Patients' experiences and perceptions of dignity in end‐of‐life care in emergency departments: A qualitative study

AIMS: To explore and understand the experiences of patients with advanced illness in relation to dignity during end‐of‐life care in emergency departments. DESIGN: Qualitative study based on Gadamer's hermeneutics. METHODS: Between September 2019 and February 2020, 16 in‐depth interviews were carried out with advanced illness patients who attended emergency departments. The participants were informed priorly and signed informed consent. The data were analysed using an inductive strategy for finding emerging themes. The Consolidated Criteria for Reporting Qualitative Research was used for writing the study's report. RESULTS: In the data analysis process, two main themes emerged that glean the experiences of patients in relation to dignity during end‐of‐life care in emergency departments. ‘Dignity as an individual's attribute’ and ‘Acting with dignity: Dignity as a behavioural attribute’. CONCLUSION: Patient dignity in end‐of‐life care is centred around the principle of control (of oneself, one's death and one's emotions). The strategies required for patients to preserve their dignity can be somewhat incompatible with the dynamics and objectives of healthcare professionals who work in emergency departments. IMPACT STATEMENT: The dignity of patients with advanced illness who attend emergency departments is a relevant issue that merits being addressed from the patients' perspective. Participants have identified that dignity is a way of being and behaving in the face of illness. Emergency departments need to respect end‐of‐life patients' desires by supporting and accompanying them, avoiding therapeutic obstinacy. We recommend care to be centred on patients' well‐being, to respect their autonomy and decision‐making processes, and to allow prompt referrals to palliative care services. PATIENT OR PUBLIC CONTRIBUTION: Managers from the Emergency Departments participated in the study design and patients' recruitment. Patients' relatives were informed about the study's aim, and they contributed to the development of the interview protocol.