IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/gam/jijerp/v18y2021i19p10494-d650704.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

Motivation, Barriers, and Suggestions for Intradialytic Exercise—A Qualitative Study among Patients and Nurses

Author

Listed:
  • Pernille Maria Wodskou

    (Department of Nursing and Nutrition, Faculty of Health, University College Copenhagen, 2200 Copenhagen N, Denmark)

  • Sasha Maria Reinhardt

    (Department of Nursing and Nutrition, Faculty of Health, University College Copenhagen, 2200 Copenhagen N, Denmark)

  • Marie Borring Andersen

    (Department of Nursing and Nutrition, Faculty of Health, University College Copenhagen, 2200 Copenhagen N, Denmark
    National Institute of Public Health, University of Southern Denmark, 1455 Copenhagen K, Denmark)

  • Stig Molsted

    (Department of Clinical Research, Nordsjællands Hospital, 3400 Hillerød, Denmark)

  • Lone Helle Schou

    (Department of Nursing and Nutrition, Faculty of Health, University College Copenhagen, 2200 Copenhagen N, Denmark)

Abstract

Background : Intradialytic exercise is an effective intervention to reduce morbidity and mortality and increase quality of life among patients with chronic kidney disease undergoing dialysis. However, implementing and sustaining it in clinical practice has proved challenging. To identify how to best design an effective and sustainable intervention in clinical practice, we aimed to explore hemodialysis patients’ and nurses’ attitudes towards intradialytic exercise, including their motivation, anticipated barriers, and suggestions for the design of a proposed exercise program. Methods : Data were collected through qualitative semistructured interviews with patients and focus group interviews with nurses and analyzed inductively with content analysis. Results : Overall, patients’ and nurses’ attitudes towards intradialytic exercise were positive. Patients were motivated by their expectations about perceived benefits, such as improved quality of life and reduced musculoskeletal pain. Their main concern was triggering dialysis machine alarms and disturbing nurses. Nurses were more skeptical of intradialytic exercise and concerned about patient safety. Patients and nurses had several ideas on how to design a safe and motivating intradialytic exercise intervention. Conclusion : The analysis of patients’ and nurses’ experiences and attitudes generated recommendations for an intradialytic exercise program. Recommendations include individually tailored programs that are safe and that patients can do independently, continuous collaboration between patients, nurses, physicians, and physiotherapists, and educating nurses about the benefits and safety of intradialytic exercise.

Suggested Citation

  • Pernille Maria Wodskou & Sasha Maria Reinhardt & Marie Borring Andersen & Stig Molsted & Lone Helle Schou, 2021. "Motivation, Barriers, and Suggestions for Intradialytic Exercise—A Qualitative Study among Patients and Nurses," IJERPH, MDPI, vol. 18(19), pages 1-12, October.
    • Handle: RePEc:gam:jijerp:v:18:y:2021:i:19:p:10494-:d:650704
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: https://www.mdpi.com/1660-4601/18/19/10494/pdf
    Download Restriction: no
    File URL: https://www.mdpi.com/1660-4601/18/19/10494/
    Download Restriction: no
    ---><---

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. Yu‐Chu Chung & Mei‐Ling Yeh & Yueh‐Min Liu, 2017. "Effects of intradialytic exercise on the physical function, depression and quality of life for haemodialysis patients: a systematic review and meta‐analysis of randomised controlled trials," Journal of Clinical Nursing, John Wiley & Sons, vol. 26(13-14), pages 1801-1813, July.
    2. Satu Elo & Maria Kääriäinen & Outi Kanste & Tarja Pölkki & Kati Utriainen & Helvi Kyngäs, 2014. "Qualitative Content Analysis," SAGE Open, , vol. 4(1), pages 21582440145, February.
    Full references (including those not matched with items on IDEAS)

    Citations

    Citations are extracted by the CitEc Project, subscribe to its RSS feed for this item.
    as


    Cited by:

    1. Bartłomiej Kabaja & Magdalena Wojnarowska & Marek Ćwiklicki & Stefania Claudia Buffagni & Erica Varese, 2023. "Does Environmental Labelling Still Matter? Generation Z’s Purchasing Decisions," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 15(18), pages 1-19, September.

    Most related items

    These are the items that most often cite the same works as this one and are cited by the same works as this one.
    1. Xiaomei Wang & Andrew South & Brett Hashimoto & Clifton Farnsworth, 2024. "Six Connotations of Sustainability in Civil and Construction Engineering: A Corpus Linguistics Study," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 16(15), pages 1-18, July.
    2. Harpreet Sohal & Lisa Huddlestone & Elena Ratschen, 2016. "Preparing for Completely Smoke-Free Mental Health Settings: Findings on Patient Smoking, Resources Spent Facilitating Smoking Breaks, and the Role of Smoking in Reported Incidents from a Large Mental ," IJERPH, MDPI, vol. 13(3), pages 1-12, February.
    3. Leah M. Haverhals, 2022. "How Social Determinants of Health of Individuals Living or Working in U.S. Department of Veterans Affairs Home-Based Long-Term Care Programs in Puerto Rico Influenced Recovery after Hurricane Maria," IJERPH, MDPI, vol. 19(20), pages 1-19, October.
    4. David Mhlanga, 2021. "Artificial Intelligence in the Industry 4.0, and Its Impact on Poverty, Innovation, Infrastructure Development, and the Sustainable Development Goals: Lessons from Emerging Economies?," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 13(11), pages 1-16, May.
    5. Rebecca Balasa & Julie Chartrand & Katherine Moreau & Kelley Tousignant & Kaylee Eady, 2021. "Patients’ and parents’ perspectives of and experiences with assessing nursing students’ paediatric clinical practice," Journal of Clinical Nursing, John Wiley & Sons, vol. 30(1-2), pages 217-228, January.
    6. Rafaela Garbelini Anuardo & Maximilian Espuny & Ana Carolina Ferreira Costa & Ana Lígia Gil Espuny & Yiğit Kazançoğlu & Jayakrishna Kandsamy & Otávio José de Oliveira, 2023. "Transforming E-Waste into Opportunities: Driving Organizational Actions to Achieve Sustainable Development Goals," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 15(19), pages 1-21, September.
    7. Chia-Huei Lin & Yu-Juei Hsu & Pi-Hsiu Hsu & Yi-Ling Lee & Chueh-Ho Lin & Meei-Shyuan Lee & Shang-Lin Chiang, 2021. "Effects of Intradialytic Exercise on Dialytic Parameters, Health-Related Quality of Life, and Depression Status in Hemodialysis Patients: A Randomized Controlled Trial," IJERPH, MDPI, vol. 18(17), pages 1-16, August.
    8. Ernesto Antonini & Jacopo Gaspari & Cristina Visconti, 2021. "Collaborative Learning Experiences in a Changing Environment: Innovative Educational Approaches in Architecture," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 13(16), pages 1-26, August.
    9. Pajaree Ackaradejruangsri & Atthaphon Mumi & Sirirat Rattanapituk & Pijak Pakhunwanich, 2023. "Exploring the Determinants of Young Inclusive Leadership in Thailand: Research Taxonomy and Theoretical Framework," Journal of the Knowledge Economy, Springer;Portland International Center for Management of Engineering and Technology (PICMET), vol. 14(4), pages 3696-3723, December.
    10. Maribel Blasco, 2022. "“We’re Just Geeks”: Disciplinary Identifications Among Business Students and Their Implications for Personal Responsibility," Journal of Business Ethics, Springer, vol. 178(1), pages 279-302, June.
    11. Zakrzewska-Bielawska, Agnieszka & Czakon, Wojciech & Kraus, Sascha, 2023. "Relational orientation in B2B strategies: Measurement scale development and validation," Journal of Business Research, Elsevier, vol. 160(C).
    12. Moritz Böhmecke‐Schwafert & Marie Wehinger & Robin Teigland, 2022. "Blockchain for the circular economy: Theorizing blockchain's role in the transition to a circular economy through an empirical investigation," Business Strategy and the Environment, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 31(8), pages 3786-3801, December.
    13. Perello-Marin, M Rosario & Rodríguez-Rodríguez, Raúl & Alfaro-Saiz, Juan-Jose, 2022. "Analysing GRI reports for the disclosure of SDG contribution in European car manufacturers," Technological Forecasting and Social Change, Elsevier, vol. 181(C).

    Corrections

    All material on this site has been provided by the respective publishers and authors. You can help correct errors and omissions. When requesting a correction, please mention this item's handle: RePEc:gam:jijerp:v:18:y:2021:i:19:p:10494-:d:650704. See general information about how to correct material in RePEc.

    If you have authored this item and are not yet registered with RePEc, we encourage you to do it here. This allows to link your profile to this item. It also allows you to accept potential citations to this item that we are uncertain about.

    If CitEc recognized a bibliographic reference but did not link an item in RePEc to it, you can help with this form .

    If you know of missing items citing this one, you can help us creating those links by adding the relevant references in the same way as above, for each refering item. If you are a registered author of this item, you may also want to check the "citations" tab in your RePEc Author Service profile, as there may be some citations waiting for confirmation.

    For technical questions regarding this item, or to correct its authors, title, abstract, bibliographic or download information, contact: MDPI Indexing Manager (email available below). General contact details of provider: https://www.mdpi.com .

    Please note that corrections may take a couple of weeks to filter through the various RePEc services.

    IDEAS is a RePEc service. RePEc uses bibliographic data supplied by the respective publishers.