4.3 Article

A Qualitative Approach of Psychosocial Adaptation Process in Patients Undergoing Long-term Hemodialysis

期刊

ASIAN NURSING RESEARCH
卷 9, 期 1, 页码 35-41

出版社

ELSEVIER SCIENCE INC
DOI: 10.1016/j.anr.2014.10.007

关键词

hemodialysis; end-stage renal disease; psychosocial adaptation

类别

向作者/读者索取更多资源

Purpose: Professional hemodialysis (HD) nursing tends to be task-oriented and lack consideration of the client's viewpoint. This study aims to interpret the process of psychosocial adaptation to dealing with HD in people with end-stage renal disease (ESRD). Methods: A grounded theory guided this study. Theoretical sampling included 15 people receiving HD at the HD center of a hospital from July to November 2010. Participants received an information sheet in writing, a verbal invitation, and informed consent forms before interviews were conducted. A constant comparative data analysis was analyzed using open, axial and selective coding. The computer software ATLAS.ti assisted data management. Credibility, transferability, dependability, and confirmability ensured the rigor of study process. Results: This study identified adopting life with hemodialysis, which captures the process of the psychosocial adaptation in people with ESRD as one transformation. Four categories that evolved from adopting HD life are (a) slipping into, (b) restricted to a renal world, (c) losing self control, and (d) stuck in an endless process. Conclusions: The findings of this investigation indicate the multidimensional requirements of people receiving maintenance dialysis, with an emphasis on the deficiency in psychosocial and emotional care. The study's findings contribute to clinical practice by increasing the understanding of the experience of chronic HD treatment from the recipient's viewpoint. The better our understanding, the better the care provided will meet the needs of the people receiving HD. Copyright (C) 2015, Korean Society of Nursing Science. Published by Elsevier. All rights reserved.

作者

我是这篇论文的作者
点击您的名字以认领此论文并将其添加到您的个人资料中。

评论

主要评分

4.3
评分不足

次要评分

新颖性
-
重要性
-
科学严谨性
-
评价这篇论文

推荐

暂无数据
暂无数据