has advantages since focus groups present a time-consuming option that is easy to use. The participants from a local university were selected using non-probability sampling techniques. They were recruited in the nursing department of their educational institution with the help of advertisements about the planned study. The sampling sites helped fit the needs of the study, and 34 students willing to participate were included in the sample. The inclusion criteria were being a student nurse and the presence of clinical experience, and the exclusion criterion was the absence of clinical placements. The refusal rate was 5, 56%, whereas the attrition rate exceeded 94%. Data collection was performed during four meetings of the participating groups; therefore, only one method was used. The rationale for that choice was the need to create a non-threatening atmosphere from honesty considerations. The period was two months (May-June 2012). All four discussions were preceded by the explanations of the rules and principles of communication, but the participants did not review the transcripts. No changes in data collection due to external factors are mentioned in the study. Collaboration between the researchers and the student nurses was not in the format of interviews that are usually structured or semi-structured. In their focus groups, all participants were free to express their opinions or skip certain questions. The students’ privacy was protected in two ways: they have explained the purposes of the study and the researchers let them use individual pseudonyms.
Analysis (10%) Data analysis Credibility Auditability Fittingness	The collected data was analyzed and managed with the help of qualitative content analysis methods. To maintain the rigor of the research process and inspire a shared vision of data management principles, each data collection session was followed by meetings of the research team. The methods of data management and analysis were consistent with the purpose of the study and the available information. In general, the findings seem credible since some measures were used to reduce the impact of different types of experimenter bias on the results. For instance, three specialists responsible for investigations worked independently to analyze the data and used the approach of Kevern and Webb aimed at improving the credibility of findings. Moreover, all four transcripts were checked and reviewed a few times to exclude coding errors. When it comes to suitability, data transparency and the accuracy of the results can be checked by external investigators even though the study is qualitative. However, the article does not present all details necessary for such audits. To conduct the procedure, all transcripts and source audio tapes should be available to investigators. The findings are meaningful to the everyday experiences of healthcare providers who aim to promote patient dignity and maximize the positive outcomes of treatment strategies. For instance, many themes identified due to the analysis refer to the widely-known manifestations of dignity such as the use of curtains and respecting patients’ boundaries.
Findings (10%) Findings?	The findings addressed the purpose of research, and many quotes were interpreted concerning the context and non-verbal signs. The results of the analysis suggest that all factors that threaten dignity are related to five themes. They include the following: i. clients’ preferences and the recognition of their individuality; ii. confidentiality, privacy; iii. “loss of autonomy and need for help”; iv. discrimination; v. “attribution and reciprocity” (Papastavrou et al., 2016, p. 96). Additionally, the participants did not mention any barriers to the promotion of patient dignity that affect nurses’ work. As for data congruency, the presented quotes match the themes, but the problem of variations is not thoroughly discussed. Overall, the findings are understandable, identifiable, congruent with the source’s presentation, and logically organized.
Conclusions/Implications and Recommendations (10%) Conclusions/implications and recommendations Contribution of this particular research study to the body of knowledge in nursing: How does it add to what is known? Does it have implications for practice? If so, what are they?	The conclusions are consistent with the aim of the study and present an effective summary of the article that outlines some directions for future research. Concerning implications, they do not receive much attention in the final section of the source. In the conclusion, the researchers refer to the experience of other institutions, but no specific implications of their findings to theory-building and policy-making are presented. The only recommendation is the need to provide student nurses with more opportunities to report unethical practices at their workplaces. As for the source’s intellectual contribution, it supports the findings of numerous studies that regard mispronouncing patients’ names and similar issues as significant ethical violations. At the same time, it adds to what is already known by taking a fresh look at some dimensions of dignity violations such as the failure to individualize care. These findings’ potential implications mainly relate to nursing education: using them, it is possible to introduce new requirements to be followed by students and improve dignity training programs.