Perceptions about hemodialysis and transplantation among African American adults with end-stage renal disease: inferences from focus groups

BACKGROUND: Disparities in access to kidney transplantation (KT) remain inadequately understood and addressed. Detailed descriptions of patient attitudes may provide insight into mechanisms of disparity. The aims of this study were to explore perceptions of dialysis and KT among African American adults undergoing hemodialysis, with particular attention to age- and sex-specific concerns. METHODS: Qualitative data on experiences with hemodialysis and views about KT were collected through four age- and sex-stratified (males <65, males ≥65, females <65, and females ≥65 years) focus group discussions with 36 African American adults recruited from seven urban dialysis centers in Baltimore, Maryland. RESULTS: Four themes emerged from thematic content analysis: 1) current health and perceptions of dialysis, 2) support while undergoing dialysis, 3) interactions with medical professionals, and 4) concerns about KT. Females and older males tended to be more positive about dialysis experiences. Younger males expressed a lack of support from friends and family. All participants shared feelings of being treated poorly by medical professionals and lacking information about renal disease and treatment options. Common concerns about pursuing KT were increased medication burden, fear of surgery, fear of organ rejection, and older age (among older participants). CONCLUSIONS: These perceptions may contribute to disparities in access to KT, motivating granular studies based on the themes identified

From ‘politics of numbers’ to ‘politics of singularisation’:Patients’ activism and engagement in research on rare diseases in France and Portugal

This article investigates how the engagement of patients/' organisations (POs) in research relates to the dynamics of their activism in the area of rare diseases. It traces back how certain concerned families and groups elaborated rareness as an issue of equity and social justice, gave shape to what we call a /`politics of numbers/' for stating the fact of rare diseases as a major public health problem, and promoted patients/' critical involvement in biomedical and therapeutic research as a solution for mainstreaming rare diseases in regular health systems. It then studies three Portuguese and three French POs, which point to the limits of the epidemiological notion of rareness for capturing the compounded and intersecting nature of the bio-psycho-social make-up of their conditions. It finally shows how these critics progressively lead to the emergence of an alternative politics, which we call a /`politics of singularisation/'. At the core of this politics stands a collective and ongoing profiling of conditions and patients, whose similarities and differences relates to the ubiquity of biological pathways and diseases categories. Our contention is that this /`politics of singularisation/' not only pictures a politics of illnesses which questions the rationale for nosological classifications, but also, and consequently, affects the making of social links by suggesting the simultaneous identification of individual patients and constitution of collectives to which they partake while asserting their specificities