Patient Perspectives of Center-Specific Reporting in Kidney Failure Care: An Australian Qualitative Study
Introduction: Public reporting of quality of care indicators in healthcare is intended to inform consumer decision-making; however, people may be unaware that such information exists, or it may not capture their priorities. The aim of this study was to understand the views of people with kidney dise...
Saved in:
| Main Authors: | , , , , , , , , |
|---|---|
| Format: | Article |
| Language: | English |
| Published: |
Elsevier
2024-04-01
|
| Series: | Kidney International Reports |
| Subjects: | |
| Online Access: | http://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S2468024924000019 |
| Tags: |
Add Tag
No Tags, Be the first to tag this record!
|
| Summary: | Introduction: Public reporting of quality of care indicators in healthcare is intended to inform consumer decision-making; however, people may be unaware that such information exists, or it may not capture their priorities. The aim of this study was to understand the views of people with kidney disease about public reporting of dialysis and transplant center outcomes. Methods: This qualitative study involved 27 patients with lived experience of kidney disease in Australia who participated in 11 online focus groups between August and December 2022. Transcripts were analyzed thematically. Results: Patients from all Australian states and territories participated, with 22 (81%) having a functioning kidney transplant and 22 (81%) having current or previous experience of dialysis. Five themes were identified as follows: (i) surrendering to the health system, (ii) the complexity of quality, (iii) benefits for patient care and experience, (iv) concerned about risks and unintended consequences, and (v) optimizing the impact of data. Conclusion: Patients desire choice among kidney services but perceive this as rarely possible in the Australian context. Health professionals are trusted to make decisions about appropriate centers. Public reporting of center outcomes may induce fear and a loss of balanced perspective; however, it was supported by all participants and represents an opportunity for self-advocacy and informed decision-making. Strategies to mitigate potential risks include availability of trusted clinicians and community members to aid in data interpretation, providing context about centers and patients, and framing statistics to promote positivity and hope. |
|---|---|
| ISSN: | 2468-0249 |