Dataset Information

Clinicians' and researchers' perspectives on establishing and implementing core outcomes in haemodialysis: semistructured interview study.

ABSTRACT:

Objectives

To describe the perspectives of clinicians and researchers on identifying, establishing and implementing core outcomes in haemodialysis and their expected impact.

Design

Face-to-face, semistructured interviews; thematic analysis.

Stetting

Twenty-seven centres across nine countries.

Participants

Fifty-eight nephrologists (42 (72%) who were also triallists).

Results

We identified six themes: reflecting direct patient relevance and impact (survival as the primary goal of dialysis, enabling well-being and functioning, severe consequences of comorbidities and complications, indicators of treatment success, universal relevance, stakeholder consensus); amenable and responsive to interventions (realistic and possible to intervene on, differentiating between treatments); reflective of economic burden on healthcare; feasibility of implementation (clarity and consistency in definition, easily measurable, requiring minimal resources, creating a cultural shift, aversion to intensifying bureaucracy, allowing justifiable exceptions); authoritative inducement and directive (endorsement for legitimacy, necessity of buy-in from dialysis providers, incentivising uptake); instituting patient-centredness (explicitly addressing patient-important outcomes, reciprocating trial participation, improving comparability of interventions for decision-making, driving quality improvement and compelling a focus on quality of life).

Conclusions

Nephrologists emphasised that core outcomes should be relevant to patients, amenable to change, feasible to implement and supported by stakeholder organisations. They expected core outcomes would improve patient-centred care and outcomes.

SUBMITTER: Tong A

PROVIDER: S-EPMC5914778 | biostudies-literature | 2018 Apr

REPOSITORIES: biostudies-literature

ACCESS DATA

Publications

Clinicians' and researchers' perspectives on establishing and implementing core outcomes in haemodialysis: semistructured interview study.

Tong Allison A Crowe Sally S Gill John S JS Harris Tess T Hemmelgarn Brenda R BR Manns Braden B Pecoits-Filho Roberto R Tugwell Peter P van Biesen Wim W Wang Angela Yee Moon AYM Wheeler David C DC Winkelmayer Wolfgang C WC Gutman Talia T Ju Angela A O'Lone Emma E Sautenet Benedicte B Viecelli Andrea A Craig Jonathan C JC

BMJ open 20180420 4

<h4>Objectives</h4>To describe the perspectives of clinicians and researchers on identifying, establishing and implementing core outcomes in haemodialysis and their expected impact.<h4>Design</h4>Face-to-face, semistructured interviews; thematic analysis.<h4>Stetting</h4>Twenty-seven centres across nine countries.<h4>Participants</h4>Fifty-eight nephrologists (42 (72%) who were also triallists).<h4>Results</h4>We identified six themes: <i>reflecting direct patient relevance and impact</i> (survi ...[more]

PMID: 29678992

Similar Datasets

Project description:BackgroundDigital health-tracking tools are changing mental health care by giving patients the ability to collect passively measured patient-generated health data (PGHD; ie, data collected from connected devices with little to no patient effort). Although there are existing clinical guidelines for how mental health clinicians should use more traditional, active forms of PGHD for clinical decision-making, there is less clarity on how passive PGHD can be used.ObjectiveWe conducted a qualitative study to understand mental health clinicians' perceptions and concerns regarding the use of technology-enabled, passively collected PGHD for clinical decision-making. Our interviews sought to understand participants' current experiences with and visions for using passive PGHD.MethodsMental health clinicians providing outpatient services were recruited to participate in semistructured interviews. Interview recordings were deidentified, transcribed, and qualitatively coded to identify overarching themes.ResultsOverall, 12 mental health clinicians (n=11, 92% psychiatrists and n=1, 8% clinical psychologist) were interviewed. We identified 4 overarching themes. First, passive PGHD are patient driven-we found that current passive PGHD use was patient driven, not clinician driven; participating clinicians only considered passive PGHD for clinical decision-making when patients brought passive data to clinical encounters. The second theme was active versus passive data as subjective versus objective data-participants viewed the contrast between active and passive PGHD as a contrast between interpretive data on patients' mental health and objective information on behavior. Participants believed that prioritizing passive over self-reported, active PGHD would reduce opportunities for patients to reflect upon their mental health, reducing treatment engagement and raising questions about how passive data can best complement active data for clinical decision-making. Third, passive PGHD must be delivered at appropriate times for action-participants were concerned with the real-time nature of passive PGHD; they believed that it would be infeasible to use passive PGHD for real-time patient monitoring outside clinical encounters and more feasible to use passive PGHD during clinical encounters when clinicians can make treatment decisions. The fourth theme was protecting patient privacy-participating clinicians wanted to protect patient privacy within passive PGHD-sharing programs and discussed opportunities to refine data sharing consent to improve transparency surrounding passive PGHD collection and use.ConclusionsAlthough passive PGHD has the potential to enable more contextualized measurement, this study highlights the need for building and disseminating an evidence base describing how and when passive measures should be used for clinical decision-making. This evidence base should clarify how to use passive data alongside more traditional forms of active PGHD, when clinicians should view passive PGHD to make treatment decisions, and how to protect patient privacy within passive data-sharing programs. Clear evidence would more effectively support the uptake and effective use of these novel tools for both patients and their clinicians.

Project description:OBJECTIVE:To describe the perspectives of healthcare providers on the nutritional management of patients on haemodialysis, which may inform strategies for improving patient-centred nutritional care. DESIGN:Face-to-face semistructured interviews were conducted until data saturation, and thematic analysis based on principles of grounded theory. SETTING:21 haemodialysis centres across Australia. PARTICIPANTS:42 haemodialysis clinicians (nephrologists and nephrology trainees (15), nurses (12) and dietitians (15)) were purposively sampled to obtain a range of demographic characteristics and clinical experiences. RESULTS:Six themes were identified: responding to changing clinical status (individualising strategies to patient needs, prioritising acute events, adapting guidelines), integrating patient circumstances (assimilating life priorities, access and affordability), delineating specialty roles in collaborative structures (shared and cohesive care, pivotal role of dietary expertise, facilitating access to nutritional care, perpetuating conflicting advice and patient confusion, devaluing nutritional specialty), empowerment for behaviour change (enabling comprehension of complexities, building autonomy and ownership, developing self-efficacy through engagement, tailoring self-management strategies), initiating and sustaining motivation (encountering motivational hurdles, empathy for confronting life changes, fostering non-judgemental relationships, emphasising symptomatic and tangible benefits, harnessing support networks), and organisational and staffing barriers (staffing shortfalls, readdressing system inefficiencies). CONCLUSIONS:Organisational support with collaborative multidisciplinary teams and individualised patient care were seen as necessary for developing positive patient-clinician relationships, delivering consistent nutrition advice, and building and sustaining patient motivation to enable change in dietary behaviour. Improving service delivery and developing and delivering targeted, multifaceted self-management interventions may enhance current nutritional management of patients on haemodialysis.

Project description:BackgroundBedside manner describes how clinicians relate to patients in person. Telemedicine allows clinicians to connect virtually with patients using digital tools. Effective virtual communication or webside manner may require modifications to traditional bedside manner.ObjectiveThis study aims to understand the experiences of telemedicine providers with patient-to-provider virtual visits and communication with families at a single large-volume children's hospital to inform program development and training for future clinicians.MethodsA total of 2 focus groups of pediatric clinicians (N=11) performing virtual visits before the COVID-19 pandemic, with a range of experiences and specialties, were engaged to discuss experiential, implementation, and practice-related issues. Focus groups were facilitated using a semistructured guide covering general experience, preparedness, rapport strategies, and suggestions. Sessions were digitally recorded, and the corresponding transcripts were reviewed for data analysis. The transcripts were coded based on the identified main themes and subthemes. On the basis of a higher-level analysis of these codes, the study authors generated a final set of key themes to describe the collected data.ResultsTheme consistency was identified across diverse participants, although individual clinician experiences were influenced by their specialties and practices. A total of 3 key themes emerged regarding the development of best practices, barriers to scalability, and establishing patient rapport. Issues and concerns related to privacy were salient across all themes. Clinicians felt that telemedicine required new skills for patient interaction, and not all were comfortable with their training.ConclusionsTelemedicine provides benefits as well as challenges to health care delivery. In interprofessional focus groups, pediatric clinicians emphasized the importance of considering safety and privacy to promote rapport and webside manner when conducting virtual visits. The inclusion of webside manner instructions within training curricula is crucial as telemedicine becomes an established modality for providing health care.

Project description:BackgroundOlder adults with chronic kidney disease (CKD) typically use more than 5 medications and have multiple prescribing physicians. However, little is known about how they prioritize their medical conditions or decide which medications to take.MethodsSemistructured interviews (average length, 40 minutes) with 20 community-dwelling adults with CKD stages 3-5D receiving nephrology care at a tertiary referral center. Respondents were asked about medications, prescribing physicians, and medication-taking behaviors. We performed thematic analysis to explain patients' decisions regarding medication prioritization, understanding, and adherence decisions.ResultsParticipants (age range, 55-84 years; mean, 72 years) used 5-14 prescribed medications, had 2-9 physicians, and had 5-11 comorbid conditions. All had assigned implicit priorities to their medications. Although most expressed the intention to be adherent, many regularly skipped medications they considered less important. Most identified the prescribing physician and indication for each medication, but there often was substantial discordance between beliefs about medications and conventional medical opinion. Respondents prioritized medications based on the salience of the particular condition, perceived effects of the treatment, and barriers (physical, logistic, or financial) to using the prescribed drug. Side effects of medications were common and anxiety provoking, but discussions with the prescribing physician often were delayed or unfulfilling for the patient.ConclusionsPolypharmacy in patients with CKD leads to complex medication choices and adherence behaviors in this population. Most patients we interviewed had beliefs or priorities that were nonconcordant with conventional medical opinion; however, patients rarely discussed these beliefs and priorities or the resultant poor medication adherence with their physicians. Further study is needed to provide quantitative data about the magnitude of adherence barriers. It is likely that more effective communication about medication use could improve patients' health outcomes and reduce potential adverse drug events.

Dataset Information

Clinicians' and researchers' perspectives on establishing and implementing core outcomes in haemodialysis: semistructured interview study.

Objectives

Design

Stetting

Participants

Results

Conclusions

Publications

Clinicians' and researchers' perspectives on establishing and implementing core outcomes in haemodialysis: semistructured interview study.

Similar Datasets

OmicsDI is part of the ELIXIR infrastructure

Tweets