BACKGROUND: Nephrologists have traditionally assumed responsibility for both nephrological and primary care health problems of their dialysis patients. However, given the increasing limitations of nephrology human resources, there is concern that traditional models may fall short of providing comprehensive care. METHODS: We studied this issue by distributing three different self-administered surveys to 361 members of the Canadian Society of Nephrology, 325 family physicians, and 163 chronic dialysis patients. RESULTS: The overall response rate was 61.3% for nephrologists, 51% for family physicians, and 90% for patients. More than 50% of Canadian nephrologists are spending approximately one-third of their time in primary care delivery. The majority of these nephrologists and family physicians agree that nephrologists should not be solely responsible for the primary care of patients on dialysis. Yet, both groups of physicians have concerns that family physicians do not have the knowledge/training and time to care for this complicated group of patients. The patients themselves have more confidence in the primary care that is delivered by their family physicians than by their nephrologists. Unfortunately, there is little communication between the two physician groups either between themselves or with their patients about the services that should be provided by their nephrologist or their family physician. CONCLUSION: Nephrologists and family physicians agree that more primary care for dialysis patients should be provided by family physicians. However, the lack of communication between physicians and patients may result in either a duplication or omission of services that are required by this patient population. Dialysis delivery systems in Canada must evolve to ensure that comprehensive chronic dialysis and primary care is provided to these patients through cooperation and communication with primary care physicians.
BACKGROUND: Nephrologists have traditionally assumed responsibility for both nephrological and primary care health problems of their dialysis patients. However, given the increasing limitations of nephrology human resources, there is concern that traditional models may fall short of providing comprehensive care. METHODS: We studied this issue by distributing three different self-administered surveys to 361 members of the Canadian Society of Nephrology, 325 family physicians, and 163 chronic dialysis patients. RESULTS: The overall response rate was 61.3% for nephrologists, 51% for family physicians, and 90% for patients. More than 50% of Canadian nephrologists are spending approximately one-third of their time in primary care delivery. The majority of these nephrologists and family physicians agree that nephrologists should not be solely responsible for the primary care of patients on dialysis. Yet, both groups of physicians have concerns that family physicians do not have the knowledge/training and time to care for this complicated group of patients. The patients themselves have more confidence in the primary care that is delivered by their family physicians than by their nephrologists. Unfortunately, there is little communication between the two physician groups either between themselves or with their patients about the services that should be provided by their nephrologist or their family physician. CONCLUSION: Nephrologists and family physicians agree that more primary care for dialysis patients should be provided by family physicians. However, the lack of communication between physicians and patients may result in either a duplication or omission of services that are required by this patient population. Dialysis delivery systems in Canada must evolve to ensure that comprehensive chronic dialysis and primary care is provided to these patients through cooperation and communication with primary care physicians.
Authors: Denise M Hynes; Michael Fischer; Marian Fitzgibbon; Anna C Porter; Michael Berbaum; Linda Schiffer; Ifeanyi B Chukwudozie; Hai Nguyen; Jose Arruda Journal: J Gen Intern Med Date: 2019-07-24 Impact factor: 5.128
Authors: Ifeanyi Beverly Chukwudozie; Marian L Fitzgibbon; Linda Schiffer; Michael Berbaum; Cheryl Gilmartin; Pyone David; Eson Ekpo; Michael J Fischer; Anna C Porter; Alana Aziz-Bradley; Denise M Hynes Journal: Transl Behav Med Date: 2018-05-23 Impact factor: 3.046
Authors: Anna C Porter; Marian L Fitzgibbon; Michael J Fischer; Rani Gallardo; Michael L Berbaum; James P Lash; Sheila Castillo; Linda Schiffer; Lisa K Sharp; John Tulley; Jose A Arruda; Denise M Hynes Journal: Contemp Clin Trials Date: 2015-02-28 Impact factor: 2.226
Authors: Samuel A Silver; Sarah E Bota; Eric McArthur; Kristin K Clemens; Ziv Harel; Kyla L Naylor; Manish M Sood; Amit X Garg; Ron Wald Journal: Clin J Am Soc Nephrol Date: 2020-03-05 Impact factor: 8.237
Authors: Raquel C Greer; Yang Liu; Kerri Cavanaugh; Clarissa Jonas Diamantidis; Michelle M Estrella; C John Sperati; Sandeep Soman; Khaled Abdel-Kader; Varun Agrawal; Laura C Plantinga; Jane O Schell; James F Simon; Joseph A Vassalotti; Bernard G Jaar; Michael J Choi Journal: J Gen Intern Med Date: 2019-04-16 Impact factor: 5.128
Authors: Megumi J Okumura; Michele Heisler; Matthew M Davis; Michael D Cabana; Sonya Demonner; Eve A Kerr Journal: J Gen Intern Med Date: 2008-07-26 Impact factor: 5.128
Authors: Stephanie M S Wilmore; Keir E Philip; Valentina Cambiano; Christopher P Bretherton; Josephine E Harborne; Aditi Sharma; Shyama D Jayasena Journal: Clin Kidney J Date: 2013-12-01