Page 36 - Exploring the Potential of Self-Monitoring Kidney Function After Transplantation - Céline van Lint

34
Chapter 2
Table 4. Experience of advantages and disadvantages of self-monitoring at baseline and follow-up.
Baseline
It is an advantage that... Mean* SD - I can control creatinine regularly 4.20 .91
- I can control blood pressure regularly 4.20 .91
- Physicians have direct access to results 4.72 .46
- Changes in my condition are noticed 4.76 .52 quickly
- I have to take up a more active role in my 4.68 .56 own care
- I receive a warning in case of raised 4.76 .44 creatinine levels
It is a disadvantage that...
- I have to perform measurements myself 1.60 1.00
- Performing the measurements takes 2.00 1.32 time
- I have to interpret results myself 1.72 1.17
- I can keep track of values digitally 1.88 1.13
- I have to take up a more active role in my 1.68 1.18 own care
* On a scale of 1-5.
Follow-up Dependent t-test
Mean* SD p 3.84 1.38 .15
4.08 1.15 .60 3.96 1.31 .01 4.08 1.19 .02
4.04 1.06 .01 4.20 1.04 .01
1.36 .91 .16 1.48 .92 .05
1.16 .47 .03 1.12 .44 .00 1.36 .91 .12
that self-monitoring is not just an attractive option for a small selection of patients, which has been observed in other chronic disease populations27;38-40, but may be appealing to the majority of recipients of a living donor kidney.
However, for a successful implementation of self-monitoring into post-transplantational care some barriers should be considered. Several factors were related to patients’ satisfaction with self- monitoring. Firstly, although patients’ relatively low levels of trust in the accuracy of the creatinine meter did not seem to discourage them from measuring, patients were more satisfied if they perceived the self-monitoring devices as being reliable. This corresponds with existing literature, showing that patients’ confidence in the accuracy and perceived reliability of devices is an important prerequisite to the acceptance of these devices.18;19 Although patients received instructions for trend monitoring, their unfamiliarity with interpreting successive rather than single measurement values may have hampered their trust in the creatinine device. Indeed, trend monitoring may be more