Cargando…

Predialysis education in practice: a questionnaire survey of centres with established programmes

BACKGROUND: There is growing evidence that renal replacement therapy option education (RRTOE) can result in enhanced quality of life, improved clinical outcomes, and reduced health care costs. However, there is still no detailed guidance on the optimal way to run such programmes. To help address thi...

Descripción completa

Detalles Bibliográficos
Autores principales: Prieto-Velasco, Mario, Isnard Bagnis, Corinne, Dean, Jessica, Goovaerts, Tony, Melander, Stefan, Mooney, Andrew, Nilsson, Eva-Lena, Rutherford, Peter, Trujillo, Carmen, Zambon, Roberto, Crepaldi, Carlo
Formato: Online Artículo Texto
Lenguaje:English
Publicado: BioMed Central 2014
Materias:
Acceso en línea:https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC4210595/
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/25326141
http://dx.doi.org/10.1186/1756-0500-7-730
_version_ 1782341406267801600
author Prieto-Velasco, Mario
Isnard Bagnis, Corinne
Dean, Jessica
Goovaerts, Tony
Melander, Stefan
Mooney, Andrew
Nilsson, Eva-Lena
Rutherford, Peter
Trujillo, Carmen
Zambon, Roberto
Crepaldi, Carlo
author_facet Prieto-Velasco, Mario
Isnard Bagnis, Corinne
Dean, Jessica
Goovaerts, Tony
Melander, Stefan
Mooney, Andrew
Nilsson, Eva-Lena
Rutherford, Peter
Trujillo, Carmen
Zambon, Roberto
Crepaldi, Carlo
author_sort Prieto-Velasco, Mario
collection PubMed
description BACKGROUND: There is growing evidence that renal replacement therapy option education (RRTOE) can result in enhanced quality of life, improved clinical outcomes, and reduced health care costs. However, there is still no detailed guidance on the optimal way to run such programmes. To help address this knowledge gap, an expert meeting was held in March 2013 to formulate a position statement on optimal ways to run RRTOE. Experts were selected from units that had extensive experience in RRTOE or were performing research in this field. Before the meeting, experts completed a pilot questionnaire on RRTOE in their own units. They also prepared feedback on how to modify this questionnaire for a large-scale study. METHODS: A pilot, web-based questionnaire was used to obtain information on: the renal unit and patients, the education team, RRTOE processes and content, how quality is assessed, and funding. RESULTS: Four nurses, 5 nephrologists and 1 clinical psychologist (9 renal units; 6 EU countries) participated. Nurses were almost always responsible for organising RRTOE. Nephrologists spent 7.5% (median) of their time on RRTOE. Education for the patient and family began several months before dialysis or according to disease progression. Key topics such as the ‘impact of the disease’ were covered by every unit, but only a few units described all dialysis modalities. Visits to the unit were almost always arranged. Materials came in a wide variety of forms and from a wide range of sources. Group education sessions were used in 3/9 centres. Expectations on the timing of patients’ decisions on modality and permanent access differed substantially between centres. Common quality assurance measures were: patient satisfaction, course attendance, updated materials. Only 1 unit had a dedicated budget. CONCLUSIONS: There were substantial variations in how RRTOE is run between the units. A modified version of this questionnaire will be used to assess RRTOE at a European level. ELECTRONIC SUPPLEMENTARY MATERIAL: The online version of this article (doi:10.1186/1756-0500-7-730) contains supplementary material, which is available to authorized users.
format Online
Article
Text
id pubmed-4210595
institution National Center for Biotechnology Information
language English
publishDate 2014
publisher BioMed Central
record_format MEDLINE/PubMed
spelling pubmed-42105952014-10-29 Predialysis education in practice: a questionnaire survey of centres with established programmes Prieto-Velasco, Mario Isnard Bagnis, Corinne Dean, Jessica Goovaerts, Tony Melander, Stefan Mooney, Andrew Nilsson, Eva-Lena Rutherford, Peter Trujillo, Carmen Zambon, Roberto Crepaldi, Carlo BMC Res Notes Research Article BACKGROUND: There is growing evidence that renal replacement therapy option education (RRTOE) can result in enhanced quality of life, improved clinical outcomes, and reduced health care costs. However, there is still no detailed guidance on the optimal way to run such programmes. To help address this knowledge gap, an expert meeting was held in March 2013 to formulate a position statement on optimal ways to run RRTOE. Experts were selected from units that had extensive experience in RRTOE or were performing research in this field. Before the meeting, experts completed a pilot questionnaire on RRTOE in their own units. They also prepared feedback on how to modify this questionnaire for a large-scale study. METHODS: A pilot, web-based questionnaire was used to obtain information on: the renal unit and patients, the education team, RRTOE processes and content, how quality is assessed, and funding. RESULTS: Four nurses, 5 nephrologists and 1 clinical psychologist (9 renal units; 6 EU countries) participated. Nurses were almost always responsible for organising RRTOE. Nephrologists spent 7.5% (median) of their time on RRTOE. Education for the patient and family began several months before dialysis or according to disease progression. Key topics such as the ‘impact of the disease’ were covered by every unit, but only a few units described all dialysis modalities. Visits to the unit were almost always arranged. Materials came in a wide variety of forms and from a wide range of sources. Group education sessions were used in 3/9 centres. Expectations on the timing of patients’ decisions on modality and permanent access differed substantially between centres. Common quality assurance measures were: patient satisfaction, course attendance, updated materials. Only 1 unit had a dedicated budget. CONCLUSIONS: There were substantial variations in how RRTOE is run between the units. A modified version of this questionnaire will be used to assess RRTOE at a European level. ELECTRONIC SUPPLEMENTARY MATERIAL: The online version of this article (doi:10.1186/1756-0500-7-730) contains supplementary material, which is available to authorized users. BioMed Central 2014-10-17 /pmc/articles/PMC4210595/ /pubmed/25326141 http://dx.doi.org/10.1186/1756-0500-7-730 Text en © Prieto-Velasco et al.; licensee BioMed Central Ltd. 2014 This article is published under license to BioMed Central Ltd. This is an Open Access article distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution License (http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0), which permits unrestricted use, distribution, and reproduction in any medium, provided the original work is properly credited. The Creative Commons Public Domain Dedication waiver (http://creativecommons.org/publicdomain/zero/1.0/) applies to the data made available in this article, unless otherwise stated.
spellingShingle Research Article
Prieto-Velasco, Mario
Isnard Bagnis, Corinne
Dean, Jessica
Goovaerts, Tony
Melander, Stefan
Mooney, Andrew
Nilsson, Eva-Lena
Rutherford, Peter
Trujillo, Carmen
Zambon, Roberto
Crepaldi, Carlo
Predialysis education in practice: a questionnaire survey of centres with established programmes
title Predialysis education in practice: a questionnaire survey of centres with established programmes
title_full Predialysis education in practice: a questionnaire survey of centres with established programmes
title_fullStr Predialysis education in practice: a questionnaire survey of centres with established programmes
title_full_unstemmed Predialysis education in practice: a questionnaire survey of centres with established programmes
title_short Predialysis education in practice: a questionnaire survey of centres with established programmes
title_sort predialysis education in practice: a questionnaire survey of centres with established programmes
topic Research Article
url https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC4210595/
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/25326141
http://dx.doi.org/10.1186/1756-0500-7-730
work_keys_str_mv AT prietovelascomario predialysiseducationinpracticeaquestionnairesurveyofcentreswithestablishedprogrammes
AT isnardbagniscorinne predialysiseducationinpracticeaquestionnairesurveyofcentreswithestablishedprogrammes
AT deanjessica predialysiseducationinpracticeaquestionnairesurveyofcentreswithestablishedprogrammes
AT goovaertstony predialysiseducationinpracticeaquestionnairesurveyofcentreswithestablishedprogrammes
AT melanderstefan predialysiseducationinpracticeaquestionnairesurveyofcentreswithestablishedprogrammes
AT mooneyandrew predialysiseducationinpracticeaquestionnairesurveyofcentreswithestablishedprogrammes
AT nilssonevalena predialysiseducationinpracticeaquestionnairesurveyofcentreswithestablishedprogrammes
AT rutherfordpeter predialysiseducationinpracticeaquestionnairesurveyofcentreswithestablishedprogrammes
AT trujillocarmen predialysiseducationinpracticeaquestionnairesurveyofcentreswithestablishedprogrammes
AT zambonroberto predialysiseducationinpracticeaquestionnairesurveyofcentreswithestablishedprogrammes
AT crepaldicarlo predialysiseducationinpracticeaquestionnairesurveyofcentreswithestablishedprogrammes