Cited by 96Health Policy Implementation ScienceChronic Kidney Disease and DiabetesPrimary Care and Health Outcomes

Understanding the management of early-stage chronic kidney disease in primary care: a qualitative study

Open access
Blakeman, Tom, Protheroe, Joanne, Chew-Graham, Carolyn, Rogers, Anne, Kennedy, Anne·2012·British Journal of General Practice

Abstract

BACKGROUND: Primary care is recognised to have an important role in the delivery of care for people with chronic kidney disease (CKD). However, there is evidence that CKD management is currently suboptimal, with a range of practitioner concerns about its management. AIM: To explore processes underpinning the implementation of CKD management in primary care. DESIGN AND SETTING: Qualitative study in general practices participating in a chronic kidney disease collaborative undertaken as part of the National Institute for Health Research (NIHR) Collaboration for Leadership in Applied Health Research and Care (CLAHRC) for Greater Manchester. METHOD: Semi-structured interviews were conducted with GPs and practice nurses (n = 21). Normalisation Process Theory provided a framework for generation and analysis of the data. RESULTS: A predominant theme was anxiety about the disclosure of early-stage CKD with patients. The tensions experienced related to identifying and discussing CKD in older people and patients with stage 3A, embedding early-stage CKD within vascular care, and the distribution of work within the practice team. Participants provided accounts of work undertaken to resolve the difficulties encountered, with efforts having tended to focus on reassuring patients. Analysis also highlighted how anxiety surrounding disclosure influenced, and was shaped by, the organisation of care for people with CKD and associated long-term conditions. CONCLUSION: Offering reassurance alone may be of limited benefit, and current management of early-stage CKD in primary care may miss opportunities to address susceptibility to kidney injury, improve self-management of vascular conditions, and improve the management of multimorbidity.

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 · 10.3399/bjgp12x636056

Cites

27 of 27 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?

  • In the CKD case, some GPs and practice nurses viewed declining renal function as a natural part of ageing and believed that disclosing a diagnosis of CKD could cause unnecessary anxiety in patients, potentially missing opportunities to improve self-management and overall management of cardiovascular disease and to address increased susceptibility to acute kidney injury.

    “This was particularly the case for older patients as some General Practitioners (GPs) and practice nurses viewed declining renal function as a natural part of ageing and believed that disclosing a diagnosis of CKD could cause unnecessary anxiety in patients. By adopting this approach, opportunities to improve self-management and overall management of cardiovascular disease and to address the issue”

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

1 of the 28 references couldn’t be matched to a known paper.

Research works printed but not linked: 1

  1. The Academy of Medical Sciences. Research in general practice: bringing innovation into patient care -Workshop report. London: The Academy of Medical Sciences, 2009.

Cited by

Sorted by citations

Authors
Blakeman, T., Protheroe, J., Chew-Graham, C., Rogers, A., & Kennedy, A.
Affiliations
University of Manchester (GB)
Venue
British Journal of General Practice
Published
2012-04
Volume
62
Issue
597
Pages
e233-e242
ISSN
  • 0960-1643 (ISSN-L)
  • 1478-5242
OpenAlex
W2122850558
Cited by
96
References
28
Citations by year
2026: 1 · 2025: 4 · 2024: 7 · 2023: 3 · 2022: 6 · 2021: 3 · 2020: 14 · 2019: 6 · 2018: 13 · 2017: 3 · 2016: 10 · 2015: 9 · 2014: 7 · 2013: 9 · 2012: 1
FWCI
14.77
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
Locations
  • British Journal of General Practice (publishedVersion)
  • Europe PMC (PubMed Central) (publishedVersion)
  • PubMed Central (publishedVersion)
  • PubMed (publishedVersion)
  • Research Explorer (The University of Manchester) (publishedVersion)
  • ePrints Soton (University of Southampton) (acceptedVersion)
  • Research Explorer (The University of Manchester) (submittedVersion)
Funders
National Institute for Health and Care Research (CL-2009-06-004)
Topics
  • Health Sciences › Health Professions › General Health Professions › Health Policy Implementation Science
  • Health Sciences › Medicine › Nephrology › Chronic Kidney Disease and Diabetes
  • Health Sciences › Health Professions › General Health Professions › Primary Care and Health Outcomes
Keywords
early chronic kidney disease, CKD management, primary care, general practitioners, practice nurses, patient disclosure, patient reassurance, older adults, vascular care, multimorbidity, work distribution, chronic disease, implementation of care
MeSH terms
Adult, Anxiety, Attitude of Health Personnel, Delivery of Health Care, England, Female, Humans, Male, Middle Aged, Nurse Practitioners, Patient Education as Topic, Physician-Patient Relations, Professional Practice, Disclosure, Renal Insufficiency, Chronic, General Practice

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