Purpose: The purpose of this review was to identify the characteristics and consequences of perioperative patient advocacy.

Design: An integrative review method was employed.

Methods: A database search to identify peer-reviewed articles that focused on perioperative patient advocacy was conducted in PubMed and CINAHL, followed by a manual search for additional articles. Studies were selected if they reported original empirical research findings with regard to perioperative patient advocacy. The data abstraction and synthesis were achieved with an inductive qualitative content analysis.

Finding: The analysis resulted in seven categories, two subthemes, and one main theme. The main theme, “Doing good for another human being—a balancing act between philanthropy and personal gratification,” was the core of perioperative patient advocacy.

Conclusion: Perioperative patient advocacy is part of the professional role of the perioperative nurse, and it affects the perioperative nurse emotionally. This advocacy shares similarities with descriptions of patient advocacy in general nursing.

Background: Anaesthesia often induces a state of unconsciousness that includes inability to communicate and influence the situation. The patient has to rely on the nurse anaesthetist to speak up for her/him as well as maintain her/his dignity and safety. Consequently, the nurse anaesthetist can be likened to the patient's advocate.

Aim: The aim of the study was to describe advocacy in anaesthesia care during the perioperative phase from the perspective of the registered nurse anaesthetist.

Method: Data for this qualitative descriptive study were collected during March and April, 2011. Individual interviews were conducted with a purposive sample of 20 nurse anaesthetists from two hospitals in Sweden. The audio-taped interviews were transcribed verbatim and analysed by means of qualitative content analysis.

Findings: The main theme, Holding the patient's life in my hands, described the nurse anaesthetists' perception of advocacy and comprised three subthemes: providing dignified care, providing safe care and a moral commitment.

Conclusion: Acting as the patient's advocate includes important health and well-being issues and could be stressful for the nurse anaesthetists'. A work environment where the nurse anaesthetists' can make their voices heard and feel that their opinion regarding the patient's best interests is taken seriously would be desirable, as all health professionals should ideally focus on those in their care.

Purpose: To translate and adapt the Protective Nursing Advocacy Scale (PNAS) into a Swedish version (PNAS-Swe), evaluate its psychometric properties, and describe registered nurse anesthetists' (RNAs) advocacy beliefs and actions from a protective perspective.

Design: A cross-sectional design was used.

Methods: First, the PNAS was translated into Swedish. Next, the content and construct validity of the PNAS four subscales was evaluated. Finally, the PNAS-Swe was used to describe Swedish RNA beliefs and actions regarding protective nursing advocacy.

Finding: The final PNAS-Swe has 29 items in four subscales. The RNAs reported that they feel that they should provide protective nursing advocacy for their patients. There were no differences in gender, or associations with age, or work experience regarding their advocacy beliefs or actions.

Conclusions: The PNAS-Swe is valid for use in a Swedish context. Protective nursing advocacy is important to the RNAs, which is in congruence with earlier qualitative studies.