ArticleBMC nephrology2025
Misaligned perspectives and experiences: a qualitative study of older patients with suboptimal Dialysis initiation and their clinicians.
Article in BMC nephrology, 2025. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Not yet cited in PubMed.
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
0 citing papers in PubMed.
No citing paper in PubMed yet.
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
7 authors.
Funding
Abstract
backgroundA person-centred approach is a key component of comprehensive high-quality nephrology care. However, the unpredictable nature of an acute or unplanned initiation of chronic haemodialysis treatment poses a challenge for meeting this patient group in a person-centred manner. Yet, little is known about the person-centred practices of clinical encounters prior to and along these suboptimal dialysis initiation (SDI) pathways. This study aimed to explore the patient and clinician perspectives on how these encounters unfold among older adults aged ≥ 65 years, receiving SDI.
methodsThe study builds on an ethnographic approach encompassing participant observation of clinical encounters during eight workdays and narrative interviews with 14 SDI patients aged ≥ 65 in combination with two focus group discussions with seven renal nurses and five nephrologists. This study was conducted at a specialized nephrology department at a tertiary hospital in the Capital Region of Denmark.
resultsThe results shed light on the existence and impact of 'predefined' encounters, encompassing various aspects such as the agenda of conversations during encounters, and the logical sequencing of nephrology care pathways. In the two key themes 'Predefined' agendas: lost in translation, and The optimal CKD pathway: what happens when?, we illustrate how the acute and unpredictable nature of SDIs challenge the 'predefined' encounter format. Thereby, the clinical encounters become misaligned with the needs and preferences of each patient, no longer responding in a person-centred manner.
conclusionClinicians pressed for time face challenges in responding to diverse patient needs in clinical SDI encounters. Existing 'predefined' agendas and logical sequencing have evolved to support clinicians in reaching clinical endpoints but fall short when SDI patients' particular and dynamic perspectives does not fit the standard. To truly facilitate person-centred care, the flexibility of encounters and the overall nephrology care pathways should be improved to ensure that encounters are responsive to and reflect individual patient preferences, contexts, and needs. CLINICAL TRIAL REGISTER NUMBER DECLARATION: Not applicable.
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.