Context Factors Facilitating and Hindering Patient Participation in Dialysis Care: A Focus Group Study With Patients and Staff

Patient engagement during the transition from nondialysis-dependent chronic kidney disease to dialysis: A meta-ethnography

INTRODUCTION

Patient engagement, encompassing both patient experience and opportunities for involvement in care, has been associated with increased patient satisfaction and the overall quality of care. Despite its importance, there is limited knowledge regarding patient engagement in the transition from nondialysis-dependent chronic kidney disease (CKD) to dialysis-dependent treatment. This systematic review employs meta-ethnography to synthesize findings from qualitative studies examining patients' experiences of engagement during this transition, with the aim of developing a comprehensive theoretical understanding of patient engagement in the transition from nondialysis-dependent CKD to dialysis.

METHODS

A systematic search of six databases, namely the Cochrane Library, PsycINFO, Scopus, Embase, PubMed and Web of Science was conducted to identify eligible articles published between 1990 and 2022. Meta-ethnography was utilized to translate and synthesize the findings and develop a novel theoretical interpretation of 'patient engagement' during the transition to dialysis.

RESULTS

A total of 24 articles were deemed eligible for review, representing 21 studies. Patient engagement during a transition to dialysis was found to encompass three major domains: psychosocial adjustment, decision-making and engagement in self-care. These three domains could be experienced as an iterative and mutually reinforcing process, guiding patients toward achieving control and proficiency in their lives as they adapt to dialysis. Additionally, patient engagement could be facilitated by factors including patients' basic capability to engage, the provision of appropriate education, the establishment of supportive relationships and the alignment with values and resources.

CONCLUSIONS

The findings of this review underscore the necessity of involving patients in transitional dialysis care, emphasizing the need to foster their engagement across multiple domains. Recommendations for future interventions include the provision of comprehensive support to enhance patient engagement during this critical transition phase. Additional research is warranted to explore the effects of various facilitators at different levels.

PATIENT OR PUBLIC CONTRIBUTION

The studies included in our review involved 633 participants (547 patients, 14 family members, 63 healthcare providers and 9 managers). Based on their experiences, views and beliefs, we developed a deeper understanding of patient engagement and how to foster it in the future.

Preference-based patient participation in intermediate care: Translation, validation and piloting of the 4Ps in Norway

INTRODUCTION

The implementation and evaluation of patient participation to obtain high-quality transitional care for older people is an international priority. Intermediate care (IC) services are regarded as an important part of the patient's pathway from the specialist to the primary care levels, bridging the gap between the hospital and the home. Patients may experience varying capacities and conditions for patient participation. Yet, few tools for evaluating patients' preferences for patient participation within IC services are at hand. Accordingly, further knowledge is needed to understand and scaffold processes for patient participation in IC. Therefore, the aim of this project was to translate, validate and pilot test the Patient Preferences for Patient Participation (the 4Ps) with patients in IC services in Norway.

METHODS

This project comprised two phases: (1) a careful translation and cultural adaptation process, followed by a content validity trial among 15 patients and staff in Norwegian IC and (2) a cross-sectional survey of the instrument with 60 patients admitted to IC.

RESULTS

The translation between Swedish and Norwegian required no conceptual or contextual adaptations. The subsequent cross-sectional study, designed as a dialogue between the patients and staff, revealed that only 50% of the participants received a sufficient level of patient participation based on their preferences, mostly indicating that patients were receiving less-than-preferred conditions for engaging in their health and healthcare issues.

CONCLUSION

The 4Ps instrument was deemed suitable for measuring patient participation based on patient preferences in the IC context and was feasible for both healthcare professionals and patients to complete in an interview when arriving at and leaving services. This may support person-centred communication and collaboration, calling for further research on what facilitates patient participation and the implementation of person-centred services for patients in IC.

PATIENT OR PUBLIC CONTRIBUTION

First, the current paper is part of the IPIC study (i.e., the implementation of patient participation in IC). Influenced by a James Lind Alliance process, the study addresses research uncertainties identified by patients, next of kin, staff and researchers in the cocreation process. Second, cognitive interviewing was conducted with 15 representatives of the target population: seven patients receiving IC services, one home-dwelling previous IC patient (altogether four women and four men, most of them 80 years or older) and seven healthcare staff working in IC services. The interviews determined the relevance, comprehensiveness and clarity of the 4Ps. Finally, 60 patients admitted to IC took part in the cross-sectional study.

Patient participation in end-stage kidney disease care: variation over time and effects of staff-directed interventions - a quasi-experimental study

BACKGROUND

Among those elements establishing decent quality of care from a patient perspective, opportunities to participate in accord with one's individual needs and preferences are central. To date, little is known the extent of preference-based patient participation in kidney care, and what facilitates optimal conditions. This study investigated i) preference-based patient participation in kidney care over time, and ii) the effects of interventions designed to enhance person-centred patient participation.

METHODS

A quasi-experimental study was conducted across nine kidney care sites in southeast Sweden. A cohort of 358 patients with stage IV chronic kidney disease (eGRF 15-19 ml/min) or V (eGRF < 15 mL/min) entered the study. Of these, 245 patients (with kidney replacement therapy or intermittent outpatient visits only) completed a survey on patient participation at four time points: every six months from August 2019 to May 2021, patients reported their preferences for and experiences of participation using the validated Patient Preferences for Patient Participation tool, the 4Ps. Between the first and second data collection points, interventions were provided for designated staff to facilitate person-centred participation, using two strategies for two subgroups at three sites each: the managers receiving a bundle of information via e-mail on patient participation in a standard dissemination procedure (three sites), or an additional half-year support program for implementation offered to 1-2 staff per site (three sites), with no intervention for a control group (three sites). The differences in 4Ps data between groups were analysed using multilevel ordinal regression.

RESULTS

Over time and across all sites, most patients' experiences of participation fully or almost fully matched their engagement preferences (57%-90%). Still, up to 12% of patient reports indicated that their preferences and experiences were insufficiently matched: in these cases, the patients had preferred to be more involved than they had experienced, for example, in making healthcare plans and setting health-related goals. The interventions did not affect the levels of preference-based participation, but patients in the control group sites had slightly more consistent matches.

CONCLUSIONS

Living with kidney failure necessitates patient engagement, but opportunities to participate in accordance with one's preferences are not fully provided for all patients. Additional efforts to support a common understanding and to ensure person-centred patient participation is still needed.

Facilitating facilitators to facilitate-Some general comments on a strategy for knowledge implementation in health services

Numerous endeavours to ensure that day-to-day healthcare is both evidence-based and person-centred have generated extensive, although partial, comprehension of what guarantees quality improvement. To address quality issues, researchers and clinicians have developed several strategies as well as implementation theories, models, and frameworks. However, more progress is needed regarding how to facilitate guideline and policy implementation that guarantees effective changes take place in a timely and safe manner. This paper considers experiences of engaging and supporting local facilitators in knowledge implementation. Drawing on several interventions, considering both training and support, this general commentary discusses whom to engage and the length, content, quantity, and type of support along with expected outcomes of facilitators' activities. In addition, this paper suggests that patient facilitators could help produce evidence-based and person-centred care. We conclude that research about the roles and functions of facilitators needs to include more structured follow-ups and also improvement projects. This can increase the speed of learning with respect to what works, for whom, in what context, why (or why not), and with what outcomes when it comes to facilitator support and tasks.

Preference-based patient participation for most, if not all: A cross-sectional study of patient participation amongst persons with end-stage kidney disease

Background

Patient participation is considered central for good healthcare. Yet, the concept is not fully understood when it comes to patients' experiences of participation in conjunction with their preferences, particularly in long‐term healthcare. The aim of this study was to investigate the extent and variation of preference‐based patient participation in patients with end‐stage kidney disease (ESKD).

Methods

A cross‐sectional study was conducted with 346 patients in renal care. The main variables were patients' preferences for and experiences of patient participation, determined using the Patient Preferences for Patient Participation tool, the 4Ps. Analyses identified the degree of match between preferences and experiences, that is, the preference‐based patient participation measure.

Results

Overall, 57%–84% of the patients reached a sufficient level of preference‐based patient participation on the items, while 2%–12% reached an insufficient level. A mismatch indicated either less or more participation than preferred; for example, 40% had less experience than preferred for taking part in planning, and 40% had more than preferred for managing treatment.

Conclusion

This study shows that, although many patients reach a sufficient level of preference‐based patient participation, this is not the case for all patients and/or attributes. Further opportunities for a mutual understanding of patients' preferences are needed for healthcare professionals to support person‐centred patient participation.

Patient or Public Contribution

The 4Ps is manufactured in collaboration with people with experience of the patient role, and persons living with ESKD were engaged in identifying their preferences and experiences of participation in renal care.