Evidence map›Paper›PMID 34556044›Full record

ArticleBMC nephrology2021

Improving hospital safety for patients with chronic kidney disease: a mixed methods study.

Lucia New, Donna Goodridge, Joanne Kappel, Joshua Lawson, Roy Dobson, Erika Penz, Gary Groot, John Gjevre

Open access · goldAbstract read
In one paragraph

Article in BMC nephrology, 2021. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 1 paper.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
1citing papers in PubMed
0.7field-weighted citation impact, top 24% 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

1 citing paper in PubMed, 3 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. What Factors Influence Patient Measures of Safety Among Adults?Risk management and healthcare policy · 2025
    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

8 authors at 2 institutions in 1 country.

Lucia NewHealth Sciences Program, College of Medicine, University of Saskatchewan, Saskatoon, SK, Canada.
Donna GoodridgeDepartment of Medicine, College of Medicine, University of Saskatchewan, 103 Hospital Drive, SK, S7N OW8, Saskatoon, Canada. donna.goodridge@usask.ca.
Joanne KappelDepartment of Medicine, Saskatchewan Health Authority, Saskatoon, Saskatchewan, Canada.
Joshua LawsonDepartment of Medicine, University of Saskatchewan, Saskatoon, Saskatchewan, Canada.
Roy DobsonCollege of Pharmacy and Nutrition, University of Saskatchewan, Saskatoon, SK, Canada.
Erika PenzDepartment of Medicine, University of Saskatchewan, Saskatoon, Saskatchewan, Canada.
Gary GrootDepartment of Medicine, University of Saskatchewan, Saskatoon, Saskatchewan, Canada.
John GjevreDepartment of Medicine, University of Saskatchewan, Saskatoon, Saskatchewan, Canada.
University of Saskatchewan · CASaskatchewan Health Authority · CA

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

backgroundPeople living with chronic kidney disease (CKD) require complex medical management and may be frequently hospitalized. Patient safety incidents during hospitalization can result in serious complications which may negatively affect health outcomes. There has been limited examination of how these patients perceive their own safety.

objectivesThis study compared the safety perceptions of patients hospitalized with CKD using two approaches: (a) the Patient Measure of Safety (PMOS) questionnaire and (b) qualitative interviews. The study objectives were to: (1) assess concordance between qualitative and quantitative data on safety perceptions and (2) better understand safety as perceived by study participants.

methodsA cross-sectional convergent mixed methods design was used. Integration at the reporting level occurred by weaving together patient narratives and survey domains through the use of a joint display. Interview data were merged with results of the PMOS on a case-by-case basis for analysis to assess for concordance or discordance between these approaches to safety data collection.

resultsOf the 30 inpatients with CKD, almost one quarter (23.3 %) of participants reported low levels of perceived safety in hospitals. Four major themes emerged from the interviews: receiving safe care; expecting to be taken care of; expecting to be cared for; and reporting safety concerns. Suboptimal communication, delays in care and concerns about technical aspects of care were common to both forms of data collection. Concordance was noted between qualitative and quantitative data with respect to communication/teamwork, respect and dignity, staff roles, and ward type/lay-out. While interviews allowed for participants to share specific concerns related to safety about quality of interpersonal interactions, use of the questionnaire alone did not capture this concern.

conclusionsSafety issues are a concern for in-patients with CKD. Both quantitative and qualitative approaches provided important and complementary insights into these issues. Narratives were mostly concordant with questionnaire scores. Findings from this mixed methods study suggest that communication, interpersonal interactions, and delays in care were more concerning for participants than technical aspects of care. Eliciting the concerns of people with CKD in a systematic fashion, either through interviews or a survey, ensures that hospital safety improvement efforts focus on issues important to patients.

Indexed as

HospitalsPatient SafetyRenal Insufficiency, ChronicAgedCommunicationCross-Sectional StudiesEvaluation Studies as TopicFemaleHumansInterviews as TopicMaleMiddle AgedQualitative ResearchSurveys and QuestionnairesChronic kidney diseaseCommunicationEmotional safetyMixed methods researchPatient feedbackPatient safety

Identifiers

PMID34556044
PMCPMC8461959
OpenAlexW3199189699

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY
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.