PurposeThis study evaluated current fertility care forCKD patients by assessing the perspectives of nephrolo-gists and nurses in the dialysis department.MethodsTwo different surveys were distributed forthis cross-sectional study among Dutch nephrologists(N=312) and dialysis nurses (N=1211). ResultsResponse rates were 50.9% (nephrologists) and45.4% (nurses). Guidelines on fertility care were presentin the departments of 9.0% of the nephrologists and 15.6%of the nurses. 61.7% of the nephrologists and 23.6% ofthe nurses informed ≥50% of their patients on potentialchanges in fertility due to a decline in renal function.Fertility subjects discussed by nephrologists included “wishto have children” (91.2%), “risk of pregnancy for patients’health” (85.8%), and “inheritance of the disease” (81.4%).Barriers withholding nurses from discussing FD werebased on “the age of the patient” (62.6%), “insufficienttraining” (55.2%), and “language and ethnicity” (51.6%).29.2% of the nurses felt competent in discussing fertility,8.3% had sufficient knowledge about fertility, and 75.7%needed to expand their knowledge. More knowledge andcompetence were associated with providing fertility healthcare (p< 0.01). ConclusionsIn most nephrology departments, the guide-lines to appoint which care provider should provide fertil-ity care to CKD patients are absent. Fertility counselingis routinely provided by most nephrologists, nurses oftenskip this part of care mainly due to insufficiencies in self-imposed competence and knowledge and barriers based oncultural diversity. The outcomes identified a need for fer-tility guidelines in the nephrology department and trainingand education for nurses on providing fertility care. CC BY 4.0https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/
MULTIFILE
Background and aim: Moderate preterm (MP) birth is associated with an increased risk of developmental problems. However, post-discharge support for this group is scarce. The aim of this study was to evaluate the feasibility of a post-discharge parenting program (TOP program) for MP infants. Three feasibility dimensions were evaluated (1) recruitment capability and compliance, (2) intervention acceptability, and (3) limited efficacy testing. Methods: A group of MP infants with a gestational age (GA) between 320/7‐346/7 weeks and their parents received six home visits by a TOP interventionist until 6 months corrected age (CA). A pre-posttest intervention design with quantitative and qualitative measures was used. Recruitment capability and compliance, acceptability, and satisfaction with the intervention were evaluated using a questionnaire, checklists, interviews, and a focus group. Infant socio-emotional development, parental distress, self-efficacy, and reflective functioning were measured with questionnaires. Observation measurements were used for infant motor development and parental sensitivity. Results: Thirty-two families completed the six home visits. The satisfaction rate (scale 0–10) was remarkably high (Mean 9.4, range: 8–10). Parents reported that the program was suitable, enhanced their understanding of their infants' developmental needs, and increased their self-efficacy. The infants showed age-appropriate motor and socio-emotional development post-intervention. Parental self-efficacy, reflective functioning, and sensitivity improved from pre to post intervention, with small to large effect sizes. Conclusion: The study demonstrated high compliance, acceptability, and satisfaction with the TOP program for MP infants with promising infant and parent outcomes. This study contributes to the preparatory work prior to a larger scale evaluation and dissemination.
