Evidence map›Paper›PMID 33224512›Full record

ArticleCanadian journal of kidney health and disease2020

Facilitators and Barriers to Care in Rural Emergency Departments in Alberta for Patients on Peritoneal Dialysis (PD): An Interpretive Descriptive Study.

Lisa Lillebuen, Kara Schick-Makaroff, Stephanie Thompson, Anita Molzahn

Open access · goldAbstract read
In one paragraph

Article in Canadian journal of kidney health and disease, 2020. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 4 papers, 2 of them syntheses that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
4citing papers in PubMed, 2 pooled it
–field-weighted citation impact, top 82% of its field
1 · What the graph read from it

What it found

Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.

The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.

2 · The registry

The trial behind it

Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.

Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.

3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

4 citing papers in PubMed, 2 syntheses or guidelines pooled it, 8 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Pooled it
  2. Pooled it
  3. Article
  4. Barriers and Opportunities in Access to Peritoneal Dialysis across Veterans Health Administration.Clinical journal of the American Society of Nephrology : CJASN · 2026
    Article
4 · The record

Corrections and comments

PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

4 authors at 1 institution in 1 country.

Lisa LillebuenFaculty of Nursing, University of Alberta, Edmonton, Canada.ORCID https://orcid.org/0000-0001-9244-0350
Kara Schick-MakaroffFaculty of Nursing, University of Alberta, Edmonton, Canada.ORCID https://orcid.org/0000-0001-6200-3416
Stephanie ThompsonDivision of Nephrology, Faculty of Medicine & Dentistry, University of Alberta, Edmonton, Canada.
Anita MolzahnFaculty of Nursing, University of Alberta, Edmonton, Canada.
University of Alberta · CA

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

backgroundHome dialysis offers many advantages to patients, but they require support to manage a home-based therapy such as peritoneal dialysis (PD). A rural emergency department provides an important safety net for patients requiring medical care, including managing complications of PD, such as peritonitis. Patients living in northern Alberta are spread out geographically and can be far from a PD training center, yet anecdotally, many rural sites do not provide care for these patients.

objectiveOur aim was to identify the facilitators and barriers to nursing care in rural emergency departments in northern Alberta for patients receiving PD.

designA qualitative interpretive descriptive approach was used.

settingRural emergency departments across northern Alberta.

participantsPurposeful sampling was used to seek participants from 1 of 4 rural acute care hospital emergency departments in northern Alberta. Six registered nurses and 1 licensed practical nurse agreed to participate in the study. They ranged in experience from 2 to 18 years. Two of the participants were unit managers, 2 were clinical nurse educators (CNEs), and the other 3 were staff nurses with 1 of them in a leadership position.

methodsIndividual semistructured interview were conducted over the telephone. The interview guide was developed based on a review of the literature. Interviews continued until no new information was obtained, that is, data were saturated. Interviews were audio recorded and transcribed verbatim. Field notes were recorded. A constant comparative approach was used for analysis. The coding process was both deductive (drawing from the literature) and inductive.

resultsSeven participants were interviewed, and there were 4 main themes and 1 subtheme that emerged from the analysis: LIMITATIONS: The findings represent the perceptions of the emergency department nurses who participated. These perceptions may differ from those of nurses who work in other regions of the country. Furthermore, most participants were in a leadership role, and it may be that their perspectives differ from those of front-line nurses.

conclusionsThe findings from our study highlight the need for availability of education and resource materials/persons to care for these patients. There is also a need for greater physician support from both local physicians as well as nephrologists to offer high-quality PD care.

trial registrationNot applicable. This study is not a clinical trial. It did not involve prospective assignment of participants to a treatment group.

Indexed as

emergency department (ED)end-stage kidney disease (ESKD)nursingperitoneal dialysis (PD)rural

Identifiers

PMID33224512
PMCPMC7649850
OpenAlexW3094676673

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY-NC
Read underepoch 390

Registered trials

None linked

Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.