Targeted Education ApproaCH to improve Peritoneal Dialysis Outcomes (TEACH-PD): A feasibility study

Abstract

Background:

There is substantial variation in peritonitis rates across peritoneal dialysis (PD) units globally. This may, in part, be related to the wide variability in the content and delivery of training for PD nurse trainers and patients.

Aim:

The aim of this study was to test the feasibility of implementing the Targeted Education ApproaCH to improve Peritoneal Dialysis Outcomes (TEACH-PD) curriculum in real clinical practice settings.

Methods:

This study used mixed methods including questionnaires and semi-structured interviews (pretraining and post-training) with nurse trainers and patients to test the acceptability and usability of the PD training modules implemented in two PD units over 6 months. Quantitative data from the questionnaires were analysed descriptively. Interviews were analysed using thematic analysis.

Results:

Ten PD trainers and 14 incident PD patients were included. Mean training duration to complete the modules were 10.9 h (range 6–17) and 24.9 h (range 15–35), for PD trainers and patients, respectively. None of the PD patients experienced PD-related complications at 30 days follow-up. Three (21%) patients were transferred to haemodialysis due to non-PD–related complications. Ten trainers and 14 PD patients participated in the interviews. Four themes were identified including use of adult learning principles (trainers), comprehension of online modules (trainers), time to complete the modules (trainers) and patient usability of the manuals (patient).

Conclusion:

This TEACH-PD study has demonstrated feasibility of implementation in a real clinical setting. The outcomes of this study have informed refinement of the TEACH-PD modules prior to rigorous evaluation of its efficacy and cost-effectiveness in a large-scale study.

Keywords

Adult learning principle competency assessment peritoneal dialysis qualitative training

Get full access to this article

View all access options for this article.

References

Chow

Johnson

, et al. Changes in the worldwide epidemiology of peritoneal dialysis. Nat Rev Nephrol 2017; 13(2): 90–103.

Bello

Tonelli

Okpechi

, et al. Assessment of global kidney health care status. JAMA 2017; 317(18): 1864–1881.

Agar

Hawley

George

, et al.

Home haemodialysis in Australia – is the wheel turning full circle?

Med J Aust 2010; 192(7): 403–406.

Pipkin

Eggers

Larive

, et al. Recruitment and training for home hemodialysis: experience and lessons from the nocturnal dialysis trial. Clin J Am Soc Nephro 2010; 5(9): 1614–1620.

Cass

Chadban

Gallagher

, et al. The economic impact of end-stage kidney disease in Australia: Projections to 2020. Melbourne: Kidney Health Australia, 2010.

MacGregor

Agar

Blagg

. Home haemodialysis – international trends and variation. Nephrol Dial Transpl 2006; 21(7): 1934–1945.

ANZDATA Registry. 20th Report, chapter 7: method and location of dialysis. Adelaide, Australia and New Zealand Dialysis and Transplant Registry, 1997.

McDonald

Hurst

(eds) 34th Annual report – Australia & New Zealand dialysis and transplant registry. Adelaide, 2011.

ANZDATA Registry. 39th Report, Chapter 5: Peritoneal Dialysis. Adelaide: Australian and New Zealand Dialysis and Transplant Registry, 2017.

10.

Fortnum

Mathew

Johnson

. A model for home dialysis. Australia. https://kidney.org.au/cms_uploads/docs/a-model-for-home-dialysis-2012-kha-web.pdf (2012, accessed 2 February 2019).

11.

ANZDATA Registry. 39th Report, chapter 2: prevalence of end stage kidney disease. Adelaide: Australia and New Zealand Dialysis and Transplant Registry, 2017.

12.

Jose

Johnson

Mudge

, et al. Peritoneal dialysis practice in Australia and New Zealand: a call to action. Nephrology (Carlton) 2011; 16(1): 19–29.

13.

ANZDATA Registry. 39th Report, Chapter 3: Mortality in End Stage Kidney Disease. Adelaide: Australia and New Zealand Dialysis and Transplant Registry, 2017.

14.

Boudville

Kemp

Clayton

, et al. Recent peritonitis associates with mortality among patients treated with peritoneal dialysis. J Am Soc Nephrol 2012; 23(8): 1398–1405.

15.

Ghali

Bannister

Brown

, et al. Microbiology and outcomes of peritonitis in Australian peritoneal dialysis patients. Perit Dial Int 2011; 31(6): 651–662.

16.

Kavanagh

Prescott

Mactier

. Peritoneal dialysis-associated peritonitis in Scotland (1999-2002). Nephrol Dial Transpl 2004; 19(10): 2584–2591.

17.

Kopriva-Altfahrt

Konig

Mundle

, et al. Exit-site care in Austrian peritoneal dialysis centers – a nationwide survey. Perit Dial Int 2009; 29(3): 330–339.

18.

Piraino

Bernardini

Brown

, et al. ISPD position statement on reducing the risks of peritoneal dialysis-related infections. Perit Dial Int 2011; 31(6): 614–630.

19.

Chen

, et al. Training of peritoneal dialysis patients–Taiwan’s experiences. Perit Dial Int 2008; 28(Suppl. 3): S72–S75.

20.

Cleper

Davidovits

Kovalski

, et al. Peritonitis in a pediatric dialysis unit: local profile and implications. Isr Med Assoc J 2010; 12: 348–352.

21.

Davenport

. Peritonitis remains the major clinical complication of peritoneal dialysis: the London, UK, peritonitis audit 2002–2003. Perit Dial Int 2009; 29(3): 297–302,

22.

Bechade

Guillouet

Verger

, et al. Centre characteristics associated with the risk of peritonitis in peritoneal dialysis: a hierarchical modelling approach based on the data of the French Language Peritoneal Dialysis Registry. Nephrol Dial Transpl 2017; 32(6): 1018–1023.

23.

Nadeau-Fredette

Johnson

Hawley

, et al. Center-specific factors Associated with peritonitis risk-a multi-center registry analysis. Perit Dial Int 2016; 36(5): 509–518.

24.

Figueiredo

Bernardini

Bowes

, et al. A syllabus for teaching peritoneal dialysis to patients and caregivers. Perit Dial Int 2016; 36(6): 592–605.

25.

Boudville

Choy

Equinox

, et al. Teaching peritoneal dialysis in Australia: an opportunity for improvement. Nephrology 2018; 23(3): 259–263.

26.

Bernardini

Price

Figueiredo

; International Society for Peritoneal Dialysis Nursing Liaison Committee. Peritoneal dialysis patient training, 2006. Perit Dial Int 2006; 26(6): 625–632.

27.

Sheridan

Halpern

Viera

, et al. Interventions for individuals with low health literacy: a systematic review. J Health Community 2011; 16(Suppl 3): 30–54.

28.

Laidley

Braddock

. Role of adult learning theory in evaluating and designing strategies for teaching residents in ambulatory settings. Adv Health Sci Educ Theory Pract 2000; 5(1): 43–54.

29.

Chow

Cho

Equinox

, et al. An intervention design: supporting skills development for peritoneal dialysis trainers. Perit Dial Int 2019; 39(2): 134–141.

30.

Laurillard

. Teaching as a design science: building pedagogical patterns for learning and technology. London: Routledge, 2012.

31.

Centers for Disease Control and Prevention. Develop & test materials, https://www.cdc.gov/healthliteracy/developmaterials (2017).

32.

Chow

Fortnum

Moodie

, et al. The HOME network: an Australian national initiative for home therapies. J Ren Care 2013; 39(Suppl 1): 56–61.

33.

Pflugeisen

Rebar

Reedy

, et al. Assessment of clinical trial participant patient satisfaction: a call to action. Trials 2016; 17: 483.

34.

Glazzard

. A critical analysis of learning styles and multiple intelligences and their contribution to inclusive education. J Global Res Educ Soc Sci 2015; 2(3): 107–113.

35.

Howard-Jones

. Evolutionary perspectives on mind, brain and education. Mind, Brain, Education 2014; 8(1): 21–33.

36.

Rope

Nanayakkara

Wazil

, et al. Expanding CAPD in low-resource settings: a distance learning approach. Perit Dial Int 2018; 38(5): 343–348.

37.

Newton

P M

Miah

. Evidence-based higher education – Is the learning styles myth important? Front Psychol 2017; 8: 444.

38.

Vargas

Blake

Sanabria

, et al. Early peritonitis in a large peritoneal dialysis provider system in Colombia. Perit Dial Int 2016; 37(1): 30–34.