Voicing Individual Concerns for Engagement in Hemodialysis (VOICE-HD): A Mixed Method, Randomized Pilot Trial of Digital Health in Dialysis Care Delivery

Stephanie Thompson, Kara Schick-Makaroff, Aminu Bello, Marcello Tonelli, Natasha Wiebe, Robert Buzinski, Mark Courtney, Susan Szigety, Nikhil Shah, Clara Bohm, Stephanie Thompson, Kara Schick-Makaroff, Aminu Bello, Marcello Tonelli, Natasha Wiebe, Robert Buzinski, Mark Courtney, Susan Szigety, Nikhil Shah, Clara Bohm

Abstract

Background: People receiving in-center hemodialysis (HD) have prioritized the need for more individualized health information and better communication with nephrologists. The most common setting for patient-nephrologist interactions is during the HD treatment, which is a time pressured setting that lacks privacy.

Objective: To facilitate effective communication in the hemodialysis (HD) unit, we evaluated the usability of a web application (web app) from both the patient and physician perspective. The main aim of the web app was to support patients in prioritizing their dialysis concerns outside of the clinical HD encounter.

Design: Mixed method, parallel arm, multi-site, pilot randomized controlled trial.

Setting: Two outpatient Canadian HD centers.

Participants: Adult patients receiving in-center HD and their attending nephrologists.

Methods: Patients were randomized to either a web application or an active control (paper form) for logging concerns to be addressed at weekly encounters with the nephrologist over 8 weeks. Topics included: HD treatment, symptoms, modality, and medications. The primary outcome was usability, defined as effectiveness (engagement with the tool, frequency of submitted concerns, whether the concern was satisfactorily addressed) and satisfaction with the tool using a priori thresholds and explored in interviews with patients and nephrologists.

Results: 77 patients (30 women, median age 61, interquartile range [53,67], median 2 years [1,4] on dialysis) and 19 nephrologists (4 women, median age 46 [36,65]) were enrolled. Patient use of a digital device at baseline was low (20%). Engagement with the tool was 70% (web app) and 100% (paper) with a lower proportion of patients in the web app group submitting at least one concern over 8 weeks compared to the paper form group: 56.7% vs 87.9%. Weekly concerns were satisfactorily addressed in both groups and ≥70% of patients would continue to use the tools. For patients, both tools promoted preparation and participation in the encounter; however, only the web app facilitated greater privacy in relaying concerns. For most nephrologists, the tools were disruptive to their workflow and were perceived as unnecessary given existing processes and familiarity with patients. For future versions of the app, patients suggested more features to facilitate self-management and nephrologists suggested integration with health databases and multidisciplinary teams.

Limitations: Tertiary setting may limit generalizability.

Conclusions: Both tools promoted fundamental components of self-management; however, patients in the paper form group submitted concerns more often and this tool was easier to remember to use. Although modifications would likely enhance web app usability, successful future adoption is limited by physician acceptance.Trial registration ClinicalTrials.gov NCT03605875.

Keywords: communication; digital health; hemodialysis; patient-centered care; usability.

Conflict of interest statement

Declaration of Conflicting Interests: The author(s) declared no potential conflicts of interest with respect to the research, authorship, and/or publication of this article.

© The Author(s) 2021.

Figures

Figure 1.
Figure 1.
Web application content development.
Figure 2.
Figure 2.
Participant flow diagram.
Figure 3.
Figure 3.
Types of concerns by group.
Figure 4.
Figure 4.
Satisfaction with tool usability.

References

    1. O’Hare AM. Patient-centered care in renal medicine: five strategies to meet the challenge. Am J Kidney Dis. 2018;71:732-736. . Accessed July 7, 2021.
    1. Institute of Medicine. Crossing the Quality Chasm: A New Health System for the 21st Century. Washington, DC: National Academy Press; 2001.
    1. Kelley JM, Kraft-Todd G, Schapira L, Kossowsky J, Riess H. The influence of the patient-clinician relationship on healthcare outcomes: a systematic review and meta-analysis of randomized controlled trials. PLoS One. 2014;9:e94207. . Accessed July 7, 2021.
    1. Palmer SC, de Berardis G, Craig JC, et al.. Patient satisfaction with in-centre haemodialysis care: an international survey. BMJ Open. 2014;4:e005020. . Accessed July 7, 2021.
    1. Rossum K, Finlay J, McCormick M, et al.. A Mixed method investigation to determine priorities for improving information, interaction, and individualization of care among individuals on in-center hemodialysis: the triple I study. Can J Kidney Health Dis. 2020;7:2054358120953284.
    1. Plantinga LC, Fink NE, Jaar BG, et al.. Frequency of sit-down patient care rounds, attainment of clinical performance targets, hospitalization, and mortality in hemodialysis patients. J Am Soc Nephrol. 2004;15:3144-3153. . Accessed July 7, 2021.
    1. Murray E, Hekler EB, Professor A, et al.. Evaluating digital health interventions: key questions and approaches. Am J Prev Med. 2016;51:843-851. . Accessed July 7, 2021.
    1. Fischer SH, David D, Crotty BH, Dierks M, Safran C. Acceptance and use of health information technology by community-dwelling elders. Int J Med Inform. 2014;83:624-635. . Accessed July 7, 2021.
    1. Maramba I, Chatterjee A, Newman C. Methods of usability testing in the development of eHealth applications: a scoping review. Int J Med Inform. 2019;126:95-104. . Accessed July 7, 2021.
    1. Makoul G, Krupat E, Chang C-H. Measuring patient views of physician communication skills: development and testing of the Communication Assessment Tool. Patient Educ Couns. 2007;67:333-342. . Accessed July 7, 2021.
    1. Thorne SE. Interpretive Description. Morse J., Ed. Walnut Creek, CA: Left Coast Press; 2008.
    1. Lincoln Y, Guba E. Naturalistic Inquiry. London, England: Sage; 1985.
    1. Singh Ospina N, Phillips KA, Rodriguez-Gutierrez R, et al.. Eliciting the patient’s agenda- secondary analysis of recorded clinical encounters. J Gen Intern Med. 2019;34:36-40. . Accessed July 7, 2021.
    1. Lockwood MB, Dunn-Lopez K, Pauls H, Burke L, Shah SD, Saunders MA. If you build it, they may not come: modifiable barriers to patient portal use among pre- and post-kidney transplant patients. JAMIA Open. 2018;1:255-264. . Accessed July 7, 2021.
    1. Mackert M, Mabry-Flynn A, Champlin S, Donovan EE, Pounders K. Health literacy and health information technology adoption: the potential for a new digital divide. J Med Internet Res. 2016;18:e264. . Accessed July 7, 2021.
    1. Tong A, Winkelmayer WC, Wheeler DC, et al.. Nephrologists’ perspectives on defining and applying patient-centered outcomes in hemodialysis. Clin J Am Soc Nephrol. 2017;12:454-466. . Accessed July 7, 2021.
    1. Lewis RA, Benzies KM, MacRae J, Thomas C, Tonelli M. An exploratory study of person-centered care in a large urban hemodialysis program in Canada using a qualitative case-study methodology. Can J Kidney Heal Dis. 2019;6:205435811987153. . Accessed July 7, 2021.
    1. Schick-Makaroff K, Molzahn A. Brief communication: patient satisfaction with the use of tablet computers: a pilot study in two outpatient home dialysis clinics. Can J Kidney Heal Dis. 2014;1:22. . Accessed July 7, 2021.
    1. Krawczyk M, Sawatzky R. Relational use of an electronic quality of life and practice support system in hospital palliative consult care: a pilot study. Palliat Support Care. 2019;17:208-213. . Accessed July 7, 2021.
    1. Jimison H, Gorman P, Woods S, et al.. Barriers and drivers of health information technology use for the elderly, chronically ill and underserved. Evid Rep Technol Assess (Full Rep). 2008;175:1-1422.
    1. Aasen EM, Kvangarsnes M, Heggen K. Perceptions of patient participation amongst elderly patients with end-stage renal disease in a dialysis unit. Scand J Caring Sci. 2012;26. . Accessed July 7, 2021.
    1. Kinnersley P, Edwards A, Hood K, et al.. Interventions before consultations to help patients address their information needs by encouraging question asking: systematic review. BMJ; 2008;337. . Accessed July 7, 2021.

Source: PubMed

3
订阅