Abstract
Rationale & Objective While the use of telemedicine has increased dramatically across disciplines, patient perspectives on telemedicine related to chronic kidney disease are not well understood. We systematically reviewed qualitative studies on patients with chronic kidney disease to better understand these patients’ perspectives related to telemedicine.
Study Design Qualitative Meta-Analysis
Setting & Study Populations Pre-dialysis chronic kidney disease and kidney transplant patients that used telemedicine.
Selection Criteria for Studies English language studies published in the year 2000 and beyond that investigated patient perspectives in a qualitative manner. Works that were not qualitative or did not focus on provider-patient interactive modes of telemedicine were excluded.
Data Extraction 375 papers were pulled from PubMed, Embase, and Academic Science Premier. After filtering, 8 final papers were selected. These papers were critically appraised for quality and were used in the final analysis.
Analytical Approach We developed a codebook to systematically review each of the selected papers through qualitative meta-analysis.
Results Four primary themes were identified (autonomy, logistics, privacy/confidentiality, and trust) with additional subthemes and further subdivisions to signify positive versus negative experiences. The majority of subthemes and subdivisions (n=9) identified were positively attributed by patients compared to negative attributes (n=6). The subtheme most commonly found was avoiding travel to the hospital, which was identified in all 8 papers. There was substantial variability in the number of papers demonstrating the other subthemes and subdivisions.
Limitations Lack of provider perspectives, non-English studies, and studies published before the year 2000. Papers published after the start of data extraction were also not included.
Conclusions Telemedicine should continue to be offered to patients with kidney disease and kidney transplant patients to facilitate access. Additional research should focus on ways to decrease negative factors experienced by some patients such as difficulty with using the technology.
Competing Interest Statement
The authors have declared no competing interest.
Funding Statement
Christopher D. Manko was awarded a stipend for work of this project from Geisinger Commonwealth School of Medicine.
Author Declarations
I confirm all relevant ethical guidelines have been followed, and any necessary IRB and/or ethics committee approvals have been obtained.
Yes
The details of the IRB/oversight body that provided approval or exemption for the research described are given below:
All patient data utilized in this study is publicly available and utilized from publications in peer-reviewed journals. The patient data in these publications is anonymized and citations for each paper analyzed is cited in the current manuscript.
I confirm that all necessary patient/participant consent has been obtained and the appropriate institutional forms have been archived, and that any patient/participant/sample identifiers included were not known to anyone (e.g., hospital staff, patients or participants themselves) outside the research group so cannot be used to identify individuals.
Yes
I understand that all clinical trials and any other prospective interventional studies must be registered with an ICMJE-approved registry, such as ClinicalTrials.gov. I confirm that any such study reported in the manuscript has been registered and the trial registration ID is provided (note: if posting a prospective study registered retrospectively, please provide a statement in the trial ID field explaining why the study was not registered in advance).
Yes
I have followed all appropriate research reporting guidelines, such as any relevant EQUATOR Network research reporting checklist(s) and other pertinent material, if applicable.
Yes
Data Availability
All data produced in the present study are available upon reasonable request to the authors.
