The home hemodialysis patient experience: A qualitative assessment of modality use and discontinuation
Bibliographic record
Abstract
INTRODUCTION: Home hemodialysis (HHD) is an under-utilized renal replacement modality in the United States in part because of high rates of discontinuation and transfer to in-center hemodialysis. Understanding, from the perspective of patients, facilitators, and barriers to sustained use of HHD is important for increasing successful use of this modality. METHODS: We conducted 25 semistructured interviews with 15 current and 10 former adult patients treated with home hemodialysis (23 short daily HHD and 2 nocturnal HHD). Interview transcripts were audiotaped, transcribed verbatim, and thematically analyzed. FINDINGS: Five themes related to continuation or discontinuation of HHD emerged: (1) degree of independence (increased flexibility, burden of therapy), (2) availability of support (emotional and physical support and caregiver burden), (3) technical aspects (familiarity with machine), (4) home environment (ability to organize supplies, space in home), and (5) attitude and expectations (positive or negative outlook about performing HHD). For each theme, positive aspects facilitated continuation of HHD and negative aspects contributed to discontinuation of HHD. DISCUSSION: HHD can be burdensome to patients and family members, and some discontinuations may be preventable. Helping patients with scheduling and organization, improving communication about expectations and trouble-shooting, supporting patients as well as family members, adapting the dialysis prescription to the patient's lifestyle when possible, and providing respite when needed may make HHD more sustainable for patients.
Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.
How this classification was reachedexpand
Full frame machine prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. The Gemma side is a direct model label for every work in the frame, read from the title-only record. The Codex side is a classifier learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and calibrated to design-weighted sample rates; fields without enough sample support carry no Codex call. Candidate is the union of the two sides; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels.
Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.009 | 0.015 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.004 | 0.004 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.003 | 0.002 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.005 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.002 | 0.000 |
Machine scores (provisional)
The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.
Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.
How this classification was reached, model by model and score by score, is at the end of the page under "How this classification was reached".