Impacts of the COVID-19 Pandemic on Chronic Kidney Disease Care: Perspectives of Health Care Providers
Notice bibliographique
Résumé
Background: The COVID-19 pandemic significantly disrupted health care delivery; however, limited research attention has addressed the impacts of the pandemic specifically on renal-based health care. Objective: The aim of the study was to understand the health and psychosocial impacts of the COVID-19 pandemic on care delivery as well as on health care providers (HCPs). Design: A qualitative Interpretive Description approach was used. Setting: Participants were recruited from kidney care units in Alberta and Ontario, Canada. Participants: 46 interdisciplinary HCPs providing kidney care during the pandemic participated in the study. Participants comprised pediatric (n=9) and adult (n=37) HCPs. Methods: Qualitative focus groups were facilitated. They were conducted using Zoom (Version 6.3.11). Results: Research results indicated substantial strain on patients and HCPs during the COVID-19 pandemic, including mental health difficulties. For HCPs, moral distress was experienced from witnessing negative impacts of the pandemic and care shifts on patients. HCPs were further deleteriously affected by staffing shortages, facility limitations due to care interruptions and resource gaps in health and community systems. Conversely, participants identified concurrent benefits from pandemic-related shifts such as the rapid transition to virtual care. While virtual care imposed challenges for physical assessment of patients, patient convenience and increased access to HCPs were noted. With training, support and experience, HCPs and patients reported an appreciation for communication offered by virtual care where appropriate. Supportive unit leaders and peer support from HCP colleagues were viewed to make this difficult experience of the pandemic more manageable. HCPs drew strength in being able to support their patients despite the difficulties of the pandemic. Limitations: Firsthand experiences of patients and families were not offered in this article, although their perspectives were elicited in another arm of this study. A more specific focus on pediatric versus adult systems of care, and the impacts of the pandemic on various disciplines, would add depth to understanding the unique impacts of the pandemic on various areas of care and across disciplines. Conclusions: Study results call for the advancement of clinical care and heightened consideration of HCP needs in a pandemic. Included recommendations are ensuring sufficient resources, prudent use of communication technology, and optimizing support to HCPs.
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 machine sur la base complète
Imitation des enseignantsNi prévalence calibrée, ni vérité terrain. Validation humaine à venir. Le volet Gemma est une étiquette directe du modèle pour chaque travail de la base, lue sur la notice réduite au titre. Le volet Codex est un classifieur appris des 10 348 étiquettes directes de Codex et calibré sur les taux pondérés de l'échantillon; les champs sans appui suffisant ne portent aucun appel Codex. Le mode candidate est l'union des deux volets; le consensus est leur intersection. Ces sorties portent le statut machine_predicted_unvalidated et ne sont pas des étiquettes humaines.
Scores du classifieur distillé par catégorie (deux têtes)
| Catégorie | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Métarecherche | 0,014 | 0,017 |
| Méta-épidémiologie (sens strict) | 0,000 | 0,000 |
| Méta-épidémiologie (sens large) | 0,000 | 0,001 |
| Bibliométrie | 0,001 | 0,001 |
| Études des sciences et des technologies | 0,011 | 0,008 |
| Communication savante | 0,005 | 0,004 |
| Science ouverte | 0,001 | 0,008 |
| Intégrité de la recherche | 0,003 | 0,005 |
| Charge utile insuffisante (le modèle a refusé de juger) | 0,005 | 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 source (Gemma direct ou Codex distillé), 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 ».