Answers are grounded in this paper and cite their sources.
Background Physical inactivity significantly contributes to the rapid decline in clinical and health-related outcomes among patients undergoing hemodialysis. Exergaming may offer a safe, effective, and sustainable solution for maintaining adequate physical activity levels in these patients. Objective This study aims to support its clinical applicability; our aim was to examine the attitudes and expectations of health care providers regarding intradialytic exergaming (IEG) in hemodialysis care in Slovakia. Methods We conducted 21 individual, in-person, semistructured interviews with health care providers. Using purposive sampling, we included training assistants, nurses, nephrologists, and managers from 2 dialysis centers in Slovakia. The verbatim transcripts of interviews were qualitatively analyzed using an inductive thematic analysis approach. The identified codes and themes were further deductively categorized into the strengths, weaknesses, opportunities, and/or threats quadrants of the Strengths, Weaknesses, Opportunities, and Threats (SWOT) framework. Results We identified 2 strengths, 2 weaknesses, 3 opportunities, and 3 threats of IEG. Strengths included health care providers’ enthusiasm and belief in the safety of IEG. Weaknesses involved concerns about the complexity of IEG and low digital literacy among patients and providers. Opportunities were seen in improving information availability and specificity, adjusting clinical culture, and tailoring exercises. Threats included skepticism about the availability of financial resources for IEG, resistance to changes in clinical practice, and issues related to patient behavior and privacy. Conclusions Health care providers perceived IEG as a safe and appropriate intervention for clinical practice. To improve implementation strategies, it is important to consider specific expectations regarding resource availability, as well as the technological and organizational aspects of IEG.
No takes yet. Share an insight, caveat, or question.
Zelko et al. (2026) studied this question.
Synapse has enriched 10 related papers. Consider them for comparative context: