Evaluating the clinical experience of a regional in-center nocturnal hemodialysis program: The patient and staff perspective

Perceptions of healthcare providers on benefits, risks and barriers regarding intradialytic exercise among haemodialysis patients

PURPOSE

Clinical guidelines call for the inclusion of exercise interventions in every patient's dialysis session, but these recommendations are rarely adopted. Healthcare providers play a key role in this. Therefore, the aim of this study was to explore how healthcare providers perceive the benefits, risks and barriers of intradialytic exercise (IDE).

METHODS

We conducted 21 individual, semi-structured interviews with 11 nurses, 5 nephrologists, 3 training assistants and 2 managers from two dialysis centres in Slovakia. Verbatim transcripts of digitally recorded interviews were thematically analysed using MAXQDA®.

RESULTS

Participants reported the benefits of IDE as improvements in patients' physical and psychosocial functioning, independence and self-efficacy, clinical profile and quality of therapy. As risks of IDE, they most frequently reported exercise-related damage to vascular access, insufficient individualization of training and musculoskeletal injuries. The presence of psychological problems among patients was reported as a major barrier for initiating and maintaining patients' exercise. Other reported barriers included limitations in financial and personnel resources of haemodialysis care.

CONCLUSIONS

Safe and sustainable implementation of IDE, which might improve a patient's well-being, need to be prescribed in alignment with the patient's clinical profile, be delivered individually according to the patient's characteristics and requires adjustments in the available resources.

The NightLife study - the clinical and cost-effectiveness of thrice-weekly, extended, in-centre nocturnal haemodialysis versus daytime haemodialysis using a mixed methods approach: study protocol for a randomised controlled trial

BACKGROUND

In-centre nocturnal haemodialysis (INHD) offers extended-hours haemodialysis, 6 to 8 h thrice-weekly overnight, with the support of dialysis specialist nurses. There is increasing observational data demonstrating potential benefits of INHD on health-related quality of life (HRQoL). There is a lack of randomised controlled trial (RCT) data to confirm these benefits and assess safety.

METHODS

The NightLife study is a pragmatic, two-arm, multicentre RCT comparing the impact of 6 months INHD to conventional haemodialysis (thrice-weekly daytime in-centre haemodialysis, 3.5-5 h per session). The primary outcome is the total score from the Kidney Disease Quality of Life tool at 6 months. Secondary outcomes include sleep and cognitive function, measures of safety, adherence to dialysis and impact on clinical parameters. There is an embedded Process Evaluation to assess implementation, health economic modelling and a QuinteT Recruitment Intervention to understand factors that influence recruitment and retention. Adults (≥ 18 years old) who have been established on haemodialysis for > 3 months are eligible to participate.

DISCUSSION

There are 68,000 adults in the UK that need kidney replacement therapy (KRT), with in-centre haemodialysis the treatment modality for over a third of cases. HRQoL is an independent predictor of hospitalisation and mortality in individuals on maintenance dialysis. Haemodialysis is associated with poor HRQoL in comparison to the general population. INHD has the potential to improve HRQoL. Vigorous RCT evidence of effectiveness is lacking. The NightLife study is an essential step in the understanding of dialysis therapies and will guide patient-centred decisions regarding KRT in the future.

TRIAL REGISTRATION

Trial registration number: ISRCTN87042063. Registered: 14/07/2020.

Studying both patient and staff experience to investigate their perceptions and to target key interactions to improve: a scoping review

OBJECTIVE

The improvement of patient experience (PE) is related to the experience of staff caring for them. Yet there is little evidence as to which interactions matter the most for both patients and staff, or how they are perceived by them. We aimed to summarise the interactions and the perceptions between patients and staff from studies by using both patient and staff experience data in healthcare institutions.

DESIGN

Scoping review.

METHODS

We conducted a scoping review, including studies dealing with PE and staff experience. Two authors independently reviewed each title/abstract and the selected full-text articles. A list of variables (objective, study design, data sources, tools used, results, interactions, perceptions and actions) was charted and summarised using a narrative approach including both qualitative and quantitative data. Studies were grouped according to their objective and the key interactions summarised according to this stratification. The perceptions of patients and staff were identified in the results of selected studies and were classified into four categories: commonalities and disagreements of perceptions, patients' perceptions not perceived by professionals and professional's perceptions not perceived by patients.

RESULTS

A total of 42 studies were included. The stratification of studies by type of objective resulted in six groups that allowed to classify the key interactions (n=154) identified in the results of the selected studies. A total of 128 perceptions related to interaction between patient and staff were reported with the following distribution: commonalities (n=35), disagreements (n=18), patients' perceptions not perceived by professionals (n=47) and professional's perceptions not perceived by patients (n=28). We separated positive and negative perceptions, which resulted in seven scenarios, each with actions that can be carried out for one or both populations to overcome barriers.

CONCLUSION

The study of both patient and staff experience allowed the identification of actions that can be taken to change the perceptions of patients and staff.

Intérêts et limites de l’Hémodialyse Longue Nocturne

L’hémodialyse (HD) Longue Nocturne (HDLN) intermittente permet de combiner dialyse et sommeil. Ses avantages cliniques sont une vitesse d’ultrafiltration réduite, un meilleur contrôle de la volémie avec amélioration de la tolérance des séances et des performances cardiaques, une phosphatémie et des moyennes molécules mieux épurées et une meilleure survie dans les études de cohortes. La qualité de vie n’est pas altérée par la longueur des séances et elle s’améliore quand elle n’est pas optimale lors du transfert de l’HD standard vers l’HDLN. La qualité du sommeil n’est parfois perturbée mais elle n’est pas une cause importante de sortie du programme. La pérennité d’un programme d’HDLN passe par les volontés conjointes médicales et managériales, la sélection des patients stables, le respect des horaires et de la durée de séances, indispensable à la dialyse de sommeil. Les autorités de santé doivent jouer un rôle pour permettre cette modalité dans des conditions financières acceptables. L’information au patient de l’existence de l’HDLN avant le stade de la dialyse est essentielle, aidée par le témoignage des pairs. Les sociétés savantes doivent soutenir la recherche et l’information aux néphrologues. Enfin les conditions architecturales favorisant l’intimité et le sommeil sont une clé de réussite du programme.