Alignment Among Patient, Caregiver, and Health Care Provider Perspectives on Hemodialysis Vascular Access Decision-Making: A Qualitative Study.

IF 1.6 Q3 UROLOGY & NEPHROLOGY Canadian Journal of Kidney Health and Disease Pub Date : 2023-11-29 eCollection Date: 2023-01-01 DOI:10.1177/20543581231215858
Angela R Schneider, Pietro Ravani, Kathryn M King-Shier, Robert R Quinn, Jennifer M MacRae, Shannan Love, Matthew J Oliver, Swapnil Hiremath, Matthew T James, Mia Ortiz, Braden R Manns, Meghan J Elliott
{"title":"Alignment Among Patient, Caregiver, and Health Care Provider Perspectives on Hemodialysis Vascular Access Decision-Making: A Qualitative Study.","authors":"Angela R Schneider, Pietro Ravani, Kathryn M King-Shier, Robert R Quinn, Jennifer M MacRae, Shannan Love, Matthew J Oliver, Swapnil Hiremath, Matthew T James, Mia Ortiz, Braden R Manns, Meghan J Elliott","doi":"10.1177/20543581231215858","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><strong>Background: </strong>Updates to the Kidney Disease Outcomes Quality Initiative Clinical Practice Guideline for Vascular Access emphasize the \"right access, in the right patient, at the right time, for the right reasons.\" Although this implies a collaborative approach, little is known about how patients, their caregivers, and health care providers engage in vascular access (VA) decision-making.</p><p><strong>Objective: </strong>To explore how the perspectives of patients receiving hemodialysis, their caregivers, and hemodialysis care team align and diverge in relation to VA selection.</p><p><strong>Design: </strong>Qualitative descriptive study.</p><p><strong>Setting: </strong>Five outpatient hemodialysis centers in Calgary, Alberta.</p><p><strong>Participants: </strong>Our purposive sample included 19 patients receiving maintenance hemodialysis, 2 caregivers, and 21 health care providers (7 hemodialysis nurses, 6 VA nurses, and 8 nephrologists).</p><p><strong>Methods: </strong>We conducted semi-structured interviews with consenting participants. Using an inductive thematic analysis approach, we coded transcripts in duplicate and characterized themes addressing our research objective.</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>While participants across roles shared some perspectives related to VA decision-making, we identified areas where views diverged. Areas of alignment included (1) optimizing patient preparedness-acknowledging decisional readiness and timing, and (2) value placed on trusting relationships with the kidney care team-respecting decisional autonomy with guidance. Perspectives diverged in the following aspects: (1) differing VA priorities and preferences-patients' emphasis on minimizing disruptions to normalcy contrasted with providers' preferences for fistulas and optimizing biomedical parameters of dialysis; (2) influence of personal and peer experience-patients preferred pragmatic, experiential knowledge, whereas providers emphasized informational credibility; and (3) endpoints for VA review-reassessment of VA decisions was prompted by access dissatisfaction for patients and a medical imperative to achieve a functioning access for health care providers.</p><p><strong>Limitations: </strong>Participation was limited to individuals comfortable communicating in English and from urban, in-center hemodialysis units. Few informal caregivers of people receiving hemodialysis and younger patients participated in this study.</p><p><strong>Conclusions: </strong>Although patients, caregivers, and healthcare providers share perspectives on important aspects of VA decisions, conflicting priorities and preferences may impact the decisional outcome. Findings highlight opportunities to bridge knowledge and readiness gaps and integrate shared decision-making in the VA selection process.</p>","PeriodicalId":9426,"journal":{"name":"Canadian Journal of Kidney Health and Disease","volume":"10 ","pages":"20543581231215858"},"PeriodicalIF":1.6000,"publicationDate":"2023-11-29","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC10685780/pdf/","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Canadian Journal of Kidney Health and Disease","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1177/20543581231215858","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"2023/1/1 0:00:00","PubModel":"eCollection","JCR":"Q3","JCRName":"UROLOGY & NEPHROLOGY","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

Background: Updates to the Kidney Disease Outcomes Quality Initiative Clinical Practice Guideline for Vascular Access emphasize the "right access, in the right patient, at the right time, for the right reasons." Although this implies a collaborative approach, little is known about how patients, their caregivers, and health care providers engage in vascular access (VA) decision-making.

Objective: To explore how the perspectives of patients receiving hemodialysis, their caregivers, and hemodialysis care team align and diverge in relation to VA selection.

Design: Qualitative descriptive study.

Setting: Five outpatient hemodialysis centers in Calgary, Alberta.

Participants: Our purposive sample included 19 patients receiving maintenance hemodialysis, 2 caregivers, and 21 health care providers (7 hemodialysis nurses, 6 VA nurses, and 8 nephrologists).

Methods: We conducted semi-structured interviews with consenting participants. Using an inductive thematic analysis approach, we coded transcripts in duplicate and characterized themes addressing our research objective.

Results: While participants across roles shared some perspectives related to VA decision-making, we identified areas where views diverged. Areas of alignment included (1) optimizing patient preparedness-acknowledging decisional readiness and timing, and (2) value placed on trusting relationships with the kidney care team-respecting decisional autonomy with guidance. Perspectives diverged in the following aspects: (1) differing VA priorities and preferences-patients' emphasis on minimizing disruptions to normalcy contrasted with providers' preferences for fistulas and optimizing biomedical parameters of dialysis; (2) influence of personal and peer experience-patients preferred pragmatic, experiential knowledge, whereas providers emphasized informational credibility; and (3) endpoints for VA review-reassessment of VA decisions was prompted by access dissatisfaction for patients and a medical imperative to achieve a functioning access for health care providers.

Limitations: Participation was limited to individuals comfortable communicating in English and from urban, in-center hemodialysis units. Few informal caregivers of people receiving hemodialysis and younger patients participated in this study.

Conclusions: Although patients, caregivers, and healthcare providers share perspectives on important aspects of VA decisions, conflicting priorities and preferences may impact the decisional outcome. Findings highlight opportunities to bridge knowledge and readiness gaps and integrate shared decision-making in the VA selection process.

查看原文
分享 分享
微信好友 朋友圈 QQ好友 复制链接
本刊更多论文
患者、护理人员和卫生保健提供者对血液透析血管通路决策的看法:一项定性研究。
背景:更新的肾脏疾病结局质量倡议临床实践指南血管通路强调“正确的通路,在正确的病人,在正确的时间,出于正确的原因。”虽然这意味着一种合作的方法,但很少有人知道患者,他们的护理人员和卫生保健提供者如何参与血管通路(VA)决策。目的:探讨接受血液透析的患者、他们的护理人员和血液透析护理团队在VA选择方面的观点是如何一致和分歧的。设计:定性描述性研究。环境:阿尔伯塔省卡尔加里的五个门诊血液透析中心。参与者:我们的目的样本包括19名接受维持性血液透析的患者,2名护理人员和21名卫生保健提供者(7名血液透析护士,6名VA护士和8名肾病学家)。方法:我们对同意的参与者进行了半结构化访谈。使用归纳主题分析方法,我们对副本进行编码,并描述了解决我们研究目标的主题。结果:虽然不同角色的参与者分享了与VA决策相关的一些观点,但我们确定了观点分歧的领域。一致的领域包括(1)优化患者准备-承认决策准备和时机,以及(2)重视与肾脏护理团队的信任关系-尊重有指导的决策自主权。观点在以下方面存在分歧:(1)不同的VA优先级和偏好-患者强调尽量减少对正常的破坏,与提供者对瘘和优化透析生物医学参数的偏好形成对比;(2)个人经验和同伴经验的影响——患者更倾向于实用的经验知识,而提供者则强调信息的可信度;(3)退伍军人服务审查的终点——退伍军人服务决策的重新评估是由患者对服务渠道的不满和医疗保健提供者实现有效服务渠道的迫切需要引起的。局限性:参与仅限于能自如地用英语交流的个体,以及来自城市中心血液透析单位的个体。很少有接受血液透析的人和年轻患者的非正式护理人员参与了这项研究。结论:尽管患者、护理人员和医疗保健提供者在VA决策的重要方面有共同的观点,但冲突的优先级和偏好可能会影响决策结果。调查结果强调了在退伍军人选择过程中弥合知识和准备差距并整合共同决策的机会。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 去求助
来源期刊
CiteScore
3.00
自引率
5.90%
发文量
84
审稿时长
12 weeks
期刊介绍: Canadian Journal of Kidney Health and Disease, the official journal of the Canadian Society of Nephrology, is an open access, peer-reviewed online journal that encourages high quality submissions focused on clinical, translational and health services delivery research in the field of chronic kidney disease, dialysis, kidney transplantation and organ donation. Our mandate is to promote and advocate for kidney health as it impacts national and international communities. Basic science, translational studies and clinical studies will be peer reviewed and processed by an Editorial Board comprised of geographically diverse Canadian and international nephrologists, internists and allied health professionals; this Editorial Board is mandated to ensure highest quality publications.
期刊最新文献
Optimizing Prescribing for Individuals With Type 2 Diabetes and Chronic Kidney Disease Through the Development and Validation of Algorithms for Community Pharmacists. Environmental Sustainability Is Needed in Kidney Care: Patient, Donor, and Provider Perspectives. Genetic Assessment of Living Kidney Transplant Donors: A Survey of Canadian Practices. Home Sweet Home: A Program Report on Promoting the Uptake of Home Dialysis. Definitions of Hemodynamic Instability Related to Renal Replacement Therapy in Critically Ill Patients: A Systematic Review Protocol.
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
现在去查看 取消
×
提示
确定
0
微信
客服QQ
Book学术公众号 扫码关注我们
反馈
×
意见反馈
请填写您的意见或建议
请填写您的手机或邮箱
已复制链接
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
×
扫码分享
扫码分享
Book学术官方微信
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术
文献互助 智能选刊 最新文献 互助须知 联系我们:info@booksci.cn
Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。
Copyright © 2023 Book学术 All rights reserved.
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号 京ICP备2023020795号-1