Dataset Information

Patients' experience one year after dialysis initiation: a lexicometric analysis.

ABSTRACT:

Background

Dialysis implies huge changes in patients' lives. Yet, there is a need to better understand patients' experience in the time following dialysis initiation.

Objective

The objective of this study was to investigate patients' experience of dialysis a year after treatment initiation and the associations between patients' discourse and their anxiety and depression symptoms.

Methods

Twenty two patients (mean age 63.4; 68% men) took part in a semi-directed interview about their experience with dialysis. Participants completed the Hospital Anxiety and Depression Scale (HADS). Interviews were analyzed using a lexicometric analysis.

Results

The analysis generated five classes: experience with nephrological care, facing loss and family relationships, family and acceptance, implementation of a new routine and making sense of the end-stage renal disease experience. Patients' felt very passive in their experience with care. They reported the importance of integrating dialysis in their lives and the role of family support when facing treatment initiation. Depressed patients were more likely to describe their nephrological monitoring very factually and to talk about what they lost with dialysis initiation.

Conclusion

Dialysis initiation is a hard time for patients during which they face many challenges. This first year represents a time of adaptation, in which family seems essential.

SUBMITTER: Montalescot L

PROVIDER: S-EPMC8158193 | biostudies-literature |

REPOSITORIES: biostudies-literature

ACCESS DATA

Similar Datasets

Project description:Rationale & objectiveDialysis comes with a substantial treatment burden, so patients must select care plans that align with their preferences. We aimed to deepen the understanding of decisional regret with dialysis choices.Study designThis study had a mixed-methods explanatory sequential design.Setting & participantsAll patients from a single academic medical center prescribed maintenance in-center hemodialysis or presenting for home hemodialysis or peritoneal dialysis check-up during 3 weeks were approached for survey. A total of 78 patients agreed to participate. Patients with the highest (15 patients) and lowest decisional regret (20 patients) were invited to semistructured interviews.PredictorsDecisional regret scale and illness intrusiveness scale were used in this study.Analytical approachQuantitatively, we examined correlations between the decision regret scale and illness intrusiveness scale and sorted patients into the highest and lowest decision regret scale quartiles for further interviews; then, we compared patient characteristics between those that consented to interview in high and low decisional regret. Qualitatively, we used an adapted grounded theory approach to examine differences between interviewed patients with high and low decisional regret.ResultsOf patients invited to participate in the interviews, 21 patients (8 high regret, 13 low regret) agreed. We observed that patients with high decisional regret displayed resignation toward dialysis, disruption of their sense of self and social roles, and self-blame, whereas patients with low decisional regret demonstrated positivity, integration of dialysis into their identity, and self-compassion.LimitationsPatients with the highest levels of decisional regret may have already withdrawn from dialysis. Patients could complete interviews in any location (eg, home, dialysis unit, and clinical office), which may have influenced patient disclosure.ConclusionsAlthough all patients experienced disruption after dialysis initiation, patients' approach to adversity differs between patients experiencing high versus low regret. This study identifies emotional responses to dialysis that may be modifiable through patient-support interventions.

Project description:Rationale & objectivesDue to unmeasured confounding, observational studies have limitations when assessing whether dialysis initiation reduces mortality compared with conservative therapy among adults with advanced chronic kidney disease (CKD). We addressed this issue in this meta-analysis.Study designMeta-analysis with bias analysis for unmeasured confounding.Setting & study populationAdults with stage 4 or 5 CKD who had initiated dialysis or conservative treatment.Selection criteria for studiesProspective or retrospective cohort studies comparing survival of dialysis versus conservatively managed patients were searched on MEDLINE and Embase from January 2009 to March 20, 2019.Data extractionHRs of all-cause mortality associated with dialysis initiation compared with conservative treatment.Analytical approachWe pooled HRs using a random-effects model. We estimated the percentage of effect sizes more protective than HRs of 0.80 and severity of unmeasured confounding that could reduce this percentage to only 10%. Subgroup analysis was performed for studies with only older patients (aged ≥ 65 years).Results12 studies were included that involved 16,609 dialysis patients and 3,691 conservatively managed patients. A random-effects model suggested that dialysis initiation was associated with a mean mortality HR of 0.47 (95% CI, 0.34-0.64), in which 92% (95% CI, 50%-100%) of the true effects were more protective than HRs of 0.80. To reduce the percentage of HRs < 0.80 to 10%, unmeasured confounder(s) would need to be associated with both dialysis initiation and mortality by relative risks of 4.05 (95% CI, 2.39-4.15), which is equivalent to shifting each study's estimated HR by 2.31-fold (95% CI, 1.51-2.36). Restricting studies to include only older patients did not modify the results.LimitationsLimited number of studies and evidence on the absence of publication bias.ConclusionsOur findings suggest that dialysis initiation considerably reduces mortality among adults with advanced CKD. Future bias-adjusted meta-analyses need to assess outcomes beyond mortality.