Characteristics of dialysis important to patients and family caregivers: A mixed methods approach

Nephrology Dialysis Transplantation

Volumn 26, Issue 12, 2011, Pages 4038-4046

  Morton, Rachael L ^a   Tong, Allison ^a,b   Webster, Angela C ^a,b   Snelling, Paul ^c   Howard, Kirsten ^a  

^a UNIVERSITY OF SYDNEY   (Australia)

^b CHILDREN S HOSPITAL AT WESTMEAD   (Australia)

^c ROYAL PRINCE ALFRED HOSPITAL   (Australia)

Author keywords

chronic kidney disease; dialysis; dialysis caregivers; patient preferences; treatment decision making

Indexed keywords

ARTICLE; CAREGIVER; CHRONIC KIDNEY DISEASE; DECISION MAKING; DIALYSIS; FAMILY CAREGIVER; FEMALE; HEALTH CARE DELIVERY; HEMODIALYSIS; HEMODIALYSIS PATIENT; HOME DIALYSIS; HUMAN; INTERMETHOD COMPARISON; MAJOR CLINICAL STUDY; MALE; PATIENT CARE; PERITONEAL DIALYSIS; PRIORITY JOURNAL;

ADULT; AGED; AGED, 80 AND OVER; CAREGIVERS; FEMALE; HUMANS; MALE; MIDDLE AGED; PATIENT PREFERENCE; RENAL DIALYSIS;

EID: 82255185524     PISSN: 09310509     EISSN: 14602385     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1093/ndt/gfr177     Document Type: Article

References (35)

1. Baboolal K, McEwan P, Sondhi S et al. The cost of renal dialysis in a UK setting-a multicentre study. Nephrol Dial Transplant 2008; 23: 1982-1989 (Pubitemid 351768145)
2. Korevaar JC, Feith Gw, Dekker FW et al. Effect of starting with hemodialysis compared with peritoneal dialysis in patients new on dialysis treatment: a randomized controlled trial. Kidney Int 2003; 64: 2222-2228 (Pubitemid 37449558)
3. Vale L, Cody J, Wallace S et al. Continuous ambulatory peritoneal dialysis (CAPD) versus hospital or home haemodialysis for endstage renal disease in adults. Cochrane Database Syst Rev 2004;(4):CD003963
4. Covic A, Bammens B, Lobbedez T et al. Educating end-stage renal disease patients on dialysis modality selection: clinical advice from the European Renal Best Practice (ERBP) Advisory Board. Nephrol Dial Transplant 2010; 25: 1757-1759
5. Couchoud C, Savoye E, Frimat L et al. Variability in case mix and peritoneal dialysis selection in fifty-nine French districts. Perit Dial Int 2008; 28: 509-517
6. Jassal SV, Krishna G, Mallick NP et al. Attitudes of British Isles nephrologists towards dialysis modality selection: a questionnaire study. Nephrol Dial Transplant 2002; 17: 474-477 (Pubitemid 34211146)
7. Lee A, Gudex C, Povlsen JV et al. Patients' views regarding choice of dialysis modality. Nephrol Dial Transplant 2008; 23: 3953-3959
8. Wuerth DB, Finkelstein SH, Schwetz O et al. Patients' descriptions of specific factors leading to modality selection of chronic peritoneal dialysis or hemodialysis. Perit Dial Int 2002; 22: 184-190 (Pubitemid 34546329)
9. Morton RL, Tong A, Howard K et al. The views of patients and carers in treatment decision making for chronic kidney disease: a systematic review and thematic synthesis of qualitative studies. Br Med J 2010; 340, c112
10. Morton RL, Devitt J, Anderson K et al. Patient views about treatment of stage 5 CKD: a qualitative analysis of semistructured interviews. Am J Kidney Dis 2010; 55: 431-440
11. Oliver MJ, Garg AX, Blake PG et al. Impact of contraindications, barriers to self-care and support on incident peritoneal dialysis utilization. Nephrol Dial Transplant 2010; 25: 2737-2744
12. Jager KJ, Korevaar JC, Dekker FW et al. The effect of contraindications and patient preference on dialysis modality selection in ESRD patients in The Netherlands. Am J Kidney Dis 2004; 43: 891-899 (Pubitemid 38529627)
13. National Kidney Foundation. Kidney Disease Outcomes Quality Initiative (K-DOQI). Clinical Practice Guidelines for Hemodialysis Adequacy. Guideline 1. Initiation of Dialysis. 1.1 Preparation for Kidney Failure. New York: National Kidney Foundation, Inc, 2006
14. Pruchno RA, Lemay EP Jr, Feild L et al. Spouse as health care proxy for dialysis patients: whose preferences matter? Gerontologist 2005; 45: 812-819 (Pubitemid 41759787)
15. Stack AG, Martin DR. Association of patient autonomy with increased transplantation and survival among new dialysis patients in the United States. Am J Kidney Dis 2005; 45: 730-742 (Pubitemid 40460761)
16. Szabo E, Moody H, Hamilton T et al. Choice of treatment improves quality of life. A study on patients undergoing dialysis. Arch Intern Med 1997; 157: 1352-1356 (Pubitemid 27264277)
17. Bergman MM. Advances in Mixed Methods Research. Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage, 2008
18. Delbecq AL, Gustafson DH, Van de Ven AH. Group Techniques for Program Planning: A Guide to Nominal Group and Delphi Processes. Glenview, IL: Scott, Foresman, 1975
19. Sanderson T, Morris M, Calnan M et al. Patient perspective of measuring treatment efficacy: the rheumatoid arthritis patient priorities for pharmacologic interventions outcomes. Arthritis Care Res 2010; 62: 647-656
20. Corner J, Wright J, Hopkinson J et al. The research priorities of patients attending UK cancer treatment centres: findings from a modified nominal group study. Br J Cancer 2007; 96: 875-881 (Pubitemid 46452292)
21. Tuffrey-Wijne I, Bernal J, Butler G et al. Using Nominal Group Technique to investigate the views of people with intellectual disabilities on end-of-life care provision. J Adv Nurs 2007; 58: 80-89
22. Aspinal F, Hughes R, DunckleyMet al. What is important to measure in the last months and weeks of life: A modified nominal group study. Int J Nurs Stud 2006; 43: 393-403 (Pubitemid 43626158)
23. Teddlie C, Tashakkori A. Foundations of Mixed Methods Research: Integrating Quantitative and Qualitative Approaches in the Social and Behavioral Sciences. Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage, 2009
24. Leask J, Hawe P, Chapman S. Focus group composition: a comparison between natural and constructed groups. Aust N Z J Public Health 2001; 25: 152-154 (Pubitemid 32451861)
25. Kitzinger J. Qualitative Research: Introducing focus groups. BMJ 1995; 311: 299-302
26. Boyatzis RE. Transforming Qualitative Information: Thematic Analysis and Code Development. Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage Publications Inc, 1998
27. Barnett-Page E, Thomas J. Methods for the synthesis of qualitative research: a critical review. BMC Med Res Methodol 2009; 9: 59
28. Kerr P, Polkinghorne KR, McDonald SP. Home hemodialysis in Australia: current perspective. Hemodial Int 2008; 12: S6-S10 (Pubitemid 352016061)
29. Weinhandl ED, Foley RN, Gilbertson DT et al. Propensity-matched mortality comparison of incident hemodialysis and peritoneal dialysis patients. J Am Soc Nephrol 2010; 21: 499-506
30. McDonald SP, Marshall MR, Johnson DW et al. Relationship between dialysis modality and mortality. J Am Soc Nephrol 2009; 20: 155-163
31. Pauly RP, Gill JS, Rose CL et al. Survival among nocturnal home haemodialysis patients compared to kidney transplant recipients. Nephrol Dial Transplant 2009; 24: 2915-2919
32. U.S. Renal Data System. USRDS 2008 Annual Data Report: Atlas of Chronic Kidney Disease and End-Stage Renal Disease in the United States. Bethesda, MD: Chapter 12 International comparisons. 2008
33. Marron B, Martinez Ocana JC, Salgueira M et al. Analysis of patient flow into dialysis: Role of education in choice of dialysis modality. Perit Dial Int 2005; 25 (Suppl 3): S56-S59 (Pubitemid 40883217)
34. McLaughlin K, Jones H, VanderStraeten C et al. Why do patients choose self-care dialysis? Nephrol Dial Transplant 2008; 23: 3972-3976
35. Hornberger JC, Habraken H, Bloch DA. Minimum data needed on patient preferences for accurate, efficient medical decision making. Med Care 1995; 33: 297-310