Maintenance Notice

Due to necessary scheduled maintenance, the JMIR Publications website will be unavailable from Wednesday, July 01, 2020 at 8:00 PM to 10:00 PM EST. We apologize in advance for any inconvenience this may cause you.

Who will be affected?

Accepted for/Published in: JMIR Rehabilitation and Assistive Technologies

Date Submitted: Jul 5, 2026
Date Accepted: Oct 5, 2026

The final, peer-reviewed published version of this preprint can be found here:

Analysis of Health Care Providers' Attitudes and Expectations on Intradialytic Exergaming: Qualitative SWOT Study

Zelko A, Antoniadou M, Rosenberger J, Dankulincova Veselska Z, Madarasova Geckova A, Klompstra L, Jaarsma T

Analysis of Health Care Providers' Attitudes and Expectations on Intradialytic Exergaming: Qualitative SWOT Study

JMIR Rehabil Assist Technol 2026;13:e106283

DOI: 10.2196/106283

PMID: 42981700

Game on or Game over: A qualitative SWOT analysis of healthcare providers’ attitudes and expectations on intradialytic exergaming

  • Aurel Zelko; 
  • Marianna Antoniadou; 
  • Jaroslav Rosenberger; 
  • Zuzana Dankulincova Veselska; 
  • Andrea Madarasova Geckova; 
  • Leonie Klompstra; 
  • Tiny Jaarsma

ABSTRACT

Background:

Physical inactivity significantly contributes to the rapid decline in clinical and health-related outcomes among patients undergoing haemodialysis. Exergaming may offer a safe, effective, and sustainable solution for maintaining adequate physical activity levels in these patients.

Objective:

To support its clinical applicability, our aim was to examine the attitudes and expectations of healthcare providers regarding intradialytic exergaming (IEG).

Methods:

We conducted 21 individual, in-person, semi-structured interviews with healthcare providers. Using purposive sampling, we included training assistants, nurses, nephrologists, and managers from two dialysis centres in Slovakia. The verbatim transcripts of interviews were qualitatively analysed using an inductive thematic analysis approach. The identified codes and themes were further deductively categorised into the strengths, weaknesses, opportunities, and/or threats quadrants of the SWOT framework.

Results:

We identified two strengths, two weaknesses, three opportunities, and three threats of IEG. Strengths included healthcare 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, potentially affecting its effectiveness and sustainability. Opportunities were seen in improving information availability and specificity, adjusting clinical culture, and tailoring exercises. Threats included scepticism about availability of financial resources for IEG, resistance to changes in clinical practice, and issues related to patient behaviour and privacy.

Conclusions:

Healthcare providers perceived IEG as a safe and appropriate intervention for clinical practice. To ensure high effectiveness and sustainability, it is important to consider specific expectations regarding resource availability, as well as the technological and organizational aspects of IEG. Clinical Trial: ClinicalTrials.gov NCT03511924; https://clinicaltrials.gov/study/NCT03511924


 Citation

Please cite as:

Zelko A, Antoniadou M, Rosenberger J, Dankulincova Veselska Z, Madarasova Geckova A, Klompstra L, Jaarsma T

Analysis of Health Care Providers' Attitudes and Expectations on Intradialytic Exergaming: Qualitative SWOT Study

JMIR Rehabil Assist Technol 2026;13:e106283

DOI: 10.2196/106283

PMID: 42981700

Download PDF


Request queued. Please wait while the file is being generated. It may take some time.

© The authors. All rights reserved. This is a privileged document currently under peer-review/community review (or an accepted/rejected manuscript). Authors have provided JMIR Publications with an exclusive license to publish this preprint on it's website for review and ahead-of-print citation purposes only. While the final peer-reviewed paper may be licensed under a cc-by license on publication, at this stage authors and publisher expressively prohibit redistribution of this draft paper other than for review purposes.