Table 5.

Summary of qualitative studies

Study (Reference)	Target population	Number of participants	Aim/Intervention	Methods	Summary of findings
Blickem et al 21	CKD stage 3	20	‘To explore the experience of patient-led assessment for network support (PLANS) from the perspectives of participants and telephone support workers.’ (p. 1) Intervention: see table 4 Blakeman et al 46	Interviews and focus groups: no analytic methodology discussed	Mixed reception from participants Formulation of ‘health’ in everyday life (ie, participants unaware of having CKD or its significance—confused about relevance of PLANS) Trajectories and tipping points (ie, engagement in PLANS depended on participants’ stage of life—either could influence trying new things or disrupt routines) Trust in networks (ie, unwillingness to seek support, intrusive, others saw improved awareness/access to local resources; tailored support)
Heiden et al 69	CKD predialysis, dialysis, transplant	5	To identify participant’s perspective regarding a ‘web application prototype to help make decisions regarding diet restrictions and phosphate binder dosage.’ (p. 544) Intervention: Website tool for patients that included three components—diet/fluid education; diet registry and phosphate binder decision support tool.	Interviews: no analytic methodology discussed	Benefits: Education tool increased insight and understanding Assisted in tracking and choosing best food alternative Decision support for binder dosage Limitations: Targeted users familiar with using computers Users had different information needs One-way communication Need self-care resources in place to carry out recommendations
Jansen et al 70	CKD stages 4–5	7	Feasibility of ‘a psychosocial intervention to assist ESRD patients and their partners in integrating renal disease and treatment into daily activities, primary work and thereby increasing autonomy.’ (p. 280) Intervention: group teaching and handbook regarding coping strategies and goals based on self-regulation, social learning and self-determination theories.	Interviews: no analytic methodology discussed	Benefits: Group included predialysis and dialysis patients Leaders addressed individual needs, situations and questions Limitations: Patient preferences for information differed by stages of CKD Patient schedules need to be considered when intervention offered Consider offering intervention shortly after diagnosis of CKD
Thomas et al 33	Type 1 or 2 DM with microalbuminuria	5 (3 face-to-face interviews)	To evaluate ‘whether patients understood the content of the pack and whether they could make any recommendations.’ (p. 275) Intervention: see table 4 Thomas et al 30	Questionnaire and interview: no analytic methodology discussed	Mixed responses DVD—content distressing and took effort to use Written material useful, but need to elaborate on seriousness of disease Package helped change behaviour—stop smoking, monitoring DM
Williams et al 22	CKD stages 2–4 with diabetes and cardiovascular disease	26	‘Examine the perceptions of a group of CALD participants with comorbid diabetes, chronic kidney disease and cardiovascular disease … using an intervention to influence their medication self-efficacy.’ (p. 1271) Intervention: see table 4 Williams et al 43	Interviews: Ritchie and Spencer thematic approach	Attitudes towards taking medications (ie, appreciate importance of taking; medication burden; concern with the number of medications, effectiveness and side effects of medications Having to take medications (ie, behaviours and family support to assist taking medications; forgetting and non-adherent; motivation to take to prevent becoming worse) Impediments to chronic illness medication self-efficacy (ie, lack of knowledge regarding medication; strong faith in physician’s advice; multiple medications too overwhelming; cost)
Williams et al 23	CKD stages 2–4, with coexisting diabetes and hypertension	39	Individual perceptions of a ‘telephone call using a motivational interviewing approach to improve medication adherence in participants with coexisting diabetes, CKD and hypertension.’ (p. 472) Intervention: see table 4 Williams et al 42	Interviews: Ritchie and Spencer thematic approach	Importance of health (ie, determined the degree of health behaviour; altered medications or use of complementary medicine to control health) Perceived seriousness of disease (ie, thinking about mortality; comorbidities complicate care; acute illness with chronic conditions) Perceived threat of disease (ie, want to learn about disease control earlier; symptom management; looking for reasons to explain why ill)

CKD, chronic kidney disease; DM, diabetes mellitus.