ArticleCanadian journal of kidney health and disease2022
Patient and Clinician Perspectives on the use of Remote Patient Monitoring in Peritoneal Dialysis.
Article in Canadian journal of kidney health and disease, 2022. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 9 papers.
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.
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.
Who cites it
9 citing papers in PubMed, 20 citations in OpenAlex.
- Identifying and Comparing Intervention Cost Components in Remote Patient Monitoring: A Scoping Review.PharmacoEconomics · 2026Article
- Article
- Nurse-Assisted Remote Patient Monitoring for Self-Management Support to Patients With Long-Term Illness-A Qualitative Multimethod Study.Journal of advanced nursing · 2025Article
- Implementation and evaluation of a smartphone-based application for continuous ambulatory peritoneal dialysis (CAPD) patients: a prospective feasibility cohort study and collaborative effort of patients and the peritoneal dialysis team.Clinical kidney journal · 2025Article
- Hospital Staff Perspectives on the Drivers and Challenges in Implementing a Virtual Rehabilitation Ward: Qualitative Study.JMIR aging · 2024Article
- Functionality and Usability of mHealth Apps in Patients with Peritoneal Dialysis: A Systematic Review.Healthcare (Basel, Switzerland) · 2024Review
- Patient experience in automated peritoneal dialysis with telemedicine monitoring during the COVID-19 pandemic in Mexico: Qualitative study.Nursing open · 2023Article
- Effect of remote patient monitoring on healthcare use among patients with cancer: A systematic review.Digital healthReview
- Remote Patient Monitoring in Home Dialysis Patients: Enhancing Care for Home Hemodialysis and Peritoneal Dialysis.Seminars in dialysisReview
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
8 authors at 2 institutions in 1 country.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Background: Numerous factors influence patient recruitment to, and retention on, peritoneal dialysis (PD), but a major challenge is a perceived "inaccessibility" to treating clinicians. It has been suggested that remote patient monitoring (RPM) could be a means of improving such oversight and, thereby, uptake of PD. Objective: To describe patient and clinician perspectives toward RPM and the use of applications (Apps) suitable for mobiles, tablets, or computers to support the provision of PD care. Design: Qualitative design using semi-structured interviews. Setting: All patient participants perform PD treatment at home under the oversight of an urban PD unit in Sydney, Australia. Patient and clinician interviews were conducted within the PD unit. Participants: 14 participants (5 clinicians [2 nephrologists, 3 PD nurses] and 9 patients treated with PD). Methods: Semi-structured interviews were conducted using interview guides tailored for clinician and patient participants. Transcripts were coded and analyzed by a single researcher using thematic analysis. Results: Six themes were identified: perceived benefits of RPM implementation (offering convenience and efficiency, patient assurance through increased surveillance, more complete data and monitoring adherence), uncertainty regarding data governance (protection of personal data, data reliability), reduced patient engagement (transfer of responsibility leading to complacency), changing patient-clinician relationships (reduced patient-initiated communication, the need to maintain patient independence), increased patient and clinician burden (inadequate technological literacy, overmanagement leading to frequent treatment changes), and clinician preference influencing patient behavior. Limitations: The interviews were conducted in English only and with participants from a single urban dialysis unit, which may limit generalizability. Conclusions: For patients and clinicians, advantages from the use of RPM in PD may include increased patient confidence and assurance, improved treatment oversight, more complete data capture, and overcoming barriers to data documentation. Careful patient selection and patient and clinician education may help to optimize the benefits of RPM, maintain patient independence, and reduce the risks of patient disengagement. The use of an App may support RPM; however, participants expressed concerns about increasing the burden on some patients through the use of unfamiliar technology. Human Research Ethics Committee Approval Number: CH62/6/2019-028.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What OpenQuestion holds
Registered trials
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.