SURVEY OF STAFF OPINIONS ABOUT EXTENDED HAEMODIALYSIS TREATMENT TIME AND SERVICE IMPLICATIONS. Issue 3 (16th March 2015)
- Record Type:
- Journal Article
- Title:
- SURVEY OF STAFF OPINIONS ABOUT EXTENDED HAEMODIALYSIS TREATMENT TIME AND SERVICE IMPLICATIONS. Issue 3 (16th March 2015)
- Main Title:
- SURVEY OF STAFF OPINIONS ABOUT EXTENDED HAEMODIALYSIS TREATMENT TIME AND SERVICE IMPLICATIONS
- Authors:
- Singh, Seema
Procter, Susan
Power, Albert
Pusey, Charles
Choi, Peter
Duncan, Neill
Brown, Edwina - Abstract:
- <abstract abstract-type="main" xml:lang="en"> <title>SUMMARY</title> <sec id="jorc12115-sec-0001" sec-type="section"> <title>Background</title> <p>We explored the potential impact of staff opinions and service provision upon patient's willingness to recruit to a clinical trial studying the effects of extended treatment time (TT) on haemodialysis (HD), six hours versus four hours for a period of twenty‐four weeks.</p> </sec> <sec id="jorc12115-sec-0002" sec-type="section"> <title>Methods</title> <p>We conducted a local survey of dialysis nurses and a national survey of multidisciplinary HD staff opinions to extended TT including clinical benefits, tolerance to, prescription and ability to accommodate extended TT on in‐centre HD programmes.</p> </sec> <sec id="jorc12115-sec-0003" sec-type="section"> <title>Results</title> <p>The survey was completed by 56/134 (42%) local nurses and the national survey by 15/72 (21%) of dialysis providers across the UK (35% nurses and 75% other healthcare professionals). The majority of respondents felt extended TT was clinically beneficial but only 42% of nurses would recommend extended TT compared to 95% of non‐nursing healthcare professionals (p &lt; 0.0001). Although 45% of nurses felt that it was well tolerated, non‐nursing healthcare professionals suggested this was significantly higher at 75% (p &lt; 0.05). The negative impact on service provision was agreed by 83% of nurses with the need to facilitate shifts within a finite time period<abstract abstract-type="main" xml:lang="en"> <title>SUMMARY</title> <sec id="jorc12115-sec-0001" sec-type="section"> <title>Background</title> <p>We explored the potential impact of staff opinions and service provision upon patient's willingness to recruit to a clinical trial studying the effects of extended treatment time (TT) on haemodialysis (HD), six hours versus four hours for a period of twenty‐four weeks.</p> </sec> <sec id="jorc12115-sec-0002" sec-type="section"> <title>Methods</title> <p>We conducted a local survey of dialysis nurses and a national survey of multidisciplinary HD staff opinions to extended TT including clinical benefits, tolerance to, prescription and ability to accommodate extended TT on in‐centre HD programmes.</p> </sec> <sec id="jorc12115-sec-0003" sec-type="section"> <title>Results</title> <p>The survey was completed by 56/134 (42%) local nurses and the national survey by 15/72 (21%) of dialysis providers across the UK (35% nurses and 75% other healthcare professionals). The majority of respondents felt extended TT was clinically beneficial but only 42% of nurses would recommend extended TT compared to 95% of non‐nursing healthcare professionals (p &lt; 0.0001). Although 45% of nurses felt that it was well tolerated, non‐nursing healthcare professionals suggested this was significantly higher at 75% (p &lt; 0.05). The negative impact on service provision was agreed by 83% of nurses with the need to facilitate shifts within a finite time period and pressure to find session spaces being cited.</p> </sec> <sec id="jorc12115-sec-0004" sec-type="section"> <title>Conclusion</title> <p>There is conflict between the understanding that extended TT is clinically beneficial and its prescription &amp; delivery to patients. Enrolment to studies examining HD delivery strategies may be influenced by service provision and staff attitudes. In centre HD has been designed to maximise patient throughput and we may need to consider more flexible settings in which to deliver longer treatment time: Home HD maybe a solution.</p> </sec> </abstract> … (more)
- Is Part Of:
- Journal of renal care. Volume 41:Issue 3(2015:Sep.)
- Journal:
- Journal of renal care
- Issue:
- Volume 41:Issue 3(2015:Sep.)
- Issue Display:
- Volume 41, Issue 3 (2015)
- Year:
- 2015
- Volume:
- 41
- Issue:
- 3
- Issue Sort Value:
- 2015-0041-0003-0000
- Page Start:
- 162
- Page End:
- 167
- Publication Date:
- 2015-03-16
- Subjects:
- Kidneys -- Diseases -- Nursing -- Periodicals
Hemodialysis -- Periodicals
Kidney Diseases -- nursing -- Periodicals
Renal Replacement Therapy -- nursing -- Periodicals
616.61 - Journal URLs:
- http://ejournals.ebsco.com/direct.asp?JournalID=715546 ↗
http://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/journal/10.1111/(ISSN)1755-6686/issues ↗
http://www3.interscience.wiley.com/journal/118902533/home ↗
http://search.ebscohost.com/login.aspx?direct=true&db=rzh&jid=56RH&site=ehost-live ↗
http://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/ ↗
http://www.edtnaerca.org/pages/education/jrc.php ↗ - DOI:
- 10.1111/jorc.12115 ↗
- Languages:
- English
- ISSNs:
- 1755-6678
- Deposit Type:
- Legaldeposit
- View Content:
- Available online (eLD content is only available in our Reading Rooms) ↗
- Physical Locations:
- British Library DSC - 5049.450000
British Library DSC - BLDSS-3PM
British Library HMNTS - ELD Digital store - Ingest File:
- 3027.xml