Nursing Inquiry 2010; 17(1): 39–46

Feature

Dealing with the patient’s body in

nursing: nurses’ ambiguous
experience in clinical practice
Elisa Picco,a Roberto Santorob and Lorenza Garrinob
aAzienda Sanitaria Universitaria San Giovanni Battista, Turin, Italy, bUniversity of Turin, Turin, Italy

Accepted for publication 6 September 2009

PICCO E, SANTORO R and GARRINO L. Nursing Inquiry 2010; 17: 39–46

Dealing with the patient’s body in nursing: nurses’ ambiguous experience in clinical practice
The core of nursing in western countries is interaction with the patient and with his ⁄ her body in particular. As all nursing prac-
tices revolve around caring for the patient’s body, nurses need to understand the frailty of the body, the intimacy surrounding
it, the story it tells, as well as the discomfort and difficulties both illness and close contact can generate in the nurse–patient rela-
tionship. With this study, we wanted to explore the ward experiences of a small group of nurses in their day-to-day interaction
with patients and their bodies, to highlight their perceptions and possible difficulties in providing care. We collected qualitative
data from in-depth interviews with 14 nurses working in departments of general internal medicine, neurology, and geriatrics.
The interviews were conducted between April and June 2006 and interpreted using an interpretive phenomenological
approach. Analysis of the interview transcripts revealed that while the nurses recognize the centrality of the body in nursing,
they also expressed a certain ambiguity toward it: being able to improve a patient’s well-being through attentive care to the body
is a major source of job satisfaction, but various coping and defense strategies are deployed to overcome care-giving situations
that elicit avoidance or refusal reactions to the patient’s body.

Key words: body, care, in-depth interviews, medical anthropology, nurse–patient relationships.

Corporeity holds fundamental meaning for human
experience. Each human being possesses a body distinct
from that of another human being; the body renders a
person unique and allows the individual to perceive his ⁄ her
world and so establish continuous relationships with it
(Merleau-Ponty 1994).
‘The body inhabits the world’ (Galimberti 1998, 69). It is
an instrument with which we project ourselves outward,
toward others, and through which we experience reality and
allow it to penetrate our inner self (Godart 2007). Therefore,
it is through the perspective of the body that we perceive,
experience, and interpret reality, trying to give it meaning
(McDonald and McIntyre 2001).
Correspondence: Dr Elisa Picco, Nurse, Azienda Sanitaria Universitaria San
Giovanni Battista, ICU 9, C.so Bramante 89 ⁄ 90 10126, Turin, Italy.
E-mail: <elisa.picco@alice.it>
Basically, human life is experienced and perceived
through the body. In not recognizing the importance of the
body, we risk eliminating the foundation of human experi-
ence and knowledge (Pizza 2005). This is of foremost con-
cern for the nursing profession, as nurses care for bodies
and share the experience of illness with their patients,
although this may not equally apply to all cultural and geo-
graphic contexts in which nurses work (Zaman 2009).
Daily care of another person’s body is the task of nurses.
They look after bodies that may be healthy, sick, disabled, or
frail, ensuring that vital functions are adequately supported
and basic needs are met. Nurses work on sick people’s
bodies: dressing, undressing, and washing them, administer-
ing treatment and helping the healing process take its nat-
ural course. They are responsible for recognizing and giving
voice to bodies burdened by disease.
In the complex role of attending to the ill, nurses attempt
to give voice to the experience of disease (Touzet 2007)

 2010 Blackwell Publishing Ltd

E Picco, R Santoro and L Garrino
through daily care of the body. This implies continuous
access to a body not one’s own, with daily intrusion into a very
private space otherwise considered personal and inviolable.
In the healing process, some of the most important (some-
times implicit) rules regulating interpersonal contact in the
outside world simply disappear (Shakespeare 2003).
The nurse–patient relationship takes place in shared
spaces of privacy where patients are forced to allow a stran-
ger access to their body’s most intimate parts; nurses need to
touch a body that is not theirs, a body altered by disease and
on which they must sometimes undertake unpleasant
actions. The depth a nurse–patient relationship reaches will
depend on the partners’ willingness to co-operate, share
physical closeness, and establish physical or emotional con-
tact (Palese 2004).
The intimacy between nurse and patient, as well as the
nurse’s need to have free access to the patient’s body and
perform a series of activities on it, may cause discomfort and
conflicting emotions, as the patient’s body may have been
deformed by the disease or degraded or malodorous. Part of
the tasks involved in the nursing profession deal with body
excrements. This can give rise to different reactions such as
nausea, refusal, repugnance, disgust, and the will to move as
far away as possible from the body one is caring for (Holmes,
Perron, and O’Byrne 2006).
It is in these circumstances that the complexity of taking
care of another person clearly emerges. Nurses care for
patients, accompanying them through a stressful period of
life when disease has taken over the body, manifesting itself
with visible and occult signs. Such is the object of nursing
practice and the subject of a patient’s experience. But in
what ways do nurses deal with a body burdened by trouble,
suffering, and illness?
We felt it would be of professional interest to try to
understand how nurses deal with this ‘difficult’ corporeity.
THE STUDY
The objective of this study was to explore the ward experi-
ence of a small group of nurses in their daily relationships
with the bodies of patients they have attended to. Our inten-
tion was to understand the importance nurses give to the
patient’s body, along with their impressions, experiences,
and difficulties in establishing and maintaining contact and
intimacy with it.
METHODS AND PARTICIPANTS
We chose a qualitative method based on the phenomeno-
logical approach (Merleau-Ponty 1956) as it appeared partic-
40
ularly suitable for exploring the experiences of the
participants interviewed and for bringing out the possible
meanings of such experiences (Malterud 2001). We decided
to highlight the nurses’ direct experience, as it is the primary
source for the perception and knowledge of their world
(Varela 1997). To do this, we explored the meanings that
emerged from one-to-one interviews with the nurses and
tried to reach a full understanding of the phenomenon in
order to describe its essential structure (Priest 2002).
The study population was 14 nurses working in two
hospitals in the suburbs of Turin. Participants in this
research project were all volunteers. To be selected, the sub-
jects had to have a nursing degree and work on a general
internal medicine, neurology, or geriatrics ward. Only nurses
from these departments were chosen under the assumption
that the patients they generally cared for had a fairly similar
medium to high level of dependence and an average length
of hospitalization that would dictate a longer term relation-
ship with nursing staff. The hospital review boards and the
unit co-ordinators were informed about the study content
and gave their consent to conducting the study. The study
participants were informed about the study purpose, the
interview process, and the need for audio-taping. They were
informed that participation was voluntary and confidentiality
assured. All participants gave their oral consent.
Data collection
The in-depth interviews were structured so as to stimulate
dialog that would draw out experience near stories and auto-
biographical aspects (Atkinson 1998). In this way, we tried to
highlight the subjective voice of the interviewees, giving
space to their perception of events (DiCiccio-Bloom and
Crabtree 2006). The interviews were conducted between
April and June 2006. No questions were asked during the
interviews; only thematic prompts were given to trigger dis-
cussion. All interviews took place in a quiet, isolated room
with the interviewer alone with the participant.
Data analysis
The textual material was collected, organized, and inter-
preted in a systematic analysis to bring out essential elements
(Malterud 2001). The interviews were recorded, then tran-
scribed and read through to gain an initial understanding of
the phenomenon.
The first phase of the analysis (intuition) entailed
in-depth reading of the recorded interviews in order to gain
familiarity with the phenomenon under study. Rereading of
the material enabled us to draw out units of meaning from
 2010 Blackwell Publishing Ltd
 Nurses’ experience with the patient’s body

the interviews (Spielberg 1965, 1975). This process involved FINDINGS

putting aside our preconceptions, ideas, and knowledge of
the phenomenon, so as to avoid their influence on reading
and interpreting the material (Merleau-Ponty 1956). In this
way, we focused attention on the experiences the nurses
related and attempted to capture the essence of their
accounts without preconception.
With further attentive reading, the emerging units of
meaning were identified, and their recurrence and possible
interrelations analyzed. The units of meanings were then
summed up and grouped by theme. For each theme, the
essential elements characterizing the experience of the inter-
viewees were identified (table 1).
To reinforce data reliability, some participants were
permitted to read their interview transcript to check whether
their thoughts had emerged clearly. They could also analyze
the researchers’ description of the relationship between
nurse and patient’s body to see if it correctly reflected their
experience. None of the categories or the framework was
modified in this review process.
The next step was to review the literature to have a
pure description of the phenomenon. At first, only a gen-
eral analysis was made to help choose the most suitable
method. Once this was completed, the literature was exam-
ined to place the results obtained within what is already
known about the topic (Streuber Speziale and Carpenter
2003).
Table 1 Units of meanings and themes
Fourteen in-depth interviews were conducted. The nurses
were willing to participate, though some were initially slightly
embarrassed by the presence of the recording device. Many
interview excerpts are reported here in order to convey the
nurses’ experience thoroughly; however, we realize that the
excerpts do not exhaustively reflect the many topics
addressed in the interviews. Although the excerpts reported
are anonymous, they appear with the code number for the
interview from which they were extracted in order to keep
track of the original interview. Five main themes emerged
from the data.
Theme 1: Approaching the patient’s body
Units of meaning: Being struck by …; examining its appearance;
expressing prejudices
This theme describes the first encounter between nurse and
patient and centers on the elements that struck the nurse on
seeing the patient’s body. Many interviewees said they focus
on the patient’s face and eyes, the first visible features emerg-
ing from under the bed blankets, when they enter a patient’s
room. The face communicates much about the patient’s
emotional situation.
Interview no. 9: Perhaps their eyes strike you most, the fact
that they are scared by imminent admission … The eyes are
important, because sometimes patients need reassurance
that is not expressed in words.

Themes
1. Approaching the
patient’s body
2. Caring for the body
3. Touching a diseased body
4. Difficulties in caring
for the body
5. Staying away from the body
Units of meaning
Being struck by …
Examining its appearance
Expressing prejudice
Give importance to the body
Be pleased to do so
Perform healing actions
Trying to establish an
approach of physical
closeness and sympathy
Becoming on intimate terms
Considering some activities
as unpleasant
Feeling ineffectual
Protecting oneself
Having too little time
Delegating ⁄ being replaced
by other health workers
Some nurses said they notice first the frailness of the
body and the changes caused by the illness; others spoke of
bodies that are at the hospital staff’s disposal and can be
manipulated. Evaluating a patient’s appearance was the way
they usually read signs suggesting whether a patient takes
proper care of the body or tends to neglect it. Some inter-
viewees associated good appearance with high self-esteem
and self-respect; by the same token, however, they qualified
this statement, specifying that contingent factors (e.g.
advanced age, illness, or inability to live alone indepen-
dently) can often limit self-care. Even prejudices against
patients, because of their appearance at the first encounter,
can suddenly arise, which need to be overcome on deeper
analysis of the patient’s personal story.
Interview no. 4: I remember a person who must have been
the same age as my dad. He was so dirty! I was surprised he
was so young. Then his daughter explained, ‘He had gone
to pick mushrooms when it happened.’ I was ashamed of

 2010 Blackwell Publishing Ltd 41

E Picco, R Santoro and L Garrino
myself, because he could really have been my father and
maybe at home he was very clean indeed.
Theme 2: Caring for the body
Units of meaning: Giving importance to the body; being pleased to do so
Caring for the patient’s body has a central role in nursing.
This emerged clearly from the interviews. The interviewees
agreed on the importance and attention that patients give to
their corporeity and that special attention to the body helps
the patient feel important.
Interview no. 11: We take care of our own bodies and, since
we are independent, everything seems natural. But when
this autonomy is taken away from us … then what we do
normally, like washing our faces, becomes extremely diffi-
cult … For us, it should be fundamental to allow patients to
take care of their bodies during periods of illness.
Some interviewees underlined that attention given to a
patient’s body is essential because it can provide them with a
chance to learn more about the patient’s experience and
difficulties. It is in daily activities of body care that patients
often report they are losing command of their personal
world.
The interviews contained descriptions of many routine
activities related to body care and individual preferences
among them. Most interviewees stated they prefer basic care
(e.g. grooming the hair, bedside bathing, washing the face
and hands, maintaining general personal hygiene), because
all this helps the patient to feel better. Some like to keep
the body’s outer appearance neat and clean; what others see
counts for both nurse and patient. Others said they prefer
these activities because it gives them a chance to show
greater attention to the patient as a person ⁄ subject, too.
Taken together, these activities provide an occasion to create
a relationship based on trust.
Interview no. 12: I like to take care of the hair and bathe
patients in bed. I like the first because we don’t do it
very often, so when I do it, I feel that it is gratifying for
the patient. It’s one of those things that you don’t nor-
mally do, because there are so many other more impor-
tant things to be done, and you just say ‘that doesn’t
matter’. But when I do it, it’s a nice moment for both
the patient and me.
One interviewee explained that she prefers placing dress-
ings because it makes her feel useful. Another said she pre-
fers small gestures like a caress.
Pleasant activities were those that made the interviewees
feel satisfied and useful, or just knowing the patient was
grateful.
42
Interview no. 6: I really like to place dressings. I’m very inter-
ested in it; besides, I see the patients react very positively.
When you have to place a bladder or a venous catheter, they
always say, ‘Another hole? Why? Can’t you take it away?’ But
with dressings, they say, ‘You are angels. How do you man-
age to do these things?’ Some are really moved.
Theme 3: Touching the patient’s sick body
Units of meaning: Performing healing actions; trying to establish an
approach of physical closeness and sympathy; becoming on intimate
terms
During their daily activities, nurses come into all sorts of con-
tact with patients. However, the interviewees reported that
there are basically two kinds of contact during work. The
one refers to contact during a routine nursing procedure
and is common experience for all nurses. Some manage to
remain detached from the patient, while others seek more
attention and sympathy. The other kind of contact is vari-
ously used to comfort and reassure patients, to make them
feel the nurse’s empathy. Some hold the patient’s hand,
some put an arm around their shoulders, and others caress
the patient or simply stand by them in silence, which, as sev-
eral interviewees related, is a more natural way of touching a
patient. This is a subjective choice, however.
Interview no. 11: Sometimes when I see a patient who is par-
ticularly sad or crying, my approach is to try to comfort him.
I may give him a caress, a pat on the cheek or just hold his
hands.
Some reported that since they usually prefer to keep a
certain distance from the patient, they do not often use this
kind of contact.
Interview no. 2: I come into contact with the patient during
treatment, but apart from that, I try to avoid contact …
Maybe it’s part of my character, but I think that there
should always be a distance between patient and caregiver.
What emerged from the words of some interviewees was
that creating a closer relationship with the patient, often
through greater attention and emotional contact, can trans-
form the nurse into a reference point, resulting in an
increased demand for attention by the patient or greater
emotional involvement by the nurse.
Interview no. 10: When you come into contact with a patient
more often than usual, a kind of relationship of trust devel-
ops. You may become a reference point, while other col-
leagues do not. Patients always appreciate it when you’re a
bit more helpful.
Some interviewees said that the first contact with the
patient is a key moment, since it tests your ability to under-
 2010 Blackwell Publishing Ltd

stand whether the person opposite you wants to be
approached or not. Others mentioned that by touching
patients you gain access to their privacy. In brief, patients
need to be able to feel they can trust caregivers before they
will entrust their bodies to them.
Interview no. 5: when you approach them they clam up. You
see [that they refuse contact] from their posture: they either
fold their arms so you can’t take their hand or they shy away
… They make you understand that ‘Ok. We can talk, but
there’s no need for physical contact’.
Interview no. 9: on the geriatrics ward, you often have to put
the pill directly into the patient’s mouth, which is a very
private thing. Because putting something in somebody else’s
mouth is not so normal. Often, patients cannot see, they
are blind, and they have to trust what you say with your voice
… If you put yourself in their shoes, well, it must be very
hard …
Theme 4: Difficulties in caring for the body
Units of meaning: Considering some activities as unpleasant; feeling
ineffectual; protecting oneself
The interviewees pointed out at least one nursing activity or
situation that gives them a sense of emotional or physical
unease. These are a common source of difficulty but also
very individual experiences: some said they do not like to
pare toenails, others that they do not like to see people
vomiting or to have to aspirate fluids and secretions. Odors
notoriously elicit strong reactions. Some interviewees
described their reaction to the smell of ulcers and dressings
or immobile limbs in paralyzed patients.
Many could remember at least one episode in the course
of their career when they had felt relatively noticeable
unease and distress in coping with certain situations. The
causes may be related to physical factors, like amputation, or
a procedure to be performed on a private part of the body,
like trichotomy. But the difficulty can also reside in bearing
a patient’s emotional silence.
Interview no. 8: I once had a problem with an aspiration. The
patient was conscious, so I was very sorry about that, but I felt
so bad that I had to run away. If I hadn’t left the room, I
would have collapsed there. But I went back and apologized.
Interview no. 14: Once we had to dress a lady with a bad leg
ulcer where, unfortunately, there were tiny worms in the
wound. That was tough.
Some interviewees related feeling inadequate to the task,
because they did not know how to solve or face a certain
situation and that those occasions made them feel they were
not good nurses; they had the impression they were ineffec-
tual. A feeling of unease and inadequacy emerged.
 2010 Blackwell Publishing Ltd
Nurses’ experience with the patient’s body
Interview no. 6: [the nurse is referring to trichotomy] …
because I had to go round the testicles and the penis. He
was quite a young man and he was very tense … It made me
feel uneasy. That time I felt bad. I felt inefficient as a nurse.
I felt I just conveyed to him a sense of embarrassment.
Interview no. 3: There was a man who had just been
amputated. Not that I couldn’t deal with it on a physical
level. I had no trouble with touching the amputated limb;
even so, it was a difficult situation because he kept on feel-
ing the limb and he asked me if I could scratch his foot.
At that moment I felt unsure because I didn’t know how
to behave … I didn’t know if I had to scratch a foot that
no longer existed or tell him ‘I’m afraid there’s no foot to
scratch!’
Devising strategies as a way out of extreme circumstances
appeared fairly common. Many spoke of avoidance; one
tactic is asking to be replaced by another colleague, another
is having a colleague be with them so that they can chat to
keep their mind off the situation and concentrate on the
task instead. Others said they try to talk with colleagues
about what makes them feel uneasy, while still others deal
with a troublesome situation by trying to analyze it critically
in order to overcome embarrassment.
Interview no. 4: I had never prepared dressings this before.
One day I decided I had to see it one time; otherwise, I
would never be able to do it in case of necessity. So I went
with a colleague because I didn’t want to start to undo a
dressing and then faint! I used shock therapy; I just went
and watched!
Theme 5: Staying away from the body
Units of meaning: Having too little time; delegating ⁄ being replaced by
other health workers
The interviewees said their daily chores often made it hard
to find time to take care of the patient’s body. With a heavy
workload and limited resources, nurses simply do not have
enough time to do all the things they would like to or follow
them up in detail.
Interview no. 1: I like to put them in the wheelchair or have
them to go to the toilet or shave. But this clashes with our
need to be quick and efficient. It is difficult with such an
organization.
Some interviewees regretted having lost some care activi-
ties after the new organizational job structures assigned these
tasks to other health workers, so that nurses could dedicate
time to tasks considered to be more specialized. Some saw
this situation as negative because of the risk of creating a dis-
tance between the nurse and the patient. Others thought
43
E Picco, R Santoro and L Garrino
these organizational changes were unavoidable in the inter-
est of improving the quality of care. They also thought it was
up to the nurse to find other occasions for establishing a
relationship of trust with the patient.
Interview no. 9: other people deal with it … We delegate a
lot, maybe the term ‘delegate’ is not quite exact, it’s just that
other people do it. I miss a bit the fact that I cannot be as
close to the patient as before, because the trust they have in
you is different. The time you need to put on a drip is not
long enough [to establish trust].
Interview no. 6: Sometimes I have the impression that the
other health workers gain more when it comes to a relation-
ship with the patient. But it’s also true that having to deal
with hygienic procedures every morning is not necessarily a
nursing activity that enables you to maintain a relationship.
If you do it once, then it’s enough to realize how the patient
is doing and then go on to create a certain relationship with
him.
DISCUSSION
Analysis of the interview content underlined that the
patient’s body is felt to be a focal point in nursing: it consti-
tutes both the subject and the object of daily activities.
Nurses interviewed often spoke of their work as a series
of actions performed on a body that becomes an object on
which they act. Sometimes, they focus on a body area or con-
centrate on the more technical aspects of a procedure as a
way to maintain distance from the person–subject when
emotional involvement rises or they encounter situations
that are difficult to manage. What emerged from the
accounts of their experiences is that even in these attempts
to reify the patient’s body the body reacts: it talks back,
moves, manifests itself, forcing the nurses to realize anew
that they are dealing with a person, to recognize the indi-
vidual’s personality, and to re-establish interaction with the
person. The body–object turns back into a person–subject.
The literature discusses the perplexing double role of the
body as an object of care and a subject with whom a relation-
ship needs somehow to be established. At times, it may be
precisely through care given the body that a person can
regain his ⁄ her dignity and that is ⁄ her being a subject is rec-
ognized, even if not consciously (Seymour 2001). An addi-
tional point was that in certain circumstances it may be
necessary to reify the person’s body in order to render
acceptable the application of exceptional medical proce-
dures such as organ explantation and transplantation (Lock
2002).
The interviewees expressed an ambiguous attitude
toward dealing with the patient’s body. This ambiguity has
been highlighted elsewhere in the literature (Lawler 1991;
Urli 1999). While the body is considered as a privileged
44
element that experiences nursing care, it is also felt to be a
source of problems, unease, and negative feelings.
Nurses are physically close to the patient’s body in daily
practice: they wash, dress, treat, support, and massage
patients or simply hold their hand. They try to create a feel-
ing of well-being by taking care of the body, to which
patients react in a positive, gratifying way. Nurses assert they
are satisfied when they feel useful.
What also emerged from the interviews, however, was
how difficult it can sometimes be to deal with a body changed
by disease. Some situations may be hard to cope with both
physically and emotionally, and some activities are consid-
ered unpleasant, either because they involve an embarrassing
situation or because the situation itself causes a feeling of
nausea or repugnance or inadequacy.
Holmes, Perron, and O’Byrne (2006) explain that nurses
often experience such disgust or repugnance, as nursing
deals with bodies that have been deeply modified by illness
through wounds, excrement, and secretions. When faced
with difficult circumstances, the interviewees reported they
had devised different defense and coping strategies to help
them overcome a problem. Some may ask for help from a
colleague, others try to avoid certain situations: the tactics
vary depending on the individual and the solution being
sought.
A common complaint was not being able to find enough
time to care for the patient’s body. With pressures owing to
reduced staff, heavy workload, and the demand for more
efficiency, the nurses felt they neglected some aspects of care
and thus in certain instances might have failed to provide
the overall quality expected.
New hospital staff organizational models now include
auxiliary health workers who carry out procedures of basic
care, the idea being that with a lighter workload nurses
would take on more specialized tasks. However, some inter-
viewees felt these organizational changes result in a sense of
loss and distance from patients, as the time devoted to caring
for a patient’s body is still considered the basis for establish-
ing contact with them. Others welcomed the changes, as
with a reduced workload, it should be possible to improve
the quality of care and it is up to the nurse to find other ways
to establish a relationship of trust with patients.
The literature reveals that several nurses perceive career
advancement as a progressive loss of direct contact with cor-
poreity. This sense of detachment may be experienced as a
source of concern or as a loss of professional enrichment
(Lawler 1991; Urli 1999). Care procedures involving
the more physical aspects of the body are often regarded
as simple, humble tasks, and attributed less prestige than
procedures requiring technical nursing skills (Lawler 1991).
 2010 Blackwell Publishing Ltd

Such distinctions may create distance from intimacy with the
patient (from direct contact) and encourage placing greater
attention on technical aspects considered more profession-
ally qualifying (Williams 2001). In some cases, however, such
as specialized departments where care is supported by highly
advanced technologies (e.g. intensive care units), care of the
body becomes a key means to communicate with the patient,
to recognize and restore uniqueness and identity to a body–
person often unable to maintain contact with his ⁄ her sur-
roundings (Seymour 2001).
Touching a patient is a common gesture during daily
activities. The literature underlines the centrality of physical
contact while caring for a person and considers it to be
(more or less consciously) an integral part of nurse–patient
interaction (Routasalo 1999; Chang 2001; Edvardsson,
Sandman, and Rasmussen 2003). The interviewees distin-
guished two main forms of contact: one refers to procedures,
where gloves are more often worn; the other refers to con-
tact as an offer of emotional support. While the former is dic-
tated by protocol or practice, the latter is individually
subjective and implies a closer, more spontaneous relation-
ship with the patient. The identification of these two possible
ways of entering into contact the patient’s body (also called
‘physical and therapeutic contact’, ‘pragmatic and expressive
contact’, ‘necessary and unnecessary contact’) is described
in the literature (Routasalo 1999; Van Dongen and Elema
2001), which also discusses other main distinctions concern-
ing the way of touching, the use of contact, the conse-
quences and experience of touching (Routasalo 1999;
Chang 2001; Williams 2001).
Nursing implies constant presence near the patient.
Taking care of a patient involves entering into their privacy.
Nurses need to be able to receive patients, spend time with
them, and build, whenever possible, a relationship based on
trust that will enable patients to express their difficulties,
fears, and problems (Williams 2001).
The interviewees sometimes experienced difficulty in
maintaining a relationship with the body. Some reported
that paying more personalized attention to a patient
(a caress, for example) may lead to a closer relationship and
increased trust, but also a more demanding patient. Nurses
fear that patients may identify a particular nurse as a refer-
ence person with whom they can feel more at ease, but also
ask for more help and attention. This increases the nurse’s
workload, emotional involvement, and stress.
CONCLUSIONS
During their work, nurses establish a complex, deep relation-
ship with patients and their body. They help patients to cope
 2010 Blackwell Publishing Ltd
Nurses’ experience with the patient’s body
with the changes an illness produces and to give voice and
meaning to what patients experience through the body. This
is done in close proximity to a patient’s body. Yet nurses
hold ambiguous attitudes varying from attention and care to
distance and unease toward the body.
Being intimate and close to a body other than one’s own
requires overcoming personal physical and emotional bar-
riers. Furthermore, a profession that involves close contact
with the physical part of a person is not considered highly
qualifying professionally by society at large (Urli 1999);
nurses do not feel their profession is properly appreciated.
This may limit efforts to care for a person and his ⁄ her body,
resulting in possible detachment from and reification of
the body.
This study was carried out on a small sample of nurses
working with different patient groups that were assumed
to be generally similar in their level of dependence and
length of hospital stay: two criteria that could arguably be
taken as reasonable variables in the establishment of a
relationship between nurse and patient. The study could
be usefully extended to a larger sample to deeply investi-
gate the relationship between the nurse and the patient’s
body.
REFERENCES
Atkinson R. 1998. The life story interview. London: Sage Pub-
lication. Italian translation L’intervista narrativa. 2002.
Milano: Raffaello Cortina Editore.
Chang SO. 2001. The conceptual structure of physical touch
in caring. Journal of Advanced Nursing 33: 820–7.
DiCiccio-Bloom B and B Crabtree. 2006. The qualitative
research interview. Medical Education 40: 314–21.
Edvardsson JD, P Sandman and BH Rasmussen. 2003. Mean-
ings of giving touch in the care of older patients: Becom-
ing a valuable person and professional. Journal of Clinical
Nursing 12: 601–9.
Galimberti U. 1998. Il corpo. Milano: Feltrinelli.
Godart E. 2007. Le corps à l’épreuve du sens. Soins Psychiatrie
252: 18–23.
Holmes D, A Perron and P O’Byrne. 2006. Understanding
disgust in nursing: Abjection, self, and the other. Research
& Theory for Nursing Practice 20: 305–15.
Lawler J. 1991. Behind the screens: Nursing somology and the prob-
lem of the body. London: Churcill Livingstone.
Lock M. 2002. Human body parts as therapeutic tools: Con-
tradictory discourses and transformed subjectivities.
Qualitative Health Research 12: 1406–18.
Malterud K. 2001. Qualitative research: Standards, chal-
lenges, and guidelines. Lancet 358: 483–8.
45
E Picco, R Santoro and L Garrino
McDonald C and M McIntyre. 2001. Reinstating the margin-
alized body in nursing science: Epistemological privilege
and the lived life. Nursing Philosophy 2: 234–9.
Merleau-Ponty M. 1956. What is phenomenology? Cross Cur-
rent 6: 59–70.
Merleau-Ponty M. 1994. Phenomenology of perception. London:
Routledge. Italian translation 2003. Fenomenologia della
percezione. Milano: Bompiani.
Palese A. 2004. L’intimità nell’assistenza al paziente. In Il
corpo paziente. Da oggetto delle cure a soggetto della relazione
terapeutica, ed. L Zannini, 72–85. Milano: Franco
Angeli.
Pizza G. 2005. Antropologia medica: Saperi pratiche e politiche del
corpo. Roma: Carocci.
Priest H. 2002. An approach to the phenomenological analy-
sis of data. Nurse Researcher 10: 50–63.
Routasalo P. 1999. Physical touch in nursing studies: A litera-
ture review. Journal of Advanced Nursing 30: 843–50.
Seymour J. 2001. Critical moments: Death and dying in intensive
care. Buckingham, Philadelphia, PA: Open University
Press.
Shakespeare P. 2003. Nurses’ bodywork: Is there a body of
work? Nursing Inquiry 10: 47–56.
46
Spielberg H. 1965. The phenomenological movement: A historical
introduction, 2nd edn, vol. 1–2. Dortdrecht: Martinus
Nijhoff.
Spielberg H. 1975. Doing phenomenology. Dortdrecht: Martinus
Nijhoff.
Streuber Speziale HJ and DR Carpenter. 2003. Qualitative
research in nursing: Advancing the humanistic imperative,
3rd edn. Philadelphia, PA: Lippincott Williams &
Wilkins.
Touzet P. 2007. Du corps soignant au corps soigné. Soins
Psychiatrie 252: 39–42.
Urli N. 1999. L’ambiguità del corpo nelle cure infermieristiche.
Milano: Casa Editrice Ambrosiana.
Van Dongen E and Elema R. 2001. The art of touching: The
culture of ‘body work’ in nursing. Anthropology and Medi-
cine 8: 149–62.
Varela FJ. 1997. Neurofenomenologia: Una soluzione met-
odologica al problema difficile. Pluriverso 11: 16–39.
Williams A. 2001. A literature review on the concept of
intimacy in nursing. Journal of Advanced Nursing 33:
660–7.
Zaman S. 2009. Ladies without lamps: Nurses in Bangladesh.
Qualitative Health Research 19: 366–74.
 2010 Blackwell Publishing Ltd