Systematic Review on Quality of Life of Patients with Chronic Kidney Disease

Abstract

Background: QOL is an overall assessment of a person’s well-being, which may include physical, emotional, and social dimensions, as well as stress level, sexual function, and self-perceived health status. Endstage renal failure is a chronic disease that exerts a great negative impact on patients’ health-related QOL mainly due to the accompanied impairment or to the imposed limitations in almost all domains of their daily lives. Despite remarkable advances in the treatment of HD, the patients encounter certain physical, psychological, economic, and social problems which affect their QOL. Objectives: This review aims to examine systematically the impact of patient navigator training on Quality Of Life of Patients with Chronic Kidney Disease undergoing haemodialysis to identify: (i) QOL of patients with CKD undergoing Hemodialysis (ii) QOL of patients with CKD undergoing Hemodialysis in terms of Client centred health education, Meditation & progressive muscle relaxation technique. Methodology: Searches were conducted across 10 electronics data bases consistent keywords. Papers were screened by the title and abstract (n=733) and judged against pre-defined eligibility (n= 26). Twenty six papers were included in the review. Results: Different patient navigator training approaches were included such as client centred health education to improve knowledge related to disease condition; meditation program which includes pranayama, progressive muscle relaxation technique and mindful meditation which may indirectly impact on quality of life (Physical health, Psychological, Social relationships & Environment). Patient navigator training may improve Quality Of Life of Patients with Chronic Kidney Disease undergoing haemodialysis. Conclusion: Few studies reported effect on QOL (n=18), the lack of a clear theoretical framework resulted in ambiguous predictions about training and its effect. Methodological issues also constrain the strength of the evidence, including; small samples sizes; an absence of blinding of participants, outcome assessors; and lack of active control groups.