Polypharmacy and Quality of Life Among Dialysis Patients: A Qualitative Study
Notice bibliographique
Résumé
Rationale & Objective: Almost all patients who receive dialysis experience polypharmacy, but little is known about their experiences with medication or perceptions toward it. In this qualitative study, we aimed to gain insight into dialysis patients' experiences with polypharmacy, the ways they integrate their medication into their daily lives, and the ways it affects their quality of life. Study Design: Qualitative study using semistructured interviews. Setting & Participants: Patients who received dialysis from 2 Dutch university hospitals. Analytical Approach: Interviews were transcribed verbatim and analyzed independently by 2 researchers through thematic content analysis. Results: Overall, 28 individuals were interviewed (29% women, mean age 63 ± 16 years, median dialysis vintage 25.5 [interquartile range, 15-48] months, mean daily number of medications 10 ± 3). Important themes were as follows: (1) their own definition of what constitutes "medication," (2) their perception of medication, (3) medication routines and their impact on daily (quality of) life, and (4) interactions with health care professionals and others regarding medication. Participants generally perceived medication as burdensome but less so than dialysis. Medication was accepted as an essential precondition for their health, although participants did not always notice these health benefits directly. Medication routines and other coping mechanisms helped participants reduce the perceived negative effects of medication. In fact, medication increased freedom for some participants. Participants generally had constructive relationships with their physicians when discussing their medication. Limitations: Results are context dependent and might therefore not apply directly to other contexts. Conclusions: Polypharmacy negatively affected dialysis patients' quality of life, but these effects were overshadowed by the burden of dialysis. The patients' realization that medication is important to their health and effective coping strategies mitigated the negative impact of polypharmacy on their quality of life. Physicians and patients should work together continuously to evaluate the impact of treatments on health and other aspects of patients' daily lives. Plain-Language Summary: People receiving dialysis treatment are prescribed a large number of medications (polypharmacy). Polypharmacy is associated with a number of issues, including a lower health-related quality of life. In this study we interviewed patients who received dialysis treatment to understand how they experience polypharmacy in the context of their daily lives. Participants generally perceived medication as burdensome but less so than dialysis and accepted medication as an essential precondition for their health. Medication routines and other coping mechanisms helped participants mitigate the perceived negative effects of medication. In fact, medication led to increased freedom for some participants. Participants had generally constructive relationships with their physicians when discussing their medication but felt that physicians sometimes do not understand them.
Récupéré en direct depuis OpenAlex et désinversé. Les résumés ne sont pas conservés dans cette base de données : les index inversés représentent 8,6 Go des 9,3 Go de texte de la base, et le serveur dispose de 13 Go libres.
Comment cette classification a été obtenuedéplier
Prédiction distillée sur la base complète
Imitation des enseignantsNi prévalence calibrée, ni vérité terrain. Validation humaine à venir. Apprise à partir de 10 348 étiquettes directes de Codex et de 10 348 étiquettes directes de Gemma. Le mode candidate est l'union des têtes enseignantes seuillées; le consensus est leur intersection. Ces sorties portent le statut machine_predicted_unvalidated et ne sont ni des étiquettes humaines ni des étiquettes directes de modèles de pointe.
Scores Codex et Gemma par catégorie
| Catégorie | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Métarecherche | 0,002 | 0,004 |
| Méta-épidémiologie (sens strict) | 0,000 | 0,000 |
| Méta-épidémiologie (sens large) | 0,001 | 0,000 |
| Bibliométrie | 0,000 | 0,001 |
| Études des sciences et des technologies | 0,000 | 0,000 |
| Communication savante | 0,000 | 0,000 |
| Science ouverte | 0,000 | 0,000 |
| Intégrité de la recherche | 0,000 | 0,000 |
| Charge utile insuffisante (le modèle a refusé de juger) | 0,000 | 0,000 |
Scores machine (provisoires)
Les deux têtes enseignantes du modèle étudiant, lues sur ce travail. Un score ordonne la base pour la relecture; il n'affirme jamais une catégorie, et le statut de validation accompagne chaque rangée tel quel.
Scores de référence d'un modèle non mature (critères de maturité non atteints, 7 itérations). Un score ordonne; il n'affirme jamais une catégorie.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · tel quel depuis la passe de notation : score_only signifie que le nombre peut ordonner les travaux, et qu'aucune étiquette de catégorie n'en découleClassification
machine, non validéePrédiction automatique; un appel candidat d’une seule tête enseignante, pas un consensus.
Le détail, modèle par modèle et score par score, se trouve en fin de page sous « Comment cette classification a été obtenue ».