z-logo
open-access-imgOpen Access
‘Not safe for discharge’? Words, values, and person-centred care
Author(s) -
Brent Hyslop
Publication year - 2019
Publication title -
age and ageing
Language(s) - English
Resource type - Journals
SCImago Journal Rank - 2.014
H-Index - 143
eISSN - 1468-2834
pISSN - 0002-0729
DOI - 10.1093/ageing/afz170
Subject(s) - medicine , set (abstract data type) , context (archaeology) , phrase , patient safety , discharge planning , health care , nursing , computer science , paleontology , artificial intelligence , economics , biology , programming language , economic growth
The phrase ‘not safe for discharge home’ is often heard in relation to an older person in hospital, commonly due to functional limitations or risk of falls. But it remains unclear how such a standard of safety should be set in this context, or who should set it. In addition, labelling someone ‘unsafe’ to return to their own home has significant practical and ethical implications. After briefly exploring these issues, this Commentary suggests that a holistic approach and shared decision-making is required in this setting. Instead of simply declaring someone safe or unsafe for discharge home, specific ‘safety concerns’ (or ‘hazards’) should be identified and addressed as able. Ongoing specific concerns can then be discussed in conjunction with a patient’s values and perceived benefits of returning home, in comparison with potential pros and cons of other discharge options. Overall, this paper suggests that paying attention to our words and values can enhance discharge planning and person-centred care.

The content you want is available to Zendy users.

Already have an account? Click here to sign in.
Having issues? You can contact us here
Accelerating Research

Address

John Eccles House
Robert Robinson Avenue,
Oxford Science Park, Oxford
OX4 4GP, United Kingdom