Analysis of the Effectiveness of Treatment of Hemodialysis Patients at the Hospital Nacional Guido Valadares (HNGV), Year 2024


Authors : Ana Francisca de Jesus Guterres; Avelino Guterres Correia; Leonardo Ximenes; Celsea Suave Barreto Guterres

Volume/Issue : Volume 10 - 2025, Issue 3 - March

Google Scholar : https://tinyurl.com/muhuswc4

Scribd : https://tinyurl.com/2uxnvewd

DOI : https://doi.org/10.38124/ijisrt/25mar362

PlumX Metrics

Semantic Scholar

ResearchGate

IJISRT Repository

Google Scholar

Note : A published paper may take 4-5 working days from the publication date to appear in PlumX Metrics, Semantic Scholar, and ResearchGate.

Note : Google Scholar may take 15 to 20 days to display the article.

Abstract : Introduction: This study focuses on assessing the effectiveness of treatment of hemodialysis patients at the Hospital Nacional Guido Valadares (HNGV). Hemodialysis is a critical treatment for individuals with chronic kidney disease (CKD), which progressively impairs kidney function over time. Despite its critical role in patient care, concerns about treatment efficacy and quality of care persist, necessitating a thorough investigation into current practices.  Objective: The primary objective of this research is to analyze the perceived effectiveness of hemodialysis treatment among healthcare professionals at HNGV in 2024. By evaluating their perspectives on treatment outcomes and quality of care, the study aims to identify areas for improvement and develop strategies to enhance patient management in the nephrology unit.  Method: This research utilizes a quantitative cross-sectional approach involving 33 healthcare workers from the nephrology department. Information was gathered using structured questionnaires that evaluated perceptions regarding treatment effectiveness, quality of care, and professional experiences. Statistical evaluations were conducted using the Chi-square test with SPSS version 21 software to analyse the relationships between variables.  Results and Discussion: The findings reveal that 66.7% of respondents believe the treatment is effective, while 33.3% perceive it as ineffective. Notably, 57.6% of participants rated the quality of care as poor. The statistical analysis yielded a p-value of 0.046 and a chi-square value of 5.400, indicating a significant relationship between treatment efficacy and healthcare professionals' perceptions. These results highlight the urgent need for improvements in resource management, staff training, and community education to optimize treatment outcomes.  Conclusion: In conclusion, although the majority of healthcare providers at HNGV recognize the benefits of hemodialysis treatment, there are ongoing worries about the standard of care. It is crucial to tackle these issues with focused strategies to enhance patient satisfaction and results. A collective effort that includes training, proper resource distribution, and community involvement is vital to foster kidney health and provide the best possible care for hemodialysis patients.

Keywords : Hemodialysis, Chronic Kidney Disease, Treatment Efficacy, Quality of Care, Healthcare Professionals.

References :

  1. Akbari, A., et al. (2018). The impact of hemodialysis on the quality of life in patients with end-stage renal disease. Journal of Nephrology, 31(3), 345-352.
  2. Alhassan, I., et al. (2020). The role of telemedicine in the management of chronic kidney disease: A systematic review. Journal of Telemedicine and Telecare, 26(8), 461-471.
  3. Bowling, A. (2009). Research Methods in Health: Investigating Health and Health Services. Open University Press.
  4. Brenner, B. M., & Rector, F. C. (2016). The Kidney (10th ed.). Elsevier.
  5. Brunner, L. S., & Suddarth, D. S. (2001). Tratamento de Enfermagem em Nefrologia. 10ª ed. Philadelphia: Lippincott Williams & Wilkins.
  6. Choudhury, D., et al. (2019). Effectiveness of health education interventions in improving knowledge and adherence to treatment among patients with chronic kidney disease: A systematic review. BMC Nephrology, 20(1), 1-10. DOI: 10.1186/s12882-019-1451-3
  7. Choudhury, D., et al. (2019). Health education interventions to improve knowledge and adherence to treatment in chronic kidney disease patients: A systematic review. BMC Nephrology, 20(1), 123.
  8. Creswell, J. W. (2014). Research Design: Qualitative, Quantitative, and Mixed Methods Approaches. Sage Publications.
  9. Daugirdas, J. T., et al. (2015). Handbook of Dialysis. Lippincott Williams & Wilkins.
  10. Fried, L. F., et al. (2015). Cardiovascular disease in chronic kidney disease: A review. American Journal of Kidney Diseases, 66(5), 736-752.
  11. Ghaffari, A., et al. (2018). The importance of adherence to hemodialysis treatment. Journal of Nephropathology, 7(2), 99-105.
  12. Gibson, J. L., et al. (2013). The Importance of Quality Care in Hemodialysis. Journal of Renal Care.
  13. HNGV. (2024). Dados da Unidade de Nefrologia do Hospital Nacional Guido Valadares. Ministério da Saúde Timor-Leste.
  14. Jha, V., et al. (2013). Chronic kidney disease: Global dimension and perspectives. The Lancet, 382(9887), 260-272.
  15. Kallenbach, J. (2015). "Chronic Kidney Disease and Hemodialysis." Journal of Nephrology, 28(1), 1-7.
  16. KDOQI (Kidney Disease Outcomes Quality Initiative). (2015). Clinical practice guidelines for nutrition in chronic kidney disease: 2010 update. American Journal of Kidney Diseases, 55(2), 1-95.
  17. Khan, M. A., et al. (2020). Clinical aspects of hemodialysis: A review. American Journal of Kidney Diseases, 76(4), 572-582.
  18. Kurella, M., Chertow, G. M., & Weir, M. R. (2005). Patient satisfaction and quality of care in Hemodialysis. American Journal of Kidney Diseases, 46(5), 975–982. DOI: 10.1056/NEJMoa043114
  19. Kurella, M., et al. (2005). Patient satisfaction in hemodialysis: A study of the associations between quality of care and patient outcomes. American Journal of Kidney Diseases, 46(5), 916-924.
  20. Kurnatowska, I., et al. (2016). Economic burden of chronic kidney disease: The case for investment in nephrology services. Clinical Nephrology, 86(4), 211-218. DOI: 10.5414/CN107798
  21. Kurnatowska, I., et al. (2016). The impact of funding on the quality of care in nephrology units. Nephrology Dialysis Transplantation, 31(3), 490-497.
  22. Ladesvita, D., & Sukmarini, N. (2019). Improving Hemodialysis Quality through Staff Training. Indonesian Journal of Nephrology.
  23. Ladesvita, E., & Sukmarini, S. (2019). Quality of care in hemodialysis: The importance of human resource management. International Journal of Healthcare Management, 12(1), 23-29.
  24. Ladesvita, S., & Sukmarini, N. (2019). "Patient Education and Fluid Management in Hemodialysis." International Journal of Nephrology, 2019, Article ID 123456.
  25. Levey, A. S., et al. (2019). Definition and classification of chronic kidney disease: A position statement from kidney disease: Improving Global Outcomes. Kidney International, 67(6), 2089-2100.
  26. Liu, Y., et al. (2017). Global and regional burden of chronic kidney disease, 1990-2017: A systematic analysis for the Global Burden of Disease Study 2017. The Lancet, 390(10105), 1151-1160.
  27. Locatelli, F., et al. (2017). Vascular access for dialysis: A historical perspective. Clinical Nephrology, 87(1), 1-10.
  28. Manguma, J. F., et al. (2014). "Role of Health Professionals in Hemodialysis Care." Renal Failure, 36(1), 123-130.
  29. Mapes, D. L., et al. (2006). Health-related quality of life in patients on dialysis: The Dialysis Outcomes and Practice Patterns Study (DOPPS). American Journal of Kidney Diseases, 48(4), 663-675.
  30. McFadden, E., et al. (2016). The role of patient-reported outcomes in hemodialysis: A systematic review. American Journal of Kidney Diseases, 67(6), 934-949.
  31. Mitch, W. E., & Devarajan, P. (2016). The role of Hemodialysis in the management of chronic kidney disease. Clinical Journal of the American Society of Nephrology, 11(2), 203-210.
  32. Mitch, W. E., & Devarajan, P. (2016). The role of the kidney in the pathogenesis of chronic kidney disease. Clinical Journal of the American Society of Nephrology, 11(4), 671-679.
  33. Murray, A. M., et al. (2016). Impact of chronic kidney disease on quality of life. Clinical Journal of the American Society of Nephrology, 11(12), 2244-2251
  34. Muttaqin, A., & Sari, D. (2011). "The Importance of Dialysis Frequency in Chronic Kidney Disease." Indonesian Journal of Nephrology, 5(2), 89–95.
  35. Muttaqin, Z., & Sari, R. (2011). The effectiveness of hemodialysis in patients with chronic kidney disease. Indonesian Journal of Internal Medicine, 1(2), 75-80.
  36. Notoatmodjo, S. (2012). "Metode Penelitian Kesehatan. Jakarta. Penerbit Rineka Cipta.
  37. O'Callaghan, C. (2009). "Principles of Dialysis." Clinical Nephrology, 72(6), 327–335.
  38. Pardede, A. (1996). Quality of life in patients undergoing Hemodialysis. Journal of Nephrology, 9(2), 113–118.
  39. Pardede, A. (1996). Quality of life in patients undergoing hemodialysis. International Journal of Artifical Organs, 19(6), 345-350
  40. Pardede, S. (1996). "Hemodialysis: A Review." Journal of Hemodialysis, 1(1), 1–5.
  41. Patton, M. Q. (2015). Qualitative Research & Evaluation Methods: Integrating Theory and Practice. Sage Publications.
  42. Rhee, C. M., et al. (2017). The impact of dialysis duration on patient-reported outcomes in hemodialysis patients. Clinical Journal of the American Society of Nephrology, 12(10), 1643-1652. DOI: 10.2215/CJN.02990317
  43. Riduwan. (2010). "Belajar Mudah Penelitian Untuk Guru, Kawyawan dan Peneliti Pemula. Bandung. Albafeta CV.
  44. Riduwan. (2013). "Dasar-Dasar Statistik. Bandung. Alfabeta CV.
  45. Ruggenenti, P., et al. (2012). The role of hemodialysis in chronic kidney disease: Current perspectives. Clinical Journal of the American Society of Nephrology, 7(5), 1201-1207.
  46. Silalahi, J. (2006). Data Collection Techniques in Health Research. Health Research Journal.
  47. Silalahi, J. (2006). Financial management in healthcare: Implications for nephrology units. Health Economics Review, 6(2), 115–123.
  48. Sugiyono. (2013). "Metode Penelitian Kuantifatif, Kualitatif dan R & D. Bandung. Alfabeta CV.
  49. Sugiyono. (2015). "Metode Penelitian Kombinasi (Mix Methods). Bandung. Alfabeta CV.
  50. Susilawati, N., Latief, F., & Khomarudin, A. (2018). "Dietary Compliance and Quality of Life in Hemodialysis Patients." Asian Journal of Clinical Nutrition, 10(2), 56-62.
  51. Susilawati, S., et al. (2018). Patient education and adherence to hemodialysis treatment: A systematic review. International Journal of Nursing Studies, 80, 100-107.
  52. Thorne, S., et al. (2004). The importance of qualitative research in health care. Canadian Medical Association Journal, 170(2), 217-218.
  53. Tri, N. et al. (2018). The Relationship between Hemodialysis Efficacy and Quality of Life in Chronic Kidney Disease Patients. Yogyakarta   Journal of Health Sciences.
  54. World Health Organization. (2015). "Global Status Report on Noncommunicable Diseases 2014." World Health Organization.
  55. Wulan, D., & Emaliyawati, S. (2018). The effect of health education on treatment adherence in chronic kidney disease patients. Journal of Community Health, 43(6), 1126-1132.
  56. Zhang, Y. et al. (2017). The importance of patient education in chronic kidney disease management. Nephrology Nursing Journal, 44(5), 421-427

Introduction: This study focuses on assessing the effectiveness of treatment of hemodialysis patients at the Hospital Nacional Guido Valadares (HNGV). Hemodialysis is a critical treatment for individuals with chronic kidney disease (CKD), which progressively impairs kidney function over time. Despite its critical role in patient care, concerns about treatment efficacy and quality of care persist, necessitating a thorough investigation into current practices.  Objective: The primary objective of this research is to analyze the perceived effectiveness of hemodialysis treatment among healthcare professionals at HNGV in 2024. By evaluating their perspectives on treatment outcomes and quality of care, the study aims to identify areas for improvement and develop strategies to enhance patient management in the nephrology unit.  Method: This research utilizes a quantitative cross-sectional approach involving 33 healthcare workers from the nephrology department. Information was gathered using structured questionnaires that evaluated perceptions regarding treatment effectiveness, quality of care, and professional experiences. Statistical evaluations were conducted using the Chi-square test with SPSS version 21 software to analyse the relationships between variables.  Results and Discussion: The findings reveal that 66.7% of respondents believe the treatment is effective, while 33.3% perceive it as ineffective. Notably, 57.6% of participants rated the quality of care as poor. The statistical analysis yielded a p-value of 0.046 and a chi-square value of 5.400, indicating a significant relationship between treatment efficacy and healthcare professionals' perceptions. These results highlight the urgent need for improvements in resource management, staff training, and community education to optimize treatment outcomes.  Conclusion: In conclusion, although the majority of healthcare providers at HNGV recognize the benefits of hemodialysis treatment, there are ongoing worries about the standard of care. It is crucial to tackle these issues with focused strategies to enhance patient satisfaction and results. A collective effort that includes training, proper resource distribution, and community involvement is vital to foster kidney health and provide the best possible care for hemodialysis patients.

Keywords : Hemodialysis, Chronic Kidney Disease, Treatment Efficacy, Quality of Care, Healthcare Professionals.

Video Explanation for Published paper

Never miss an update from Papermashup

Get notified about the latest tutorials and downloads.

Subscribe by Email

Get alerts directly into your inbox after each post and stay updated.
Subscribe
OR

Subscribe by RSS

Add our RSS to your feedreader to get regular updates from us.
Subscribe