Hospitalized patient's rights: A nursing practice responsibility
Keywords:
Human Rights, Hospital Patient Relations, Nursing CareAbstract
Introduction: protection to the human rights is a duty of society, the law to be guarded mayor attention is about children, illness and inability. Since the 50’s decade, with the publication of Nuremberg’s Code, it'd established the rights of the patient hospitalized.
Objective: identify the degree of knowing in the nursery personal about the rights of patient hospitalized and if it has influencing in satisfactions with health attention.
Material and methods: transversal, descriptive, and observational study with 50 general nurses from hospitalization and measured by an instrument with 20 items, previously valided by expert and the confidentiality with Cuter-Richardson’s with value of 0.60 for ask positive, and of 0.23 for the ask negative. The items were about the right to health, autonomy, information, truth, confidentiality, freedom, intimacy, a deal with worthy best medical attention. An interview was applied to 121 hospitalized patients, questionnaire related with satisfaction and a linker's scale, for classify nursery attention. To associate the degree nurse's knowing a correlation by means of coefficient PHI.
Results: the 100% knows the right to life, the 84% to health, the 69% about autonomy, the 55% knows what’s the rights to information, the 95% to truth, 69% knows right to confidentiality, 74% to freedom, the 55% knows the right to intimacy, 50% to dignity, the 42% knows the right to a best medical attention. In relation to patients the 48.8% didn't know the name of nurse that assists, them 51.2% said intimacy wasn't respected, the 97.5% opined that the decisions for treatment or surgery are a direct medical responsibility, about the nursery attention, the patients were opinions 28% excellent, the 58% good and the 14% as regular.
Conclusions: level of nurses knowing the hospitalized patient rights was, 42% of the nurses ignore the right to a best medical attention, the patient ignores the name of the nurses take care of them, and 14% of patients' opinion about attention was regular.
References
Lifshitz GA, Trujillo F. Revista Médica del lMSS; México 1992; 32, 295,297.
Lifshitz GA, Trujillo F, Cuevas A. Derechos Humanos, Manual
de Capacitación; Comisión Nacional de Derechos Humanos; 1990; 10.
Asamblea Médica Mundial: Declaración de Lisboa; Derechos del Paciente; "Bol of Savitt Panam"; 1990; 108, 642.
Lifshitz GA, Trujillo D. Comisión Nacional de Derechos Humanos; 1995;7,10,11,13,15,16,17.
Congreso Nacional de Colombia; 2000, volumen, 2801.
Seminario de Salud y Derechos Humanos, Declaración de los Derechos Humanos del Paciente de la Asociación Americana de Hospitales y de la declaración de los Derechos del Paciente; Lisboa; 1981.
Lifshitz GA. Boletín de Educación Médica; Dirección de Prestaciones Médicas; Coordinación de Educación Médica; volumen 1; número 1; May-Jun. 1999
Durán GI, Frent M J, Becerra A. La Calidad de la conducta prescriptiva en la atención primaria. Salud Pública Méx. 1990; 32: 181-191.
González P J, Merelo A, Aguirre GH, y col. Sistema de Evaluación Médica, progresos y perspectiva. Revista Médica del IMSS. 1984; 22:407417.
Aguirre GH. Calidad de la Atención Médica México, Conferencia Interamericana de Seguridad Social. 1997. 2a edición.
De Silvia RMM, Bonifaz GR, Aguirre GH. Sistema de Evaluación Integral de la Calidad de la atención en Bancos de Sangre. Revista Médica del IMSS, 2000; vol-38:3;227-233.
Martínez CM, Sánchez CN, Escamilla CJ y cols. Calidad de la atención médica: efectos de la inasistencia del personal de salud. Revista de Enfermería IMSS. 1992; 5: 37-43.
Trujillo G. Propuesta para la protección de los derechos humanos del paciente hospitalizado. Desarrollo científico de enfermería. 1994:7:20-23.
