IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/plo/pone00/0224546.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

Nurses’ and patients’ experiences and preferences of the ankle-brachial pressure index and multi-site photoplethysmography for the diagnosis of peripheral arterial disease: A qualitative study

Author

Listed:
  • Jason Scott
  • Jan Lecouturier
  • Nikki Rousseau
  • Gerard Stansby
  • Andrew Sims
  • Lesley Wilson
  • John Allen

Abstract

Peripheral arterial disease is a global health problem, affecting around 20% of people aged over 60 years. Whilst ankle-brachial pressure index (ABPI) is regularly used for diagnosis, it has a number of limitations, which have presented a need for alternative methods of diagnosis. Multi-site photoplethysmography (MPPG) is one such method, but evidence of acceptability of both methods is lacking. This study aims to describe and compare preferences and experiences amongst nurses and patients of ABPI and MPPG use in primary care. We used qualitative research methods in the context of a clinical diagnostic study comparing ABPI with MPPG. Use of ABPI and MPPG by 13 nurses were observed with 51 patients across general practice surgeries in North-East England in 2015/16. Follow-up semi-structured interviews were conducted with 12 nurses and 27 patients. Data were thematically analysed. Two major themes were identified: (1) device preferences; (2) test discomfort and anxiety. There was a compelling preference for MPPG due to ease of use, speed of the test, patient comfort, and perceived device accuracy/objectivity. However some patients struggled to identify a preference, describing ambivalence to medical testing. ABPI was deemed uncomfortable and painful, particularly when the blood pressure cuff was inflated at the lower limbs. There was also evidence of anxiety amongst patients when their foot pulses were not identified using ABPI. Whilst ABPI is a non-invasive and routine procedure it was associated with a number of drawbacks in clinical practice. Nurses required considerable dexterity to employ the test, and it resulted in anxiety amongst some patients. Conversely, MPPG was deemed to be easier and quicker to use, and perceived to be less subjective. Should diagnostic accuracy and cost be comparable to ABPI, then the findings of this study suggest MPPG would be preferable to ABPI for patients as well as nurses.

Suggested Citation

  • Jason Scott & Jan Lecouturier & Nikki Rousseau & Gerard Stansby & Andrew Sims & Lesley Wilson & John Allen, 2019. "Nurses’ and patients’ experiences and preferences of the ankle-brachial pressure index and multi-site photoplethysmography for the diagnosis of peripheral arterial disease: A qualitative study," PLOS ONE, Public Library of Science, vol. 14(11), pages 1-15, November.
  • Handle: RePEc:plo:pone00:0224546
    DOI: 10.1371/journal.pone.0224546
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: https://journals.plos.org/plosone/article?id=10.1371/journal.pone.0224546
    Download Restriction: no

    File URL: https://journals.plos.org/plosone/article/file?id=10.1371/journal.pone.0224546&type=printable
    Download Restriction: no

    File URL: https://libkey.io/10.1371/journal.pone.0224546?utm_source=ideas
    LibKey link: if access is restricted and if your library uses this service, LibKey will redirect you to where you can use your library subscription to access this item
    ---><---

    More about this item

    Statistics

    Access and download statistics

    Corrections

    All material on this site has been provided by the respective publishers and authors. You can help correct errors and omissions. When requesting a correction, please mention this item's handle: RePEc:plo:pone00:0224546. See general information about how to correct material in RePEc.

    If you have authored this item and are not yet registered with RePEc, we encourage you to do it here. This allows to link your profile to this item. It also allows you to accept potential citations to this item that we are uncertain about.

    We have no bibliographic references for this item. You can help adding them by using this form .

    If you know of missing items citing this one, you can help us creating those links by adding the relevant references in the same way as above, for each refering item. If you are a registered author of this item, you may also want to check the "citations" tab in your RePEc Author Service profile, as there may be some citations waiting for confirmation.

    For technical questions regarding this item, or to correct its authors, title, abstract, bibliographic or download information, contact: plosone (email available below). General contact details of provider: https://journals.plos.org/plosone/ .

    Please note that corrections may take a couple of weeks to filter through the various RePEc services.

    IDEAS is a RePEc service. RePEc uses bibliographic data supplied by the respective publishers.