Renal staffs’ understanding of patients’ experiences of transition from peritoneal dialysis to in-centre haemodialysis and their views on service improvement: A multi-site qualitative study in England and Australia

Many studies have explored patients' experiences of dialysis and other treatments for kidney failure. This is the first qualitative multi-site international study of how staff perceive the process of a patient's transition from peritoneal dialysis to in-centre haemodialysis. Current litera...

Ausführliche Beschreibung

Gespeichert in:
Bibliographische Detailangaben
Veröffentlicht in:PloS one 2021-07, Vol.16 (7), p.e0254931-e0254931
Hauptverfasser: Jones, Janet E, Damery, Sarah L, Allen, Kerry, Johnson, David W, Lambie, Mark, Holvoet, Els, Davies, Simon J
Format: Artikel
Sprache:eng
Schlagworte:
Online-Zugang:Volltext
Tags: Tag hinzufügen
Keine Tags, Fügen Sie den ersten Tag hinzu!
container_end_page e0254931
container_issue 7
container_start_page e0254931
container_title PloS one
container_volume 16
creator Jones, Janet E
Damery, Sarah L
Allen, Kerry
Johnson, David W
Lambie, Mark
Holvoet, Els
Davies, Simon J
description Many studies have explored patients' experiences of dialysis and other treatments for kidney failure. This is the first qualitative multi-site international study of how staff perceive the process of a patient's transition from peritoneal dialysis to in-centre haemodialysis. Current literature suggests that transitions are poorly coordinated and may result in increased patient morbidity and mortality. This study aimed to understand staff perspectives of transition and to identify areas where clinical practice could be improved. Sixty-one participants (24 UK and 37 Australia), representing a cross-section of kidney care staff, took part in seven focus groups and sixteen interviews. Data were analysed inductively and findings were synthesised across the two countries. For staff, good clinical practice included: effective communication with patients, well planned care pathways and continuity of care. However, staff felt that how they communicated with patients about the treatment journey could be improved. Staff worried they inadvertently made patients fear haemodialysis when trying to explain to them why going onto peritoneal dialysis first is a good option. Despite staff efforts to make transitions smooth, good continuity of care between modalities was only reported in some of the Australian hospitals where, unlike the UK, patients kept the same consultant. Timely access to an appropriate service, such as a psychologist or social worker, was not always available when staff felt it would be beneficial for the patient. Staff were aware of a disparity in access to kidney care and other healthcare professional services between some patient groups, especially those living in remote areas. This was often put down to the lack of funding and capacity within each hospital. This research found that continuity of care between modalities was valued by staff but did not always happen. It also highlighted a number of areas for consideration when developing ways to improve care and provide appropriate support to patients as they transition from peritoneal dialysis to in-centre haemodialysis.
doi_str_mv 10.1371/journal.pone.0254931
format Article
fullrecord <record><control><sourceid>gale_plos_</sourceid><recordid>TN_cdi_plos_journals_2553219127</recordid><sourceformat>XML</sourceformat><sourcesystem>PC</sourcesystem><galeid>A669020707</galeid><doaj_id>oai_doaj_org_article_ae44bd5fd2ad489fb9b905cccbc18c87</doaj_id><sourcerecordid>A669020707</sourcerecordid><originalsourceid>FETCH-LOGICAL-c669t-b174e66da803406f1284a0081977dc76eaf21688b66f64f45bb8d5003554ad193</originalsourceid><addsrcrecordid>eNqNk81u1DAQxyMEoqXwBkhYQkJw2MVxEifhgLSqCqxUqVL5uFqOPd51lcRb21m6N16DV-PIkzDZXaou6gFFUWzPb_4znswkyfOUTtOsTN9eucH3sp2uXA9Tyoq8ztIHyXFaZ2zCGc0e3lkfJU9CuKK0yCrOHydHWc4qyvL6OPl1CShCQpTGhN8_fpKh1-Bx22vbL4gzZCWjhT5ujXCzAo87BWE0RS_7YKN1PTHedWQ0RkwHBbWV7SbYQKIjtp8oVPBAlhI6d2vCGCQuwXqytvAdFXsSwK-tAmK7lXdr6NDtHZmRbmijnWAoINeDbG3EnNaAWQ96g_LkrF-0o9r4zoaAebVWPk0eGdkGeLb_niRfP5x9Of00Ob_4OD-dnU8U53WcNGmZA-daVjTLKTcpq3JJaZXWZalVyUEalvKqajg3PDd50TSVLijNiiKXGkt8krzY6a5aF8T-twTBiiJjaZ2yEon5jtBOXomVt530G-GkFdsD5xdC-mhVC0JCnje6MJpJnVe1aeqmpoVSqlFppapR6_0-2tB0oLeFle2B6KGlt0uxcGtRsaqmnKLA672Ad9cDhCg6GxS0WEBwwy7vgmWMc0Rf_oPef7s9tZB4Adsbh3HVKCpmWGHKaElHanoPhY-GzipsGmPx_MDhzYEDMhFu4kIOIYj558v_Zy--HbKv7rBLbNa4DK4dxjYOh2C-A5V3IXgwt0VOqRhH8G81xDiCYj-C2R9Ulynb</addsrcrecordid><sourcetype>Open Website</sourcetype><iscdi>true</iscdi><recordtype>article</recordtype><pqid>2553219127</pqid></control><display><type>article</type><title>Renal staffs’ understanding of patients’ experiences of transition from peritoneal dialysis to in-centre haemodialysis and their views on service improvement: A multi-site qualitative study in England and Australia</title><source>DOAJ Directory of Open Access Journals</source><source>Elektronische Zeitschriftenbibliothek - Frei zugängliche E-Journals</source><source>Public Library of Science (PLoS)</source><source>PubMed Central</source><source>Free Full-Text Journals in Chemistry</source><creator>Jones, Janet E ; Damery, Sarah L ; Allen, Kerry ; Johnson, David W ; Lambie, Mark ; Holvoet, Els ; Davies, Simon J</creator><contributor>Selman, Lucy E.</contributor><creatorcontrib>Jones, Janet E ; Damery, Sarah L ; Allen, Kerry ; Johnson, David W ; Lambie, Mark ; Holvoet, Els ; Davies, Simon J ; Selman, Lucy E.</creatorcontrib><description>Many studies have explored patients' experiences of dialysis and other treatments for kidney failure. This is the first qualitative multi-site international study of how staff perceive the process of a patient's transition from peritoneal dialysis to in-centre haemodialysis. Current literature suggests that transitions are poorly coordinated and may result in increased patient morbidity and mortality. This study aimed to understand staff perspectives of transition and to identify areas where clinical practice could be improved. Sixty-one participants (24 UK and 37 Australia), representing a cross-section of kidney care staff, took part in seven focus groups and sixteen interviews. Data were analysed inductively and findings were synthesised across the two countries. For staff, good clinical practice included: effective communication with patients, well planned care pathways and continuity of care. However, staff felt that how they communicated with patients about the treatment journey could be improved. Staff worried they inadvertently made patients fear haemodialysis when trying to explain to them why going onto peritoneal dialysis first is a good option. Despite staff efforts to make transitions smooth, good continuity of care between modalities was only reported in some of the Australian hospitals where, unlike the UK, patients kept the same consultant. Timely access to an appropriate service, such as a psychologist or social worker, was not always available when staff felt it would be beneficial for the patient. Staff were aware of a disparity in access to kidney care and other healthcare professional services between some patient groups, especially those living in remote areas. This was often put down to the lack of funding and capacity within each hospital. This research found that continuity of care between modalities was valued by staff but did not always happen. It also highlighted a number of areas for consideration when developing ways to improve care and provide appropriate support to patients as they transition from peritoneal dialysis to in-centre haemodialysis.</description><identifier>ISSN: 1932-6203</identifier><identifier>EISSN: 1932-6203</identifier><identifier>DOI: 10.1371/journal.pone.0254931</identifier><identifier>PMID: 34280249</identifier><language>eng</language><publisher>San Francisco: Public Library of Science</publisher><subject>Biology and Life Sciences ; Clinical medicine ; Complications and side effects ; Continuity ; Continuous ambulatory peritoneal dialysis ; Data analysis ; Data collection ; Dialysis ; Evaluation ; Focus groups ; Health sciences ; Health services administration ; Hemodialysis ; Hospitals ; International studies ; Interviews ; Kidneys ; Medical personnel ; Medical research ; Medicine and Health Sciences ; Morbidity ; Patient outcomes ; Patient satisfaction ; Patients ; People and Places ; Peritoneal dialysis ; Peritoneum ; Professional ethics ; Qualitative research ; Renal failure ; Researchers ; Services ; Social Sciences</subject><ispartof>PloS one, 2021-07, Vol.16 (7), p.e0254931-e0254931</ispartof><rights>COPYRIGHT 2021 Public Library of Science</rights><rights>2021 Jones et al. This is an open access article distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution License: http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/ (the “License”), which permits unrestricted use, distribution, and reproduction in any medium, provided the original author and source are credited. Notwithstanding the ProQuest Terms and Conditions, you may use this content in accordance with the terms of the License.</rights><rights>2021 Jones et al 2021 Jones et al</rights><lds50>peer_reviewed</lds50><oa>free_for_read</oa><woscitedreferencessubscribed>false</woscitedreferencessubscribed><citedby>FETCH-LOGICAL-c669t-b174e66da803406f1284a0081977dc76eaf21688b66f64f45bb8d5003554ad193</citedby><cites>FETCH-LOGICAL-c669t-b174e66da803406f1284a0081977dc76eaf21688b66f64f45bb8d5003554ad193</cites><orcidid>0000-0002-9057-6956 ; 0000-0002-6285-5368 ; 0000-0003-3681-8608 ; 0000-0001-5491-3460</orcidid></display><links><openurl>$$Topenurl_article</openurl><openurlfulltext>$$Topenurlfull_article</openurlfulltext><thumbnail>$$Tsyndetics_thumb_exl</thumbnail><linktopdf>$$Uhttps://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC8289060/pdf/$$EPDF$$P50$$Gpubmedcentral$$Hfree_for_read</linktopdf><linktohtml>$$Uhttps://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC8289060/$$EHTML$$P50$$Gpubmedcentral$$Hfree_for_read</linktohtml><link.rule.ids>230,314,727,780,784,864,885,2100,2926,23865,27923,27924,53790,53792,79371,79372</link.rule.ids></links><search><contributor>Selman, Lucy E.</contributor><creatorcontrib>Jones, Janet E</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Damery, Sarah L</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Allen, Kerry</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Johnson, David W</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Lambie, Mark</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Holvoet, Els</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Davies, Simon J</creatorcontrib><title>Renal staffs’ understanding of patients’ experiences of transition from peritoneal dialysis to in-centre haemodialysis and their views on service improvement: A multi-site qualitative study in England and Australia</title><title>PloS one</title><description>Many studies have explored patients' experiences of dialysis and other treatments for kidney failure. This is the first qualitative multi-site international study of how staff perceive the process of a patient's transition from peritoneal dialysis to in-centre haemodialysis. Current literature suggests that transitions are poorly coordinated and may result in increased patient morbidity and mortality. This study aimed to understand staff perspectives of transition and to identify areas where clinical practice could be improved. Sixty-one participants (24 UK and 37 Australia), representing a cross-section of kidney care staff, took part in seven focus groups and sixteen interviews. Data were analysed inductively and findings were synthesised across the two countries. For staff, good clinical practice included: effective communication with patients, well planned care pathways and continuity of care. However, staff felt that how they communicated with patients about the treatment journey could be improved. Staff worried they inadvertently made patients fear haemodialysis when trying to explain to them why going onto peritoneal dialysis first is a good option. Despite staff efforts to make transitions smooth, good continuity of care between modalities was only reported in some of the Australian hospitals where, unlike the UK, patients kept the same consultant. Timely access to an appropriate service, such as a psychologist or social worker, was not always available when staff felt it would be beneficial for the patient. Staff were aware of a disparity in access to kidney care and other healthcare professional services between some patient groups, especially those living in remote areas. This was often put down to the lack of funding and capacity within each hospital. This research found that continuity of care between modalities was valued by staff but did not always happen. It also highlighted a number of areas for consideration when developing ways to improve care and provide appropriate support to patients as they transition from peritoneal dialysis to in-centre haemodialysis.</description><subject>Biology and Life Sciences</subject><subject>Clinical medicine</subject><subject>Complications and side effects</subject><subject>Continuity</subject><subject>Continuous ambulatory peritoneal dialysis</subject><subject>Data analysis</subject><subject>Data collection</subject><subject>Dialysis</subject><subject>Evaluation</subject><subject>Focus groups</subject><subject>Health sciences</subject><subject>Health services administration</subject><subject>Hemodialysis</subject><subject>Hospitals</subject><subject>International studies</subject><subject>Interviews</subject><subject>Kidneys</subject><subject>Medical personnel</subject><subject>Medical research</subject><subject>Medicine and Health Sciences</subject><subject>Morbidity</subject><subject>Patient outcomes</subject><subject>Patient satisfaction</subject><subject>Patients</subject><subject>People and Places</subject><subject>Peritoneal dialysis</subject><subject>Peritoneum</subject><subject>Professional ethics</subject><subject>Qualitative research</subject><subject>Renal failure</subject><subject>Researchers</subject><subject>Services</subject><subject>Social Sciences</subject><issn>1932-6203</issn><issn>1932-6203</issn><fulltext>true</fulltext><rsrctype>article</rsrctype><creationdate>2021</creationdate><recordtype>article</recordtype><sourceid>ABUWG</sourceid><sourceid>AFKRA</sourceid><sourceid>AZQEC</sourceid><sourceid>BENPR</sourceid><sourceid>CCPQU</sourceid><sourceid>DWQXO</sourceid><sourceid>GNUQQ</sourceid><sourceid>DOA</sourceid><recordid>eNqNk81u1DAQxyMEoqXwBkhYQkJw2MVxEifhgLSqCqxUqVL5uFqOPd51lcRb21m6N16DV-PIkzDZXaou6gFFUWzPb_4znswkyfOUTtOsTN9eucH3sp2uXA9Tyoq8ztIHyXFaZ2zCGc0e3lkfJU9CuKK0yCrOHydHWc4qyvL6OPl1CShCQpTGhN8_fpKh1-Bx22vbL4gzZCWjhT5ujXCzAo87BWE0RS_7YKN1PTHedWQ0RkwHBbWV7SbYQKIjtp8oVPBAlhI6d2vCGCQuwXqytvAdFXsSwK-tAmK7lXdr6NDtHZmRbmijnWAoINeDbG3EnNaAWQ96g_LkrF-0o9r4zoaAebVWPk0eGdkGeLb_niRfP5x9Of00Ob_4OD-dnU8U53WcNGmZA-daVjTLKTcpq3JJaZXWZalVyUEalvKqajg3PDd50TSVLijNiiKXGkt8krzY6a5aF8T-twTBiiJjaZ2yEon5jtBOXomVt530G-GkFdsD5xdC-mhVC0JCnje6MJpJnVe1aeqmpoVSqlFppapR6_0-2tB0oLeFle2B6KGlt0uxcGtRsaqmnKLA672Ad9cDhCg6GxS0WEBwwy7vgmWMc0Rf_oPef7s9tZB4Adsbh3HVKCpmWGHKaElHanoPhY-GzipsGmPx_MDhzYEDMhFu4kIOIYj558v_Zy--HbKv7rBLbNa4DK4dxjYOh2C-A5V3IXgwt0VOqRhH8G81xDiCYj-C2R9Ulynb</recordid><startdate>20210719</startdate><enddate>20210719</enddate><creator>Jones, Janet E</creator><creator>Damery, Sarah L</creator><creator>Allen, Kerry</creator><creator>Johnson, David W</creator><creator>Lambie, Mark</creator><creator>Holvoet, Els</creator><creator>Davies, Simon J</creator><general>Public Library of Science</general><general>Public Library of Science (PLoS)</general><scope>AAYXX</scope><scope>CITATION</scope><scope>IOV</scope><scope>ISR</scope><scope>3V.</scope><scope>7QG</scope><scope>7QL</scope><scope>7QO</scope><scope>7RV</scope><scope>7SN</scope><scope>7SS</scope><scope>7T5</scope><scope>7TG</scope><scope>7TM</scope><scope>7U9</scope><scope>7X2</scope><scope>7X7</scope><scope>7XB</scope><scope>88E</scope><scope>8AO</scope><scope>8C1</scope><scope>8FD</scope><scope>8FE</scope><scope>8FG</scope><scope>8FH</scope><scope>8FI</scope><scope>8FJ</scope><scope>8FK</scope><scope>ABJCF</scope><scope>ABUWG</scope><scope>AEUYN</scope><scope>AFKRA</scope><scope>ARAPS</scope><scope>ATCPS</scope><scope>AZQEC</scope><scope>BBNVY</scope><scope>BENPR</scope><scope>BGLVJ</scope><scope>BHPHI</scope><scope>C1K</scope><scope>CCPQU</scope><scope>D1I</scope><scope>DWQXO</scope><scope>FR3</scope><scope>FYUFA</scope><scope>GHDGH</scope><scope>GNUQQ</scope><scope>H94</scope><scope>HCIFZ</scope><scope>K9.</scope><scope>KB.</scope><scope>KB0</scope><scope>KL.</scope><scope>L6V</scope><scope>LK8</scope><scope>M0K</scope><scope>M0S</scope><scope>M1P</scope><scope>M7N</scope><scope>M7P</scope><scope>M7S</scope><scope>NAPCQ</scope><scope>P5Z</scope><scope>P62</scope><scope>P64</scope><scope>PATMY</scope><scope>PDBOC</scope><scope>PIMPY</scope><scope>PQEST</scope><scope>PQQKQ</scope><scope>PQUKI</scope><scope>PRINS</scope><scope>PTHSS</scope><scope>PYCSY</scope><scope>RC3</scope><scope>7X8</scope><scope>5PM</scope><scope>DOA</scope><orcidid>https://orcid.org/0000-0002-9057-6956</orcidid><orcidid>https://orcid.org/0000-0002-6285-5368</orcidid><orcidid>https://orcid.org/0000-0003-3681-8608</orcidid><orcidid>https://orcid.org/0000-0001-5491-3460</orcidid></search><sort><creationdate>20210719</creationdate><title>Renal staffs’ understanding of patients’ experiences of transition from peritoneal dialysis to in-centre haemodialysis and their views on service improvement: A multi-site qualitative study in England and Australia</title><author>Jones, Janet E ; Damery, Sarah L ; Allen, Kerry ; Johnson, David W ; Lambie, Mark ; Holvoet, Els ; Davies, Simon J</author></sort><facets><frbrtype>5</frbrtype><frbrgroupid>cdi_FETCH-LOGICAL-c669t-b174e66da803406f1284a0081977dc76eaf21688b66f64f45bb8d5003554ad193</frbrgroupid><rsrctype>articles</rsrctype><prefilter>articles</prefilter><language>eng</language><creationdate>2021</creationdate><topic>Biology and Life Sciences</topic><topic>Clinical medicine</topic><topic>Complications and side effects</topic><topic>Continuity</topic><topic>Continuous ambulatory peritoneal dialysis</topic><topic>Data analysis</topic><topic>Data collection</topic><topic>Dialysis</topic><topic>Evaluation</topic><topic>Focus groups</topic><topic>Health sciences</topic><topic>Health services administration</topic><topic>Hemodialysis</topic><topic>Hospitals</topic><topic>International studies</topic><topic>Interviews</topic><topic>Kidneys</topic><topic>Medical personnel</topic><topic>Medical research</topic><topic>Medicine and Health Sciences</topic><topic>Morbidity</topic><topic>Patient outcomes</topic><topic>Patient satisfaction</topic><topic>Patients</topic><topic>People and Places</topic><topic>Peritoneal dialysis</topic><topic>Peritoneum</topic><topic>Professional ethics</topic><topic>Qualitative research</topic><topic>Renal failure</topic><topic>Researchers</topic><topic>Services</topic><topic>Social Sciences</topic><toplevel>peer_reviewed</toplevel><toplevel>online_resources</toplevel><creatorcontrib>Jones, Janet E</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Damery, Sarah L</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Allen, Kerry</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Johnson, David W</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Lambie, Mark</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Holvoet, Els</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Davies, Simon J</creatorcontrib><collection>CrossRef</collection><collection>Gale In Context: Opposing Viewpoints</collection><collection>Gale In Context: Science</collection><collection>ProQuest Central (Corporate)</collection><collection>Animal Behavior Abstracts</collection><collection>Bacteriology Abstracts (Microbiology B)</collection><collection>Biotechnology Research Abstracts</collection><collection>Nursing &amp; Allied Health Database</collection><collection>Ecology Abstracts</collection><collection>Entomology Abstracts (Full archive)</collection><collection>Immunology Abstracts</collection><collection>Meteorological &amp; Geoastrophysical Abstracts</collection><collection>Nucleic Acids Abstracts</collection><collection>Virology and AIDS Abstracts</collection><collection>Agricultural Science Collection</collection><collection>Health &amp; Medical Collection</collection><collection>ProQuest Central (purchase pre-March 2016)</collection><collection>Medical Database (Alumni Edition)</collection><collection>ProQuest Pharma Collection</collection><collection>Public Health Database</collection><collection>Technology Research Database</collection><collection>ProQuest SciTech Collection</collection><collection>ProQuest Technology Collection</collection><collection>ProQuest Natural Science Collection</collection><collection>Hospital Premium Collection</collection><collection>Hospital Premium Collection (Alumni Edition)</collection><collection>ProQuest Central (Alumni) (purchase pre-March 2016)</collection><collection>Materials Science &amp; Engineering Collection</collection><collection>ProQuest Central (Alumni Edition)</collection><collection>ProQuest One Sustainability</collection><collection>ProQuest Central UK/Ireland</collection><collection>Advanced Technologies &amp; Aerospace Collection</collection><collection>Agricultural &amp; Environmental Science Collection</collection><collection>ProQuest Central Essentials</collection><collection>Biological Science Collection</collection><collection>ProQuest Central</collection><collection>Technology Collection</collection><collection>Natural Science Collection</collection><collection>Environmental Sciences and Pollution Management</collection><collection>ProQuest One Community College</collection><collection>ProQuest Materials Science Collection</collection><collection>ProQuest Central Korea</collection><collection>Engineering Research Database</collection><collection>Health Research Premium Collection</collection><collection>Health Research Premium Collection (Alumni)</collection><collection>ProQuest Central Student</collection><collection>AIDS and Cancer Research Abstracts</collection><collection>SciTech Premium Collection</collection><collection>ProQuest Health &amp; Medical Complete (Alumni)</collection><collection>Materials Science Database</collection><collection>Nursing &amp; Allied Health Database (Alumni Edition)</collection><collection>Meteorological &amp; Geoastrophysical Abstracts - Academic</collection><collection>ProQuest Engineering Collection</collection><collection>ProQuest Biological Science Collection</collection><collection>Agricultural Science Database</collection><collection>Health &amp; Medical Collection (Alumni Edition)</collection><collection>Medical Database</collection><collection>Algology Mycology and Protozoology Abstracts (Microbiology C)</collection><collection>Biological Science Database</collection><collection>Engineering Database</collection><collection>Nursing &amp; Allied Health Premium</collection><collection>Advanced Technologies &amp; Aerospace Database</collection><collection>ProQuest Advanced Technologies &amp; Aerospace Collection</collection><collection>Biotechnology and BioEngineering Abstracts</collection><collection>Environmental Science Database</collection><collection>Materials Science Collection</collection><collection>Publicly Available Content Database</collection><collection>ProQuest One Academic Eastern Edition (DO NOT USE)</collection><collection>ProQuest One Academic</collection><collection>ProQuest One Academic UKI Edition</collection><collection>ProQuest Central China</collection><collection>Engineering Collection</collection><collection>Environmental Science Collection</collection><collection>Genetics Abstracts</collection><collection>MEDLINE - Academic</collection><collection>PubMed Central (Full Participant titles)</collection><collection>DOAJ Directory of Open Access Journals</collection><jtitle>PloS one</jtitle></facets><delivery><delcategory>Remote Search Resource</delcategory><fulltext>fulltext</fulltext></delivery><addata><au>Jones, Janet E</au><au>Damery, Sarah L</au><au>Allen, Kerry</au><au>Johnson, David W</au><au>Lambie, Mark</au><au>Holvoet, Els</au><au>Davies, Simon J</au><au>Selman, Lucy E.</au><format>journal</format><genre>article</genre><ristype>JOUR</ristype><atitle>Renal staffs’ understanding of patients’ experiences of transition from peritoneal dialysis to in-centre haemodialysis and their views on service improvement: A multi-site qualitative study in England and Australia</atitle><jtitle>PloS one</jtitle><date>2021-07-19</date><risdate>2021</risdate><volume>16</volume><issue>7</issue><spage>e0254931</spage><epage>e0254931</epage><pages>e0254931-e0254931</pages><issn>1932-6203</issn><eissn>1932-6203</eissn><abstract>Many studies have explored patients' experiences of dialysis and other treatments for kidney failure. This is the first qualitative multi-site international study of how staff perceive the process of a patient's transition from peritoneal dialysis to in-centre haemodialysis. Current literature suggests that transitions are poorly coordinated and may result in increased patient morbidity and mortality. This study aimed to understand staff perspectives of transition and to identify areas where clinical practice could be improved. Sixty-one participants (24 UK and 37 Australia), representing a cross-section of kidney care staff, took part in seven focus groups and sixteen interviews. Data were analysed inductively and findings were synthesised across the two countries. For staff, good clinical practice included: effective communication with patients, well planned care pathways and continuity of care. However, staff felt that how they communicated with patients about the treatment journey could be improved. Staff worried they inadvertently made patients fear haemodialysis when trying to explain to them why going onto peritoneal dialysis first is a good option. Despite staff efforts to make transitions smooth, good continuity of care between modalities was only reported in some of the Australian hospitals where, unlike the UK, patients kept the same consultant. Timely access to an appropriate service, such as a psychologist or social worker, was not always available when staff felt it would be beneficial for the patient. Staff were aware of a disparity in access to kidney care and other healthcare professional services between some patient groups, especially those living in remote areas. This was often put down to the lack of funding and capacity within each hospital. This research found that continuity of care between modalities was valued by staff but did not always happen. It also highlighted a number of areas for consideration when developing ways to improve care and provide appropriate support to patients as they transition from peritoneal dialysis to in-centre haemodialysis.</abstract><cop>San Francisco</cop><pub>Public Library of Science</pub><pmid>34280249</pmid><doi>10.1371/journal.pone.0254931</doi><tpages>e0254931</tpages><orcidid>https://orcid.org/0000-0002-9057-6956</orcidid><orcidid>https://orcid.org/0000-0002-6285-5368</orcidid><orcidid>https://orcid.org/0000-0003-3681-8608</orcidid><orcidid>https://orcid.org/0000-0001-5491-3460</orcidid><oa>free_for_read</oa></addata></record>
fulltext fulltext
identifier ISSN: 1932-6203
ispartof PloS one, 2021-07, Vol.16 (7), p.e0254931-e0254931
issn 1932-6203
1932-6203
language eng
recordid cdi_plos_journals_2553219127
source DOAJ Directory of Open Access Journals; Elektronische Zeitschriftenbibliothek - Frei zugängliche E-Journals; Public Library of Science (PLoS); PubMed Central; Free Full-Text Journals in Chemistry
subjects Biology and Life Sciences
Clinical medicine
Complications and side effects
Continuity
Continuous ambulatory peritoneal dialysis
Data analysis
Data collection
Dialysis
Evaluation
Focus groups
Health sciences
Health services administration
Hemodialysis
Hospitals
International studies
Interviews
Kidneys
Medical personnel
Medical research
Medicine and Health Sciences
Morbidity
Patient outcomes
Patient satisfaction
Patients
People and Places
Peritoneal dialysis
Peritoneum
Professional ethics
Qualitative research
Renal failure
Researchers
Services
Social Sciences
title Renal staffs’ understanding of patients’ experiences of transition from peritoneal dialysis to in-centre haemodialysis and their views on service improvement: A multi-site qualitative study in England and Australia
url https://sfx.bib-bvb.de/sfx_tum?ctx_ver=Z39.88-2004&ctx_enc=info:ofi/enc:UTF-8&ctx_tim=2025-01-12T05%3A07%3A03IST&url_ver=Z39.88-2004&url_ctx_fmt=infofi/fmt:kev:mtx:ctx&rfr_id=info:sid/primo.exlibrisgroup.com:primo3-Article-gale_plos_&rft_val_fmt=info:ofi/fmt:kev:mtx:journal&rft.genre=article&rft.atitle=Renal%20staffs%E2%80%99%20understanding%20of%20patients%E2%80%99%20experiences%20of%20transition%20from%20peritoneal%20dialysis%20to%20in-centre%20haemodialysis%20and%20their%20views%20on%20service%20improvement:%20A%20multi-site%20qualitative%20study%20in%20England%20and%20Australia&rft.jtitle=PloS%20one&rft.au=Jones,%20Janet%20E&rft.date=2021-07-19&rft.volume=16&rft.issue=7&rft.spage=e0254931&rft.epage=e0254931&rft.pages=e0254931-e0254931&rft.issn=1932-6203&rft.eissn=1932-6203&rft_id=info:doi/10.1371/journal.pone.0254931&rft_dat=%3Cgale_plos_%3EA669020707%3C/gale_plos_%3E%3Curl%3E%3C/url%3E&disable_directlink=true&sfx.directlink=off&sfx.report_link=0&rft_id=info:oai/&rft_pqid=2553219127&rft_id=info:pmid/34280249&rft_galeid=A669020707&rft_doaj_id=oai_doaj_org_article_ae44bd5fd2ad489fb9b905cccbc18c87&rfr_iscdi=true