Search

Aim: This study aimed to investigate personal preparedness among patients on haemodialysis (HD) and to examine the relationship among sociodemographic characteristics, attitudes toward disaster preparedness and personal preparedness behaviours during natural disaster incidents. Design: A cross‐sectional survey was conducted. Methods: A convenience sampling method was used. A total of 446 participants from six areas of Sichuan province completed the online questionnaire study from February 27 to March 13, 2022. Sociodemographic characteristics, attitudes toward disaster preparedness and personal preparedness behaviours were measured. Descriptive statistics were used to analyse sociodemographic characteristics and attitudes toward disaster preparedness. The relationship among sociodemographic characteristics, attitudes toward disaster preparedness and personal preparedness behaviours were assessed using ordinal regression. Statistical significance was defined as p < 0.05. Results: A total of 446 participants completed the survey. Of these, 42.15% (N = 188) were poorly prepared, 26.23% (N = 117) were moderately prepared and 31.61% (N = 141) were highly prepared. Ordinal regression showed that knowing about disaster preparedness (Odds Ratio (OR) = 1.691, 95% Confidence Interval (CI) = 1.081–2.644, p = 0.021), participating in disaster evacuation exercises (OR = 2.519, 95% CI = 1.595–3.977, p < 0.001) and learning about disaster preparedness (OR = 2.421, 95% CI = 1.542–3.802, p < 0.001) were associated with high preparedness. Compared to patients with a university degree or higher, patients with a junior high school education or lower (OR = 3.491, 95% CI = 1.760–6.925, p < 0.001) and senior high school degree (OR = 2.052, 95% CI = 1.038–4.057, p = 0.039) were associated with high preparedness. Patients who felt very confident and could deal with all their needs (OR = 3.878, 95% CI = 2.904–7.181, p < 0.001) or patients who felt confident and could meet some of their needs (OR = 1.949, 95% CI = 1.124–3.379, p = 0.017) had higher preparedness than those who felt less confident and were not well prepared to take care of their needs. Patient or Public Contribution: After obtaining each participant's consent, they filled out the online questionnaire using their own or a relative's cell phone while undergoing HD. Implication for Practice: It is essential that patients should be educated not only on medical specialty topics, but also on general disaster preparedness. Medical institutions should improve and reinforce preparation training among targeted populations. The low level of preparedness is partly due to the lack of participation of patients in disaster preparedness programs. Dialysis center managers should be urged to implement such programs at their centers. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Background and objective: End‐stage renal disease (ESRD) affects a multitude of aspects in the patient's daily life, often entailing their own involvement in various aspects of the treatment. Although patient participation is a core health‐care value, what the concept signifies is not yet fully known. The purpose of this paper is to conceptualize patient participation in dialysis care, depicting patients' and health‐care professionals' perspectives. Design: This explorative study employed qualitative interviews and content analysis. Setting and participants: Seven focus group discussions engaging 42 key informants were performed, including patients, staff and managers with experience of dialysis care. Results: In dialysis care, patient participation connotes a sharing of information and knowledge, the learning of and planning of care, including partaking in shared decisions with regards to treatment and management, and being involved in the management of one's own health‐care treatment and/or self‐care activities. Although these attributes were illustrated by all stakeholders, their significance varied: patients suggested that their preferences regarding primary aspects of participation vary, while staff considered patients' performance of dialysis to be the ultimate form of participation. Further, while patients considered multiple ways to execute participation, staff suggested that aspects such as sharing information were a route to, rather than actual, involvement. Conclusions: Without a common understanding to denote the idea of patient participation, staff and patients are exposed to a potential deficit in terms of facilitating patient participation in everyday encounters of dialysis treatment. Further studies and means to serve a mutual understanding are needed. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Background Haemodialysis patients receive very little involvement in their end-of-life care decisions. Issues relating to death and dying are commonly avoided until late in their illness. This study aimed to explore the experiences and perceptions of doctors and nurses in nephrology for involving haemodialysis patients in end-of-life care decisions. Methods A semi-structured qualitative interview study with 15 doctors and five nurses and thematic analysis of their accounts was conducted. The setting was a large teaching hospital in Wales, UK. Results Prognosis is not routinely discussed with patients, in part due to a difficulty in estimation and the belief that patients do not want or need this information. Advance care planning is rarely carried out, and end-of-life care discussions are seldom initiated prior to patient deterioration. There is variability in end-of-life practices amongst nephrologists; some patients are felt to be withdrawn from dialysis too late. Furthermore, the possibility and implications of withdrawal are not commonly discussed with well patients. Critical barriers hindering better end-of-life care involvement for these patients are outlined. Conclusions The study provides insights into the complexity of end-of-life conversations and the barriers to achieving better end-of-life communication practices. The results identify opportunities for improving the lives and deaths of haemodialysis patients. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]