Hemodialysis in elderly patients

A comparison of the discursive practices of perception of patient participation in haemodialysis units

BACKGROUND

According to Norwegian law, nurses are obligated to provide an acceptable level of health assistance to patients and their family members and to allow patients and their family members to participate in the planning of patient care and treatment.

AIM

The aim of this study is to compare the perceptions of older patients undergoing haemodialysis treatment and of their next of kin and of nurses regarding patient participation in the context of haemodialysis treatment.

RESEARCH DESIGN

The study adopts an approach that is both comparative and explorative in nature by examining the narratives of patients, nurses and next of kin and by performing critical discourse analysis as outlined by Fairclough.

ETHICAL CONSIDERATIONS

Permission to carry out the research was granted by the Regional Committee for Medical and Health Research Ethics of Mid-Norway and by the participating hospitals. Informed consent and confidentiality were ensured.

FINDINGS

Two discourses were found: (a) the discourse of paternalism with the discursive practices of achieving physiological balance in patients, trusting the healthcare team and being excluded or included in the difficult end-of-life decision-making process, and (b) the discourse of patient participation, with the themes of maintaining patients' quality of life and trusting patients.

CONCLUSION

The participation of older patients and their next of kin was not as well integrated as social practice in dialysis units. The dominant discourse seemed to have an ideology and social practice of paternalism. However, there existed hegemonic struggles for an ideology of patient participation that involved (a) achieving physiological balance in patients versus maintaining patients' quality of life, (b) trusting the healthcare team versus trusting the patient, and (c) being excluded versus included in the difficult end-of-life decision-making process.

Elderly recipients of hepatitis C positive renal allografts can quickly develop liver disease

Our institution explored using allografts from donors with Hepatitis C virus (HCV) for elderly renal transplantation (RT). Thirteen HCV- elderly recipients were transplanted with HCV+ allografts (eD+/R-) between January 2003 and April 2009. Ninety HCV- elderly recipients of HCV- allografts (eD-/R-), eight HCV+ recipients of HCV+ allografts (D+/R+) and thirteen HCV+ recipients of HCV- allografts (D-/R+) were also transplanted. Median follow-up was 1.5 (range 0.8-5) years. Seven eD+/R- developed a positive HCV viral load and six had elevated liver transaminases with evidence of hepatitis on biopsy. Overall, eD+/R- survival was 46% while the eD-/R- survival was 85% (P = 0.003). Seven eD+/R- died during follow-up. Causes included multi-organ failure and sepsis (n = 4), cancer (n = 1), failure-to-thrive (n = 1) and surgical complications (n = 1). One eD+/R- died from causes directly related to HCV infection. In conclusion, multiple eD+/R- quickly developed HCV-related liver disease and infections were a frequent cause of morbidity and mortality.

Nurses’ perceptions of patient participation in hemodialysis treatment

The aim of this study is to explore how nurses perceive patient participations of patients over 75 years old undergoing hemodialysis treatment in dialysis units, and of their next of kin. Ten nurses told stories about what happened in the dialysis units. These stories were analyzed with critical discourse analysis. Three discursive practices are found: (1) the nurses’ power and control; (2) sharing power with the patient; and (3) transferring power to the next of kin. The first and the predominant discursive practice can be explained with an ideology of paternalism, in which the nurses used biomedical explanations and the ethical principle of benefice to justify their actions. The second can be explained with an ideology of participation, in which the nurses used ethical narratives as a way to let the patients participate in the treatment. The third seemed to involve autonomous decision-making and the ethical principle of autonomy for the next of kin in the difficult end-of-life decisions.

The next of kin of older people undergoing haemodialysis: a discursive perspective on perceptions of participation

AIM

This paper is a report of a study conducted to explore how the family members of older people who will undergo haemodialysis treatment for the rest of their lives perceive participation.

BACKGROUND

The rights of families to participate in treatment and health care are supported by international law, and by national law in Norway since 1999.

METHOD

This study, which employed an explorative qualitative approach, was carried out in Norway in 2008. Data were derived from transcribed interviews with seven family members underwent critical discourse analysis.

FINDINGS

Three discourse practices about the next of kin perception of participation were found: (1) to care and take control, (2) to struggle for involvement, and (3) to be forgotten and powerless. The next of kin said that they had no dialogue with the healthcare team, and some fought to be included in the decision-making process.

CONCLUSION

The dominant part of the discourse as expressed by the next of kin seems to be a paternalistic ideology. Thus, finding ways to enable the next of kin to participate in the decision-making process seems to be a major challenge for the healthcare team in the dialysis units.

Perceptions of patient participation amongst elderly patients with end-stage renal disease in a dialysis unit

AIM

A patient's right to influence treatment and health care has been guaranteed by Norwegian law since 1999. The aim of this study was to explore how elderly patients with end-stage renal disease who are undergoing treatment with haemodialysis for the rest of their lives perceive patient participation in a dialysis unit.

METHODS

This study, which was inspired by critical discourse analysis, drew on data derived from transcribed interviews with 11 patients.

FINDINGS

Two discourses related to patient participation were identified. The first and dominant discourse was called the health-care team's power and dominance. Both environmental conditions and the team's practice exercised power and control over the patients. The patients trusted the health-care team, but some felt powerless and were afraid of what might happen if they refused to follow the instructions. The health-care team owned the knowledge and decided what the patients needed to know. Most of all the patients wanted dialogue about the future. After years of treatment, patient identity seemed to be threatened by this situation. The second discourse is called the patients struggling for shared decision-making. Some patients struggled to be involved in decision-making about 'dry weight', diet, blood access and time of treatment when these factors threatened their well-being and the quality of their daily lives.

CONCLUSIONS

The elderly patients' right to participate in their haemodialysis treatment did not seem to be well incorporated into the social practices of haemodialysis units. Changing the social practices in the dialysis units from a paternalistic ideology to an ideology of participation will require consideration of the context, the dialogue and the process of shared decision-making with the patient.

Hospital admissions in elderly patients on chronic hemodialysis

BACKGROUND

The purpose of this study was to determine whether number of hospital admissions per patient per year (n/[pt-yr]) and hospital days per patient per year (d/[pt-yr]) differ between elderly and younger patients on chronic hemodialysis (HD).

PATIENTS AND METHODS

In a retrospective cohort analysis of incident HD patients in one dialysis unit over 15 years, we compared 166 HD patients older than 70 years (77.1 ± 4.7 yrs) at the onset of HD (group A) and 216 patients younger than 70 years both at onset (57.1 ± 7.6 yrs) and at the end of the HD period (group B). Eighty (48.2%) of group A and 141 (65.3%) patients of group B had diabetes mellitus.

RESULTS

No differences were noted in the overall hospitalization rate, presented as mean, {95% Confidence interval} (group A 2.40 {2.04-2.75}, group B 2.03 {1.89-2.16} n[pt-yr]) and days/[pt-year] (group A 33.6 {25.3-41.8}, group B 24.1 {18.9-29.23}). Group A had higher number of hospitalization days (P = 0.012) for surgery or trauma and higher rate (P = 0.045) and days (P = 0.041) of hospitalization for miscellaneous causes, primarily pulmonary disease, or malignancy. Among diabetic patients, group A had only a greater number of hospital days for cardiac disease (P = 0.050). Among patients without diabetes, group A had a higher number for hospital days for surgery or trauma (P = 0.027). All other univariate comparisons were not significant. Multiple linear regression identified comorbidity, quantified by the Charlson index, Caucasian race and poor compliance with the HD schedule as predictors of admission rate and days per year for vascular access issues and comorbidity, poor compliance, and advanced age at onset of HD as predictors of admission for causes other than vascular access related.

CONCLUSION

Hospitalizations, which affect quality of life, differ little between elderly and younger patients on HD. Therefore, hospitalizations do not constitute an argument for restricting access to HD to elderly patients.