26 research outputs found
Effective peer-to-peer support for young people with end-stage renal disease: a mixed methods evaluation of Camp COOL
__Abstract__
__Background__ The Camp COOL programme aims to help young Dutch people with end-stage renal disease
(ESRD) develop self-management skills. Fellow patients already treated in adult care
(hereafter referred to as ‘buddies’) organise the day-to-day program, run the camp, counsel
the attendees, and also participate in the activities. The attendees are young people who still
have to transfer to adult care. This study aimed to explore the effects of this specific form of
peer-to-peer support on the self-management of young people (16–25 years) with ESRD who
participated in Camp COOL (CC) (hereafter referred to as ‘participants’).
__Methods__ A mixed methods research design was employed. Semi-structured interviews (n = 19) with
initiators/staff, participants, and healthcare professionals were conducted. These were
combined with retrospective and pre-post surveys among participants (n = 62), and
observations during two camp weeks.
__Results__ Self-reported effects of participants were: increased self-confidence, more disease-related
knowledge, feeling capable of being more responsible and open towards others, and daring to
stand up for yourself. According to participants, being a buddy or having one positively
affected them. Self-efficacy of attendees and independence of buddies increased, while
attendees’ sense of social inclusion decreased (measured as domains of health-related quality
of life). The buddy role was a pro-active combination of being supervisor, advisor, and
leader.
__Conclusions__ Camp COOL allowed young people to support each other in adjusting to everyday life with
ESRD. Participating in the camp positively influenced self-management in this group. Peerto-
peer support through buddies was much appreciated. Support from young adults was not
only beneficial for adolescent attendees, but also for young adult buddies. Paediatric
nephrologists are encouraged to refer patients to CC and to facilitate such initiatives.
Together with nephrologists in adult care, they could take on a role in selecting buddies
Renal association clinical practice guideline in post-operative care in the kidney transplant recipient
These guidelines cover the care of patients from the period following kidney transplantation until the transplant is no longer working or the patient dies. During the early phase prevention of acute rejection and infection are the priority. After around 3-6 months, the priorities change to preservation of transplant function and avoiding the long-term complications of immunosuppressive medication (the medication used to suppress the immune system to prevent rejection). The topics discussed include organization of outpatient follow up, immunosuppressive medication, treatment of acute and chronic rejection, and prevention of complications. The potential complications discussed include heart disease, infection, cancer, bone disease and blood disorders. There is also a section on contraception and reproductive issues.Immediately after the introduction there is a statement of all the recommendations. These recommendations are written in a language that we think should be understandable by many patients, relatives, carers and other interested people. Consequently we have not reworded or restated them in this lay summary. They are graded 1 or 2 depending on the strength of the recommendation by the authors, and AD depending on the quality of the evidence that the recommendation is based on
Donor-derived infection-The challenge for transplant safety
Organ transplantation, including of the heart, lung, kidney, liver, pancreas, and small bowel, is considered the therapy of choice for end-stage organ failure. Each year, over 70,000 organs are implanted worldwide. One donor may provide multiple organs, as well as corneas and other tissues, for multiple recipients. The degree of risk for transmission of infection carried with grafts, notably of viruses, is largely unknown and, for a specific organ, difficult to assess. The approach to microbiological screening of organ donors varies with national and regional regulations and with the availability and performance of microbiological assays used for potential donors. Transmission of both expected or common, and unexpected infections has been observed in organ transplants, generally recognized after development of clusters of infections among recipients of organs from a common donor. Other than for unusual or catastrophic events, few data exist that define the incidence and manifestations of donor-derived infections or the ideal assays to use in screening to prevent such transmissions. Absolute prevention of the transmission of donor-derived infections in organ transplantation is not possible. However, improvements in screening technologies will enhance the safety of transplantation in the future