Skip to main content

Advertisement

SpringerLink
Log in

Mapping Patients’ Perceived Facilitators and Barriers to In-Center Hemodialysis Attendance to the Health Belief Model: Insights from a Qualitative Study

  • Full length manuscript
  • Published:
International Journal of Behavioral Medicine Aims and scope Submit manuscript

Abstract

Background

Previous research has shown that deliberate withdrawal, skipping, and/or shortening hemodialysis sessions has become a major health problem associated with poor clinical outcomes and early mortality in patients with end-stage renal disease (ESRD). However, patients’ experiences with this treatment remain largely unexplored. This study aimed to explore patients’ perceived facilitators and barriers to in-center hemodialysis attendance and map these findings to the Health Belief Model.

Methods

A qualitative exploratory study was conducted with a purposive sample. Semi-structured interviews were conducted and submitted to thematic analysis.

Results

Twenty-four patients (66.2 ± 12.3 years old; length of time on hemodialysis: 35.2 ± 51.5 months) were interviewed. Five major facilitators (social support, perceived benefits, self-efficacy, time on dialysis, and risk/susceptibility perception) and two barriers (lack of knowledge about ESRD and hemodialysis, and psychosocial costs) were identified.

Conclusion

Adherence to the prescribed regimen of hemodialysis attendance is a complex and multidimensional phenomenon that involves an interaction between modifying factors (social support, disease and treatment knowledge, time on dialysis) and patients’ perceived benefits, perceived risks, self-efficacy, and treatment costs. This study findings expand knowledge by suggesting that perceiving health benefits from the beginning of treatment, self-efficacy to deal with dialysis demands, and purpose in life are important facilitators of adherence to in-center hemodialysis sessions. Furthermore, it suggests that the impact of the hemodialysis regimen on the emotional well-being of family members is an important barrier. Future interventions should focus on skills training to promote self-efficacy and family coping with the demands of in-center hemodialysis, improve disease and treatment knowledge, and help balance perceived benefits with dialysis costs.

This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.

Access this article

Log in via an institution

Price excludes VAT (USA)
Tax calculation will be finalised during checkout.

Instant access to the full article PDF.

Institutional subscriptions

Fig. 1

Similar content being viewed by others

References

  1. GBD Chronic Kidney Disease Collaboration. Global, regional, and national burden of chronic kidney disease, 1990–2017: a systematic analysis for the Global Burden of Disease Study 2017. Lancet. 2020;395(10225):709–33.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  2. Thurlow JS, Joshi M, Yan G, et al. Global Epidemiology of End-Stage Kidney Disease and Disparities in Kidney Replacement Therapy. Am J Nephrol. 2021;52(2):98–107.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  3. Himmelfarb J, Vanholder R, Mehrotra R, Tonelli M. The current and future landscape of dialysis. Nat Rev Nephrol. 2020;16(10):573–85.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  4. Murali KM, Mullan J, Roodenrys S, Hassan HC, Lambert K, Lonergan M. Strategies to improve dietary, fluid, dialysis or medication adherence in patients with end-stage kidney disease on dialysis: A systematic review and meta-analysis of randomized intervention trials. PLoS One. 2019;14(1):e0211479.

  5. Wallace EL, Rosner MH, Alscher MD, et al. Remote Patient Management for Home Dialysis Patients. Kidney Int Rep. 2017;2(6):1009–17.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  6. Fotheringham J, Sajjad A, Stel VS, et al. The association between longer haemodialysis treatment times and hospitalization and mortality after the two-day break in individuals receiving three times a week hemodialysis. Nephrol Dial Transplant. 2019;34(9):1577–84.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  7. Jiang H, Wang L, Zhang Q, et al. Family functioning, marital satisfaction and social support in hemodialysis patients and their spouses. Stress Health. 2015;31(2):166–74.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  8. Qazi HA, Chen H, Zhu M. Factors influencing dialysis withdrawal: a scoping review. BMC Nephrol. 2018;19(1):96.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  9. Mukakarangwa M, Chironda G, Nkurunziza A, Ngendahayo F, Bhengu B. Motivators and barriers of adherence to hemodialysis among patients with end-stage renal disease (ESRD) in Rwanda: A qualitative study. Intern J of Africa Nurs Sci. 2020;13:100221.

  10. Khou V, De La Mata NL, Morton RL, Kelly PJ, Webster AC. Cause of death for people with end-stage kidney disease withdrawing from treatment in Australia and New Zealand. Nephrol Dial Transplant. 2020. [published online ahead of print, 2020 Aug 4].

  11. Chen JHC, Brown MA, Jose M, et al. Temporal changes and risk factors of death from early withdrawal within 12 months of dialysis initiation - a cohort study. Nephrol Dial Transplant. 2021. [published online ahead of print, 2021 Jun 27].

  12. Ozen N, Cinar FI, Askin D, Mut D, Turker T. Nonadherence in Hemodialysis Patients and Related Factors: A Multicenter Study. J Nurs Res. 2019;27(4):e36.

  13. Chironda G, Manwere A, Nyamakura R, Chipfuwa T, Bhengu B. Perceived health status and adherence to hemodialysis by End-Stage Renal Disease patients: A case of a Central hospital in Zimbabwe. J Nurs Health Sci. 2014;3:22–31.

    Google Scholar 

  14. Duong CM, Olszyna DP, Nguyen PD, McLaws ML. Challenges of hemodialysis in Vietnam: experience from the first standardized district dialysis unit in Ho Chi Minh City. BMC Nephrol. 2015;16:122.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  15. Bossola M, Tazza L. Postdialysis Fatigue: A Frequent and Debilitating Symptom. Semin Dial. 2016;29(3):222–7.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  16. Murali KM, Lonergan M. Breaking the adherence barriers: Strategies to improve treatment adherence in dialysis patients. Semin Dial. 2020;33(6):475–85.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  17. Dantas LGG, de Seixas RM, Junior JAM, Paschoalin EL, Paschoalin SRKP, Sampaio Cruz CM. Non-adherence to Hemodialysis, Interdialytic weight gain and cardiovascular mortality: a cohort study. BMC Nephrol. 2019;20(1):402.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  18. Dsouza B, Prabhu R, Unnikrishnan B, Shetty A, Reshmi B. A Qualitative Study on Factors Affecting Adherence Among Indian Hemodialysis Patients at a Tertiary Teaching Hospital of Southern India. J Health Manag. 2019;21(3):417–26.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  19. Gebrie MH, Ford J. Depressive symptoms and dietary non-adherence among end-stage renal disease patients undergoing hemodialysis therapy: a systematic review. BMC Nephrol. 2019;20(1):429.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  20. Griva K, Ng HJ, Loei J, Mooppil N, McBain H, Newman SP. Managing treatment for end-stage renal disease–a qualitative study exploring cultural perspectives on facilitators and barriers to treatment adherence. Psychol Health. 2013;28(1):13–29.

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  21. McDade-Montez EA, Christensen AJ, Cvengros JA, Lawton WJ. The role of depression symptoms in dialysis withdrawal. Health Psychol. 2006;25(2):198–204.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  22. Obialo CI, Hunt WC, Bashir K, Zager PG. Relationship of missed and shortened hemodialysis treatments to hospitalization and mortality: observations from a US dialysis network. Clin Kidney J. 2012;5(4):315–9.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  23. Sousa H, Ribeiro O, Paúl C, et al. Social support and treatment adherence in patients with end-stage renal disease: A systematic review. Semin Dial. 2019;32(6):562–74.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  24. Chironda G, Bhengu B. Perceptions of caregivers regarding engagement with integrated management of chronic kidney disease patients in selected public hospitals of KwaZulu-Natal region. South Africa Health SA. 2018;23:1104.

    Google Scholar 

  25. Rosenstock IM. Why people use health services. Milbank Mem Fund Q. 1966;44(3):94–127.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  26. Rosenstock IM. The Health Belief Model and Preventive Health Behavior. Health Educ Monogr. 1974;2(4):354–86.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  27. Rosenstock IM, Strecher VJ, Becker MH. Social learning theory and the Health Belief Model. Health Educ Q. 1988;15(2):175–83.

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  28. Jones CL, Jensen JD, Scherr CL, Brown NR, Christy K, Weaver J. The Health Belief Model as an explanatory framework in communication research: exploring parallel, serial, and moderated mediation. Health Commun. 2015;30(6):566–76.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  29. Becker M, Maiman L, Kirscht J, Haefner D, Drachman R. The Health Belief Model and Prediction of Dietary Compliance: A Field Experiment. J of Health Soc Beh. 1977;18(4):348–66.

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  30. Becker MH. The health belief model and sick role behavior. Health Educ Monogr. 1974;2(4):409–19.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  31. Janz N, Champion V, Strecher VJ. The health belief model. K Glanz, BK Rimer. 2002;86:45–67.

    Google Scholar 

  32. Peikani FA, Shahgholian N, Kazemi A. The Effect of Health-belief-model-Based Training on Behaviors Preventing Peritonitis in Patients on Peritoneal Dialysis. Int J Prev Med. 2018;9:72.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  33. Sulat JS, Prabandari YS, Sanusi R, Hapsari ED, Santoso B. The validity of health belief model variables in predicting behavioral change. Health Edu. 2018;118(6):499–512.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  34. Ghaddar S, Shamseddeen W, Elzein H. Behavioral modeling to guide adherence to fluid control in hemodialysis patients. J Ren Nutr. 2009;19(2):153–60.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  35. Nooriani N, Mohammadi V, Feizi A, Shahnazi H, Askari G, Ramezanzade E. The Effect of Nutritional Education Based on Health Belief Model on Nutritional Knowledge, Health Belief Model Constructs, and Dietary Intake in Hemodialysis Patients. Iran J Nurs Midwifery Res. 2019;24(5):372–8.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  36. Sutherland S, Penfold R, Doherty A, et al. A cross-sectional study exploring levels of physical activity and motivators and barriers towards physical activity in hemodialysis patients to inform intervention development. Disabil Rehabil. 2021;43(12):1675–81.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  37. Kung PC, Yeh MC, Lai MK, Liu HE. Renal Transplant Recipients: The Factors Related to Immunosuppressive Medication Adherence Based on the Health Belief Model. J Nurs Res. 2017;25(5):392–7.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  38. Ebrahimi H, Sadeghi M, Amanpour F, Dadgari A. Influence of nutritional education on hemodialysis patients’ knowledge and quality of life. Saudi J Kidney Dis Transpl. 2016;27(2):250–5.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  39. Griva K, Nandakumar M, Ng JH, Lam KFY, McBain H, Newman SP. Hemodialysis Self-management Intervention Randomized Trial (HED-SMART): A Practical Low-Intensity Intervention to Improve Adherence and Clinical Markers in Patients Receiving Hemodialysis. Am J Kidney Dis. 2018;71(3):371–81.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  40. Tong A, Sainsbury P, Craig J. Consolidated criteria for reporting qualitative research (COREQ): a 32-item checklist for interviews and focus groups. Int J Qual Health Care. 2007;19(6):349–57.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  41. Saunders B, Sim J, Kingstone T, et al. Saturation in qualitative research: exploring its conceptualization and operationalization. Qual Quant. 2018;52(4):1893–907.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  42. Braun V, Clarke V. Using thematic analysis in psychology. Qual Res in Psyc. 2006;3(2):77–101.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  43. Korstjens I, Moser A. Series: Practical guidance to qualitative research. Part 4: Trustworthiness and publishing. Eur J Gen Pract. 2018;24(1):120–124.

  44. Berger R. Now I see it, now I don’t: Researcher’s position and reflexivity in qualitative research. Qual Res. 2015;15(2):219–34.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  45. Lee AA, Piette JD, Heisler M, Janevic MR, Langa KM, Rosland AM. Family members’ experiences supporting adults with chronic illness: A national survey. Fam Syst Health. 2017;35(4):463–73.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  46. Fuertes JN, Rubinstein S, Reyes M, et al. The Physician-Patient Working Alliance in Hemodialysis Treatment. Behav Med. 2017;43(4):242–50.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  47. Van Biesen W, van der Veer SN, Murphey M, Loblova O, Davies S. Patients' perceptions of information and education for renal replacement therapy: an independent survey by the European Kidney Patients' Federation on information and support on renal replacement therapy. PLoS One. 2014;9(7):e103914.

  48. Wells SA. Determinants of Adherence to Living on Dialysis for Mexican Americans. SAGE Open. 2015;5(1):215824401557496.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  49. Bandura A. Self-efficacy: Toward a unifying theory of behavioral change. Psychol Rev.1977;84(2):191–215.

  50. Bandura A. Social cognitive theory: an agentic perspective. Annu Rev Psychol. 2001;52(1):1–26.

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  51. Elliott JO, Ortman C, Almaani S, Lee YH, Jordan K. Understanding the associations between modifying factors, individual health beliefs, and hemodialysis patients’ adherence to a low-phosphorus diet. J Ren Nutr. 2015;25(2):111–20.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  52. Ishiwatari A, Yamamoto S, Fukuma S, Hasegawa T, Wakai S, Nangaku M. Changes in Quality of Life in Older Hemodialysis Patients: A Cohort Study on Dialysis Outcomes and Practice Patterns. Am J Nephrol. 2020;51(8):650–8.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  53. Nagasawa H, Sugita I, Tachi T, et al. The Relationship Between Dialysis Patients’ Quality of Life and Caregivers’ Quality of Life. Front Pharmacol. 2018;9:770.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  54. Moore C, Carter LA, Mitra S, Skevington S, Wearden A. Quality of life improved for patients after starting dialysis but is impaired, initially, for their partners: a multi-center, longitudinal study. BMC Nephrol. 2020;21(1):185.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  55. Reis A, Guerra M, Lencastre L. Treatment Adherence, Quality of Life and Clinical Variables in HIV/AIDS Infection. World J AIDS. 2013;3(3):239–250.

  56. Hoang VL, Green T, Bonner A. Informal caregivers of people undergoing hemodialysis: Associations between activities and burden. J Ren Care. 2019;45(3):151–8.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  57. Rolland JS. The family, chronic illness, and disability: An integrated practice model. In B. H. Fiese, M. Celano, K. Deater-Deckard, E. N. Jouriles, & M. A. Whisman (Eds.), APA handbook of contemporary family psychology: Applications and broad impact of family psychology. Am Psychol Assoc. 2019;85–102.

  58. Sousa H, Ribeiro O, Afreixo V, et al. Should WE Stand Together?: A systematic review and meta-analysis of the effectiveness of family-based interventions for adults with chronic physical diseases. Fam Process. 2021; 60(4):1098-1116.

Download references

Acknowledgements

The authors would like to thank the head nurses of the dialysis centers where the recruitment took place and the participants for their time and availability to share their experiences with us.

Funding

This work was supported by the project POCI-01–0145-FEDER-030228, funded by FEDER, through COMPETE2020- Programa Operacional Competitividade e Internacionalização (POCI), and by national funds (OE), through FCT/MCTES. Additionally, Helena Sousa has a PhD grant scholarship (reference number DFA/BD/4821/2020) financed by FCT (Fundação para a Ciência e Tecnologia) through FSE (Fundo Social Europeu).

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

  1. Center for Health Technology and Services Research (CINTESIS.UA), Department of Education and Psychology, University of Aveiro, Campus Universitário de Santiago, Aveiro, 3810-193, Portugal

    Helena Sousa & Oscar Ribeiro

  2. Department of Psychology, East Carolina University, North Carolina, 27858, USA

    Alan J. Christensen

  3. Center for Health Technology and Services Research (CINTESIS.UA), School of Health Sciences, University of Aveiro, Campus Universitário de Santiago, 3810-193, Aveiro, Portugal

    Daniela Figueiredo

Authors
  1. Helena Sousa
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  2. Oscar Ribeiro
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  3. Alan J. Christensen
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  4. Daniela Figueiredo
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

Contributions

Conceptualization, data curation, and formal analysis: Daniela Figueiredo, Oscar Ribeiro, Helena Sousa; funding acquisition: Daniela Figueiredo, Helena Sousa; investigation, methodology and project administration: Daniela Figueiredo; supervision: Daniela Figueiredo, Oscar Ribeiro, Alan J. Christensen; writing—original draft: Helena Sousa; writing—review & editing: Daniela Figueiredo, Oscar Ribeiro, Alan J. Christensen.

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Helena Sousa.

Ethics declarations

Informed Consent

Informed consent was obtained from all individual participants included in the study. Additional informed consent was obtained from all individual participants for whom identifying information is included in this article. All procedures performed in studies involving human participants were in accordance with the ethical standards of the institutional and/or national research committee and with the 1964 Helsinki declaration and its later amendments or comparable ethical standards.

Conflict of Interest

The authors report no conflict of interest.

Additional information

Publisher's Note

Springer Nature remains neutral with regard to jurisdictional claims in published maps and institutional affiliations.

Supplementary Information

Below is the link to the electronic supplementary material.

Supplementary file (DOCX 26 KB)

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

About this article

Check for updates. Verify currency and authenticity via CrossMark

Cite this article

Sousa, H., Ribeiro, O., Christensen, A.J. et al. Mapping Patients’ Perceived Facilitators and Barriers to In-Center Hemodialysis Attendance to the Health Belief Model: Insights from a Qualitative Study. Int.J. Behav. Med. 30, 97–107 (2023). https://doi.org/10.1007/s12529-022-10075-9

Download citation

  • Accepted:

  • Published:

  • Issue Date:

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s12529-022-10075-9

Keywords

Search

Navigation