Cited by 5Telemedicine and Telehealth ImplementationDialysis and Renal Disease ManagementMobile Health and mHealth Applications

Improving safety and efficiency in care: multi-stakeholders’ perceptions associated with a peritoneal dialysis virtual care solution

Open access
Jeffs, Lianne, Jamieson, Trevor, Saragosa, Marianne, Mukerji, Geetha, Jain, Arsh K, Man, Rachel, Desveaux, Laura, Shaw, James +6 more·2018·Patient Preference and Adherence

Abstract

BACKGROUND: Although there is a growing body of literature on the outcomes and impacts of remote home management with peritoneal dialysis (PD) patients, less is understood how this virtual care solution impacts the quality and efficiency of the healthcare system care. In this context, a study was undertaken to understand the perceptions of patients and their caregivers, healthcare providers, health system decision makers, and vendors associated with a remote monitoring and tracking solution aimed at enhancing the outcomes and experiences of chronic kidney disease (CKD) patients receiving PD at home. METHODS: A qualitative design using semi-structured interviews with 25 stakeholders was used in this study. Narrative data were analyzed by a thematic analysis approach. RESULTS: The following two themes emerged from the data: (1) leveraging data to monitor and intervene to keep patients safe and (2) increasing efficiencies and having control over supplies. DISCUSSION: Our study findings elucidated the ability of patients (and in some cases, caregivers) to monitor and trend their data and order and track directly on-line their dialysis supplies were key to their active participation in managing their CKD and keeping them safe at home. Their active participation and functionality of the virtual care solution also led to enhanced efficiencies (eg, process faster, easier, convenient, time savings) for both patients and healthcare providers. CONCLUSION: The virtual care solution showed promising signs of a patient-centric approach and may serve as a blueprint for other virtual care solutions for chronic disease management.

The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.

Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.

A few free checks a day · papers already verified open instantly · results are public

Integrity signals

Registry

Crossref · 10.2147/ppa.s181604

Cites

33 of 33 references verified0 citation errors · 0 not checkable

Statistics

Claims the paper makes

The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.

Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.

A few free checks a day · papers already verified open instantly · results are public

Claims other papers make about this one

Each is checked against this paper’s own text: does it say what the citing paper says it does?

Self-check

Percentages, sums and reported differences re-computed from the paper’s own numbers.

The self-check needs the paper’s full text.

Cites

Flagged first, then by citations

Research works printed but not linked: 1

  1. [8]Liddy C Rowan MS Afkham A Maranger J Keely E Building access to specialist care through e-consultation Open Med 2013 7 1 e1 e8 23687533 PMC3654501

Cited by

Sorted by citations

Authors
Jeffs, L., Jamieson, T., Saragosa, M., Mukerji, G., Jain, A. K., Man, R., Desveaux, L., Shaw, J., Agarwal, P., Hensel, J. M., Maione, M., Nguyen, M., Onabajo, N., & Bhatia, R. S.
Affiliations
  • St. Michael's Hospital (CA)
  • Women's College Hospital (CA)
  • University of Toronto (CA)
  • London Health Sciences Centre (CA)
  • University Health Network (CA)
Corresponding author
Jeffs, Lianne
Venue
Patient Preference and Adherence
Published
2018-12
Volume
Volume 12
Pages
2623-2629
ISSN
1177-889X (ISSN-L)
OpenAlex
W2904107717
Cited by
5
References
33
Citations by year
2025: 2 · 2023: 2 · 2020: 1
FWCI
0.24
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
Locations
  • Patient Preference and Adherence (publishedVersion, cc-by-nc)
  • Europe PMC (PubMed Central) (publishedVersion, cc-by-nc)
  • PubMed Central (publishedVersion, cc-by-nc)
  • PubMed (publishedVersion)
Topics
  • Health Sciences › Medicine › Public Health, Environmental and Occupational Health › Telemedicine and Telehealth Implementation
  • Health Sciences › Medicine › Nephrology › Dialysis and Renal Disease Management
  • Health Sciences › Health Professions › General Health Professions › Mobile Health and mHealth Applications
Keywords
peritoneal dialysis, virtual care, remote monitoring, chronic kidney disease, home dialysis, patient safety, health care efficiency, patient engagement, caregiver involvement, stakeholder perspectives, patient-centered care, chronic disease management

About these checks

Registry, retraction, Cites and statistics results are computed, not judged, with one exception: a printed reference that no index lists is read once by a model before it counts as a citation error. Claims are extracted by a model and kept only when their quote appears verbatim in the text; each cited source is then checked, with a model’s help, for whether it says what the claim relies on. Those verdicts can be wrong — read the claim’s quote and the cited source before relying on one.

Statistics and arithmetic are recomputed, not judged.

Confidence bands are shown only for fields calibrated on our annotated test set. None is calibrated yet, so no band is shown.

What counts as a claim ›How we measure confidence ›How we check this ›

Are you an author, or do you see a problem with this page? Request a review