IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/eee/socmed/v35y1992i3p287-293.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

Responses to the institution among elderly patients in hospital long-stay care

Author

Listed:
  • Higgs, P. F.
  • MacDonald, L. D.
  • Ward, M. C.

Abstract

The theory of the 'total institution' argues that institutions deliberately create dependency in individuals who would otherwise be self-determining. We examine the significance of this concept for patients in long-stay geriatric wards. All such patients in the South West Thames Region (808) were located and assessed for levels of physical dependency and mental confusion. 87% were profoundly disabled, 53% were severely confused and 23% were seriously ill or unable to communicate. Those capable of responding (291) were interviewed. Three quarters or more were satisfied with 'staff relations', 'autonomy' and 'privacy' and three fifths were satisfied with the 'social environment'. Results suggest that: (a) patients in long-stay geriatric wards who were not severely confused were able to make realistic assessments of their situation and (b) the majority were not passively institutionalized. In terms of institutionalization theory, it is their physical frailty that appears to differentiate this group from other categories of 'inmates'. We conclude that appropriate policy for the long-term ill necessitates consideration of the actual as well as the attributed needs of patients.

Suggested Citation

  • Higgs, P. F. & MacDonald, L. D. & Ward, M. C., 1992. "Responses to the institution among elderly patients in hospital long-stay care," Social Science & Medicine, Elsevier, vol. 35(3), pages 287-293, August.
  • Handle: RePEc:eee:socmed:v:35:y:1992:i:3:p:287-293
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: http://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/0277-9536(92)90025-L
    Download Restriction: Full text for ScienceDirect subscribers only
    ---><---

    As the access to this document is restricted, you may want to search for a different version of it.

    Corrections

    All material on this site has been provided by the respective publishers and authors. You can help correct errors and omissions. When requesting a correction, please mention this item's handle: RePEc:eee:socmed:v:35:y:1992:i:3:p:287-293. See general information about how to correct material in RePEc.

    If you have authored this item and are not yet registered with RePEc, we encourage you to do it here. This allows to link your profile to this item. It also allows you to accept potential citations to this item that we are uncertain about.

    We have no bibliographic references for this item. You can help adding them by using this form .

    If you know of missing items citing this one, you can help us creating those links by adding the relevant references in the same way as above, for each refering item. If you are a registered author of this item, you may also want to check the "citations" tab in your RePEc Author Service profile, as there may be some citations waiting for confirmation.

    For technical questions regarding this item, or to correct its authors, title, abstract, bibliographic or download information, contact: Catherine Liu (email available below). General contact details of provider: http://www.elsevier.com/wps/find/journaldescription.cws_home/315/description#description .

    Please note that corrections may take a couple of weeks to filter through the various RePEc services.

    IDEAS is a RePEc service. RePEc uses bibliographic data supplied by the respective publishers.