Dataset Information

Facilitators and Barriers to Care in Rural Emergency Departments in Alberta for Patients on Peritoneal Dialysis (PD): An Interpretive Descriptive Study.

ABSTRACT: Background:Home dialysis offers many advantages to patients, but they require support to manage a home-based therapy such as peritoneal dialysis (PD). A rural emergency department provides an important safety net for patients requiring medical care, including managing complications of PD, such as peritonitis. Patients living in northern Alberta are spread out geographically and can be far from a PD training center, yet anecdotally, many rural sites do not provide care for these patients. Objective:Our aim was to identify the facilitators and barriers to nursing care in rural emergency departments in northern Alberta for patients receiving PD. Design:A qualitative interpretive descriptive approach was used. Setting:Rural emergency departments across northern Alberta. Participants:Purposeful sampling was used to seek participants from 1 of 4 rural acute care hospital emergency departments in northern Alberta. Six registered nurses and 1 licensed practical nurse agreed to participate in the study. They ranged in experience from 2 to 18 years. Two of the participants were unit managers, 2 were clinical nurse educators (CNEs), and the other 3 were staff nurses with 1 of them in a leadership position. Methods:Individual semistructured interview were conducted over the telephone. The interview guide was developed based on a review of the literature. Interviews continued until no new information was obtained, that is, data were saturated. Interviews were audio recorded and transcribed verbatim. Field notes were recorded. A constant comparative approach was used for analysis. The coding process was both deductive (drawing from the literature) and inductive. Results:Seven participants were interviewed, and there were 4 main themes and 1 subtheme that emerged from the analysis: education (along with the subtheme of resources) was seen as both facilitators and barriers; patient/family ability to perform PD; infrequent exposure; and physician supports. Continuing education about PD was a facilitator, and the lack of education was a barrier to provision of PD care. Similarly, availability of resource materials about PD and access to a CNE were facilitators, while lack of these resources was a barrier to offering PD care. As PD was not always seen regularly, infrequent exposure was a barrier to offering PD care. Lack of physician supports, both from the locum physicians who were sometimes reluctant to care for these patients and the delays in reaching nephrologists were barriers. Limitations:The findings represent the perceptions of the emergency department nurses who participated. These perceptions may differ from those of nurses who work in other regions of the country. Furthermore, most participants were in a leadership role, and it may be that their perspectives differ from those of front-line nurses. Conclusions:The findings from our study highlight the need for availability of education and resource materials/persons to care for these patients. There is also a need for greater physician support from both local physicians as well as nephrologists to offer high-quality PD care. Trial registration:Not applicable. This study is not a clinical trial. It did not involve prospective assignment of participants to a treatment group.

SUBMITTER: Lillebuen L

PROVIDER: S-EPMC7649850 | biostudies-literature | 2020

REPOSITORIES: biostudies-literature

ACCESS DATA

Publications

Facilitators and Barriers to Care in Rural Emergency Departments in Alberta for Patients on Peritoneal Dialysis (PD): An Interpretive Descriptive Study.

Lillebuen Lisa L Schick-Makaroff Kara K Thompson Stephanie S Molzahn Anita A

Canadian journal of kidney health and disease 20201104

<h4>Background</h4>Home dialysis offers many advantages to patients, but they require support to manage a home-based therapy such as peritoneal dialysis (PD). A rural emergency department provides an important safety net for patients requiring medical care, including managing complications of PD, such as peritonitis. Patients living in northern Alberta are spread out geographically and can be far from a PD training center, yet anecdotally, many rural sites do not provide care for these patients. ...[more]

PMID: 33224512

Similar Datasets

Project description:ImportanceLatinx people have a high burden of kidney disease but are less likely to receive home dialysis compared to non-Latinx White people. The disparity in home dialysis therapy has not been completely explained by demographic, medical, or social factors.ObjectiveTo understand the barriers and facilitators to home dialysis therapy experienced by Latinx individuals with kidney failure receiving home dialysis.Design, setting, and participantsThis qualitative study used semistructured interviews with Latinx adults with kidney failure receiving home dialysis therapy in Denver, Colorado, and Houston, Texas, between November 2021 and March 2023. Patients were recruited from home dialysis clinics affiliated with academic medical centers. Of 39 individuals approached, 27 were included in the study. Interviews were audio-recorded, transcribed verbatim, and analyzed using thematic analysis.Main outcomes and measuresThemes and subthemes regarding barriers and facilitators to home dialysis therapy.ResultsA total of 27 Latinx adults (17 [63%] female and 10 [37%] male) with kidney failure who were receiving home dialysis participated. Themes and subthemes were identified, 3 related to challenges with home dialysis and 2 related to facilitators. Challenges to home dialysis included misinformation and immigration-related barriers to care (including cultural stigma of dialysis, misinformation regarding chronic disease care, and lack of health insurance due to immigration status), limited dialysis education (including lack of predialysis care, no-nephrologist education, and shared decision-making), and maintenance of home dialysis (including equipment issues, lifestyle restrictions, and anxiety about complications). Facilitators to home dialysis included improved lifestyle (including convenience, autonomy, physical symptoms, and dietary flexibility) and support (including family involvement, relationships with staff, self-efficacy, and language concordance).Conclusions and relevanceLatinx participants in this study who were receiving home dialysis received misinformation and limited education regarding home dialysis, yet were engaged in self-advocacy and reported strong family and clinic support. These findings may inform new strategies aimed at improving access to home dialysis education and uptake for Latinx individuals with kidney disease.

Project description:BackgroundScreening, brief intervention, and referral (SBIR) is an evidence-based, comprehensive health promotion approach commonly implemented to reduce alcohol and substance use. Implementation research on SBIR demonstrate that patients find it acceptable, reduces hospital costs, and it is effective. However, SBIR implementation in hospital settings for multiple risk factors (fruit and vegetable consumption, physical activity, alcohol and tobacco use) is still emergent. More evidence is needed to guide SBIR implementation for multiple risk factors in hospital settings.ObjectiveTo explore the facilitators and barriers of SBIR implementation in a rural hospital using the Consolidated Framework for Implementation Research (CFIR).MethodsWe conducted a descriptive qualitative investigation consisting of both inductive and deductive analyses. We conducted virtual, semi-structured interviews, guided by the CFIR framework. All interviews were audio-recorded, and transcribed verbatim. NVivo 12 Pro was used to organize and code the raw data.ResultsA total of six key informant semi-structured interviews, ranging from 45 to 60 min, were carried out with members of the implementation support team and clinical implementers. Implementation support members reported that collaborating with health departments facilitated SBIR implementation by helping (a) align health promotion risk factors with existing guidelines; (b) develop training and educational resources for clinicians and patients; and (c) foster leadership buy-in. Conversely, clinical implementers reported several barriers to SBIR implementation including, increased and disrupted workflow due to SBIR-related documentation, a lack of knowledge on patients' readiness and motivation to change, as well as perceived patient stigma in relation to SBIR risk factors.ConclusionThe CFIR provided a comprehensive framework to gauge facilitators and barriers relating to SBIR implementation. Our pilot investigation revealed that future SBIR implementation must address organizational, clinical implementer, and patient readiness to implement SBIR at all phases of the implementation process in a hospital.

Project description:Background and objectivesThe objective of this study was to evaluate the association between neighborhood socioeconomic status and barriers to peritoneal dialysis eligibility and choice.Design, setting, participants, & measurementsThis study was a mixed methods parallel design study using quantitative and qualitative data from a prospective clinical database of ESRD patients. The eligibility and choice cohorts were assembled from consecutive incident chronic dialysis patients entering one of five renal programs in the province of Ontario, Canada, between January 1, 2004 and December 31, 2010. Socioeconomic status was measured as median household income and percentage of residents with at least a high school education using Statistics Canada dissemination area-level data. Multivariable models described the relationship between socioeconomic status and likelihood of peritoneal dialysis eligibility and choice. Barriers to peritoneal dialysis eligibility and choice were classified into qualitative categories using the thematic constant comparative approach.ResultsThe peritoneal dialysis eligibility and choice cohorts had 1314 and 857 patients, respectively; 65% of patients were deemed eligible for peritoneal dialysis, and 46% of eligible patients chose peritoneal dialysis. Socioeconomic status was not a significant predictor of peritoneal dialysis eligibility or choice in this study. Qualitative analyses identified 16 barriers to peritoneal dialysis choice. Patients in lower- versus higher-income Statistics Canada dissemination areas cited built environment or space barriers to peritoneal dialysis (4.6% versus 2.7%) and family or social support barriers (8.3% versus 3.5%) more frequently.ConclusionsPeritoneal dialysis eligibility and choice were not associated with socioeconomic status. However, socioeconomic status may influence specific barriers to peritoneal dialysis choice. Additional studies to determine the effect of targeting interventions to specific barriers to peritoneal dialysis choice in low socioeconomic status patients on peritoneal dialysis use are needed.

Project description:BackgroundPeritoneal dialysis (PD) is an underutilized, therapeutic option to in-center hemodialysis (HD), given its similar survival and clinical efficacy but provides lifestyle benefits and cost savings. Despite these advantages, PD prevalence rates remains below 20% in many Canadian jurisdictions.ObjectivesThe primary objective of this study was to identify and assess patient-perceived barriers to PD implementation in Saskatchewan. The secondary objectives were to examine variations in patient-perceived barriers to PD by dialysis units (main dialysis units vs satellite dialysis units) and specific challenges faced by First Nation patients residing on reserves.DesignA cross-sectional observational survey study.SettingTwo major centers (Regina and Saskatoon) and 5 associated satellite units attached to each center across the province of Saskatchewan.PatientsWe approached all prevalent in-center HD patients across Saskatchewan, 366 (49%) agreed to participate in the study.MeasurementsSelf-reported barriers to PD were assessed using a 26-question survey which was created after engagement of our multidisciplinary team.MethodsWe conducted a cross-sectional survey of 740 prevalent in-center HD patients within the province of Saskatchewan, Canada, from June 2018 to January 2019. Around 366 (49%) patients agreed to participate in the study. The questionnaire was designed to capture patients' perceived barriers to PD. Descriptive statistics were used to present the data. Chi-square and Mann-Whitney U-test were used to compare the patients' responses (main dialysis units vs satellite dialysis units, and First Nation reserves vs nonreserves).ResultsOf the 366 patients who completed the survey, 284 met the eligibility criteria and were included in the analysis. Patient-reported satisfaction with current in-center HD care was the most common barrier to PD uptake (92%), followed by proximity to their HD unit (61%). A lack of understanding of the benefits/risks of PD, fear of family burden (54% each), and unwillingness to dialyze daily and to learn a new technique (51% each) were additional factors. Patients residing on reserves compared to nonreserve residents felt PD had a higher risk of infection compared to HD (54% vs 34%, P = .005), and felt PD led to suboptimal care (47% vs 31%, P = .021).LimitationsWe used a nonstandardized locally derived questionnaire to quantify barriers, and this prevents inclusion of additional barriers than individual patients may consider important. Cross-sectional data can only be used as a snapshot. Only 366 patients agreed to participate, and the results cannot be generalized to 740 prevalent HD patients. We did not capture data on demographics (age, income, and literacy level), comorbidities, and dialysis vintage, which would have been helpful in interpretation of the results. We did not involve patients, carers, or patients of First Nations heritage, in the design of the survey and the study.ConclusionsThe results of our survey indicate that the major patient-reported barrier to PD uptake in our province is clinical inertia in patients defaulted to in-center HD at the onset of dialysis. Lack of patient awareness and knowledge of PD as a viable treatment modality also figured prominently, as did fears/concerns surrounding the safety, efficacy, and perceived family burden with PD compared with in-center HD.Trial registrationThe study was not registered on a publicly accessible registry because it did not involve any health care intervention on human participants.

Project description:BackgroundNon-euvolaemia in peritoneal dialysis (PD) patients is associated with elevated mortality risk. There is an urgent need to collect data to help us understand the association between clinical practices and hydration and nutritional status, and their effects on patient outcome.MethodsThe aim of this prospective international, longitudinal observational cohort study is to follow up the hydration and nutritional status, as measured by bioimpedance spectroscopy using the body composition monitor (BCM) of incident PD patients for up to 5 years. Measures of hydration and nutritional status and of clinical, biochemical and therapy-related data are collected directly before start of PD treatment, at 1 and 3 months, and then every 3 months. This paper presents the protocol and a pre-specified analysis of baseline data of the cohort.ResultsA total of 1092 patients (58.1% male, 58.0 ± 15.3 years) from 135 centres in 32 countries were included. Median fluid overload (FO) was 2.0 L (males) and 0.9 L (females). Less than half of the patients were normohydrated (38.7%), whereas FO > 1.1 L was seen in 56.5%. Systolic and diastolic blood pressure were 139.5 ± 21.8 and 80.0 ± 12.8 mmHg, respectively, and 25.1% of patients had congestive heart failure [New York Heart Association (NYHA) 1 or higher]. A substantial number of patients judged to be not overhydrated on clinical judgement appeared to be overhydrated by BCM measurement. Overhydration at baseline was independently associated with male gender and diabetic status.ConclusionsThe majority of patients starting on PD are overhydrated already at start of PD. This may have important consequences on clinical outcomes and preservation of residual renal function. Substantial reclassification of hydration status by BCM versus on a clinical basis was necessary, especially in patients who were not overtly overhydrated. Both clinical appreciation and bioimpedance should be combined in clinical decision-making on hydration status.

Project description:BackgroundPostnatal care (PNC) has the potential to prevent a substantial burden of maternal and newborn morbidity and mortality. This scoping review aimed to identify and synthesise themes related to facilitators and barriers of implementation of guidelines on routine PNC for women (postpartum care) in all settings.MethodsThis is a scoping review guided by the standard principles of Arksey & O'Malley's framework. We used the critical interpretive synthesis method to synthesise the whole body of evidence. We searched four databases (Medline, Embase, Global Health, CINAHL Plus) using a combination of search terms comprising four key concepts: postnatal care, routine care, guidelines and implementation. No restrictions on country or language of publication were applied. We excluded studies not presenting findings about PNC for women. We thematically charted the themes of studies included based on title and abstract screening. All studies included after full text screening were described and their results synthesised using the socio-ecological model framework. We did not conduct a risk of bias analysis or quality assessment of included studies.ResultsWe identified a total of 8692 unique records and included 43 studies which identified facilitators and barriers to implementing routine guidelines in provision of PNC to women. Three quarters of studies pertained to PNC provision in high-income countries. Specific facilitators and barriers were identified and thematically presented based on whether they affect the provision of PNC or the intersection between provision of PNC and its use by women and families. We applied a critical global health lens to synthesise three constructs in the literature: finding a balance between standardisation and individualisation of PNC, the fragmented PNC provision landscape complicating the experiences of women with intersecting vulnerabilities, and the heavy reliance on the short postpartum period as an opportunity to educate and retain women and newborns in the health system.ConclusionsThis interpretive synthesis of evidence shows that the fragmented and narrow nature of PNC provision presents specific challenges to developing, adapting and implementing routine PNC guidelines. This results in a lack of linkages to social support and services, fails to address intersecting vulnerabilities and inequities among women, and negatively influences care seeking. There is a lack of evidence on how processes of individualising PNC provision can be applied in practice to support health workers in providing woman-centered PNC in various global settings.Registrationhttps://www.protocols.io/private/C99DA688881F11EBB4690A58A9FEAC02.

Project description:Evidence-based indicators of quality of care have been developed to improve care and performance in Canadian emergency departments. The feasibility of measuring these indicators has been assessed mainly in urban and academic emergency departments. We sought to assess the feasibility of measuring quality-of-care indicators in rural emergency departments in Quebec.We previously identified rural emergency departments in Quebec that offered medical coverage with hospital beds 24 hours a day, 7 days a week and were located in rural areas or small towns as defined by Statistics Canada. A standardized protocol was sent to each emergency department to collect data on 27 validated quality-of-care indicators in 8 categories: duration of stay, patient safety, pain management, pediatrics, cardiology, respiratory care, stroke and sepsis/infection. Data were collected by local professional medical archivists between June and December 2013.Fifteen (58%) of the 26 emergency departments invited to participate completed data collection. The ability to measure the 27 quality-of-care indicators with the use of databases varied across departments. Centres 2, 5, 6 and 13 used databases for at least 21 of the indicators (78%-92%), whereas centres 3, 8, 9, 11, 12 and 15 used databases for 5 (18%) or fewer of the indicators. On average, the centres were able to measure only 41% of the indicators using heterogeneous databases and manual extraction. The 15 centres collected data from 15 different databases or combinations of databases. The average data collection time for each quality-of-care indicator varied from 5 to 88.5 minutes. The median data collection time was 15 minutes or less for most indicators.Quality-of-care indicators were not easily captured with the use of existing databases in rural emergency departments in Quebec. Further work is warranted to improve standardized measurement of these indicators in rural emergency departments in the province and to generalize the information gathered in this study to other health care environments.

Dataset Information

Facilitators and Barriers to Care in Rural Emergency Departments in Alberta for Patients on Peritoneal Dialysis (PD): An Interpretive Descriptive Study.

Publications

Facilitators and Barriers to Care in Rural Emergency Departments in Alberta for Patients on Peritoneal Dialysis (PD): An Interpretive Descriptive Study.

Similar Datasets

OmicsDI is part of the ELIXIR infrastructure

Tweets