ScholarWorksIndianapolis
  • Communities & Collections
  • Browse ScholarWorks
  • English
  • Català
  • Čeština
  • Deutsch
  • Español
  • Français
  • Gàidhlig
  • Italiano
  • Latviešu
  • Magyar
  • Nederlands
  • Polski
  • Português
  • Português do Brasil
  • Suomi
  • Svenska
  • Türkçe
  • Tiếng Việt
  • Қазақ
  • বাংলা
  • हिंदी
  • Ελληνικά
  • Yкраї́нська
  • Log In
    or
    New user? Click here to register.Have you forgotten your password?
  1. Home
  2. Browse by Author

Browsing by Author "Townsend, Raymond R."

Now showing 1 - 3 of 3
Results Per Page
Sort Options
  • Loading...
    Thumbnail Image
    Item
    Content Validity Assessment of the Revised Illness Perception Questionnaire in CKD Using Qualitative Methods
    (MDPI, 2022-07-16) Rivera, Eleanor; Levoy, Kristin; Clark-Cutai, Maya N.; Schrauben, Sarah; Townsend, Raymond R.; Rahman, Rahman; Lash, James; Saunders, Milda; Frazier, Rebecca; Rincon-Choles, Hernan; Hirschman, Karen B.; School of Nursing
    Background: The Revised Illness Perception Questionnaire (IPQ-R) measures individuals’ unique perceptions of their illness. While psychometric properties of the IPQ-R have been demonstrated in many disease populations, its content validity has not been extensively studied in non-dialysis chronic kidney disease (CKD). Unique features of CKD (e.g., few symptoms in early stages) may impact the measurement of illness perceptions. The purpose of this study was to explore the IPQ-R content validity in a sample of CKD patients. Methods: Thirty-one participants completed the IPQ-R and were interviewed regarding their subscale scores (timeline, consequences, personal control, treatment control, coherence, cyclical, and emotions). Participants’ agreement with their scores was tallied and assessed qualitatively for themes related to the content validity of the measure. Results: Individual participant agreement with their subscale scores averaged 79% (range: 29–100%). Subscale agreement varied: timeline (100%), consequences, coherence, and emotion (83% each), cyclical (75%), personal control (65%), and treatment control (64%). A qualitative exploration of disagreement responses revealed concerns with the relevance and comprehensibility of personal control and treatment control. Conclusions: Some IPQ-R subscales may pose content validity concerns in the non-dialysis CKD population. Item modification for comprehensibility (personal control) and relevance (treatment control) should be considered. Future studies should explore the impact of a patient’s symptom experience on IPQ-R validity, especially in populations like CKD with a higher proportion of asymptomatic patients.
  • Loading...
    Thumbnail Image
    Item
    KDOQI US Commentary on the 2012 KDIGO Clinical Practice Guideline for Management of Blood Pressure in CKD
    (Elsevier, 2013) Taler, Sandra J.; Agarwal, Rajiv; Bakris, George L.; Flynn, Joseph T.; Nilsson, Peter M.; Rahman, Mahboob; Sanders, Paul W.; Textor, Stephen C.; Weir, Matthew R.; Townsend, Raymond R.; Medicine, School of Medicine
    In response to the 2012 KDIGO (Kidney Disease: Improving Global Outcomes) guideline for blood pressure management in patients with chronic kidney disease not on dialysis, the National Kidney Foundation organized a group of US experts in hypertension and transplant nephrology to review the recommendations and comment on their relevancy in the context of current US clinical practice and concerns. The overriding message was the dearth of clinical trial evidence to provide strong evidence-based recommendations. For patients with CKD with normal to mildly increased albuminuria, goal blood pressure has been relaxed to ≤140/90 mm Hg for both diabetic and nondiabetic patients. In contrast, KDIGO continues to recommend goal blood pressure ≤130/80 mm Hg for patients with chronic kidney disease with moderately or severely increased albuminuria and for all renal transplant recipients regardless of the presence of proteinuria, without supporting data. The expert panel thought the KDIGO recommendations were generally reasonable but lacking in sufficient evidence support and that additional studies are greatly needed.
  • Loading...
    Thumbnail Image
    Item
    KDOQI US Commentary on the 2017 ACC/AHA Hypertension Guideline
    (Elsevier, 2020-04-01) Kramer, Holly J.; Townsend, Raymond R.; Griffin, Karen; Flynn, Joseph T.; Weiner, Daniel E.; Rocco, Michael V.; Choi, Michael J.; Weir, Matthew R.; Chang, Tara I.; Agarwal, Rajiv; Beddhu, Srinivasan; Medicine, School of Medicine
    Hypertension is a modifiable risk factor for cardiovascular morbidity and mortality and reduction of elevated blood pressure (BP) remains an important intervention for slowing kidney disease progression. Over the past decade, the most appropriate BP target for initiation and titration of BP-lowering medications has been an area of intense research and debate within the clinical community. In 2017, the American College of Cardiology and the American Heart Association (ACC/AHA) in conjunction with several other professional societies released new hypertension guidelines based on data from a systematic review of clinical trials and observational data. While many of the recommendations in the ACC/AHA hypertension guideline are relevant to nephrology practice, BP targets and management strategies for patients receiving dialysis are not discussed. This Kidney Disease Outcomes Quality Initiative (KDOQI) commentary focuses largely on recommendations from the ACC/AHA hypertension guidelines that are pertinent to individuals at risk of chronic kidney disease or with non–dialysis-dependent chronic kidney disease. This KDOQI commentary also includes a brief discussion of the consensus statement regarding hypertension diagnosis and management for adults receiving maintenance dialysis published by the European Renal and Cardiovascular Medicine Working Group of the European Renal Association–European Dialysis and Transplant Association (ERA-EDTA) and the Hypertension and the Kidney working group of the European Society of Hypertension. Overall, we support the vast majority of the ACC/AHA recommendations and highlight select areas in which best diagnosis and treatment options remain controversial.
About IU Indianapolis ScholarWorks
  • Accessibility
  • Privacy Notice
  • Copyright © 2025 The Trustees of Indiana University