4.6 Article

Dietary and fluid restriction perceptions of patients undergoing haemodialysis: an exploratory study

Journal

JOURNAL OF CLINICAL NURSING
Volume 26, Issue 21-22, Pages 3664-3676

Publisher

WILEY
DOI: 10.1111/jocn.13739

Keywords

adherence; dietary restriction; fluid restriction; haemodialysis; qualitative study

Categories

Ask authors/readers for more resources

Aims and objectives. To explore the perspectives of patients undergoing haemodialysis in Singapore on an imposed dietary and fluid restriction regime.& para;& para;Background. Adherence to prescribed dietary and fluid restriction constructs the fundamental basis of self-care with improved morbidity and mortality. However, most patients have struggled to adhere in this aspect. Existing studies have presented limited understanding on the facilitators and barriers of dietary and fluid adherence among haemodialysis patients.& para;& para;Design. An exploratory qualitative study.& para;& para;Methods. A purposive sample of 14 patients undergoing haemodialysis was recruited from a renal unit of a tertiary hospital in Singapore. Data were collected through face-to-face individual interviews and subsequently analysed by thematic analysis.& para;& para;Results. Four themes emerged: (1) Pessimism, (2) Existing struggles, (3) Perceived quality of support, and (4) Immensity of self-discipline.& para;& para;Conclusions. The imposed dietary and fluid restriction is a constant struggle and a cause of suffering among haemodialysis patients in Singapore. Nonetheless, they are generally submissive to their fluid restrictions for the sake of survival or to meet the expectations of their loved ones. The imposed dietary restrictions are generally neglected.& para;& para;Relevance to clinical practice. The findings from this study can provide useful information in reviewing existing educational strategies, policies and nursing care. This is especially important because most patients exhibit high reliance on healthcare professionals.

Authors

I am an author on this paper
Click your name to claim this paper and add it to your profile.

Reviews

Primary Rating

4.6
Not enough ratings

Secondary Ratings

Novelty
-
Significance
-
Scientific rigor
-
Rate this paper

Recommended

No Data Available
No Data Available