Discussing Conservative Management With Older Patients With CKD: An Interview Study of Nephrologists

Comparing Nephrologists' Self-Reported Decision-Making Skills and Treatment Attitudes With Their Patients' Experiences of Making Kidney Therapy Decisions and Receiving Nephrology Care

BackgroundDialysis is often initiated in the United States without exploring patients' preferred decision-making style, and conservative kidney management (CKM) is infrequently presented. To improve kidney therapy (KT) decision-making, research on nephrologists' comfort with various decision-making styles, attitudes towards CKM, and reports of patients' lived experiences with KT decision-making is needed.MethodsWe surveyed 28 nephrologists and 58 of their patients aged ≥75 years. The nephrologist survey was designed to gauge their comfort levels with decision-making styles and attitudes towards CKM. The patient survey assessed experiences in making KT decisions.ResultsThe average age of nephrologists was 43 years, and that of patients was 82 years. Nephrologists rated themselves as comfortable with various decision styles: paternalistic (60.7%), shared decision-making (92.8%), and patient-driven decision-making (67.8%). Nearly 57% of nephrologists felt challenged or were neutral in determining CKM's suitability, and 39% reported difficulties in discussing CKM with patients or were neutral. Only 38 % of patients recalled discussing CKM with their nephrologists, and a minority reported discussing CKM-related topics such as life expectancy (24.7%), quality of life (QOL) (45.1%), and end-of-life care (17.5%).ConclusionsMost nephrologists displayed comfort with various decision-making styles; however, many described difficulties in guiding patients toward CKM. In contrast, patients reported gaps in vital aspects of KT decision-making and CKM choices, such as discussions of life expectancy, QOL, and end-of-life care. Raising awareness of blind spots in decision-making skills and educating nephrologists in KT decision-making to include CKM and other person-centered aspects of care are needed.

Is Dialysis Nephrology's Original Sin?

The introduction of hemodialysis in the 1960s and the subsequent enactment of Medicare coverage in 1972 came to shape the evolution of nephrology as a specialty. The subsequent focus on dialysis care as a principal form of reimbursement led to a host of benefits and challenges for nephrologists. While the specialty initially enjoyed great popularity and exponential growth, a widening schism between researchers and clinicians developed. This limited the growth of robust clinical research in nephrology while dialysis care encumbered clinicians with exhausting travel, routinized rounding schedules, and burdensome navigation of electronic medical record systems. Poor morale and burnout among practitioners, coupled with the ethical issues associated with corporatized medicine have resulted in severe challenges for the specialty including difficulties with recruitment. The history of nephrology elucidates the convergence of medical science, public policy, and corporatization while providing a lens on the wider issues of contemporary American health care. Ongoing efforts to refocus nephrology on preventive care in chronic kidney disease, new diagnostic and treatment modalities, and shifting of dialysis care to nonphysician providers should be accelerated.

Designing qualitative research with value in the clinical and epidemiological context: what, why and how

Clinical and epidemiological research is indispensable for improvements in evidence-based healthcare and health outcomes, but it also leaves important gaps in our understanding of health and illness. Qualitative research has been increasingly recognized as a key to addressing some of these gaps, using both exploratory (to gain a more complete and in-depth understanding of problems) and explanatory (to explain quantitative results) approaches. By finding out 'what's going on' and bringing people's stories to light, qualitative research is widely advocated as crucial in enhancing patient-centered research and healthcare. To date, most clinicians, clinical researchers and epidemiologists are relatively unfamiliar with and untrained in qualitative research-a type of research that, compared with quantitative research, requires different research skills and uses a different jargon, type of reasoning, and methods. This article aims to equip them with the basic knowledge necessary to appraise and design qualitative research. Specifically, we provide a comprehensive overview of (i) what qualitative research is, including various examples of qualitative research questions and explanations of the contrasting properties of quantitative and qualitative research; (ii) what constitutes the added value of qualitative research in the clinical and epidemiological context, illustrated using numerous research studies conducted within nephrology; and (iii) practical guidelines for designing qualitative research within this context, including a self-developed checklist containing essential information to include in qualitative research protocols. In doing so, we hope to enrich clinical and epidemiological research with complementary qualitative evidence-amongst others, invaluable insights into patients' lived experiences and perceptions-and thereby greatly enhance patient-centered research and evidence-based healthcare.

The Need for Culturally Tailored CKD Education in Older Latino Patients and Their Families

Older Latino adults (aged 65+years) comprise the fastest growing minoritized group among the older population in the United States and experience a disproportionate burden of kidney failure as well as disparities in kidney care compared with non-Hispanic White individuals. Despite significant need and barriers uniquely faced by this population, few educational resources or decision aids are available to meet the language and cultural needs of Latino patients. Decision aids are designed to improve knowledge and empower individuals to engage in shared decision making and have been shown to improve decisional quality and goal-concordant care among older patients with chronic kidney disease (CKD). In this commentary, we examine the barriers faced by older Latino people with CKD who must make dialysis initiation decisions. We conclude that there is a need for culturally concordant decision aids tailored for older Latino patients with CKD to overcome barriers in access to care and improve patient-centered care for older Latino CKD patients.

Exploring the relationship between professional roles and behavioural intentions in chronic kidney disease management: a cross-sectional study among primary and specialist health professionals in Shanghai, China

OBJECTIVES

General practitioners, nephrologists and renal nurses play key roles in professional integration in chronic kidney disease (CKD) management. Professional roles may influence professionals' behavioural intentions, namely, the degree to which individuals formulate behavioural plans to attain a behavioural goal. However, little is known about the relationship between professional roles and their behavioural intentions in CKD management. Therefore, in this study, we aimed to explore the relationship between professional roles and their behavioural intentions in CKD management and the mediating role of normative and functional factors.

DESIGN

Cross-sectional.

SETTING

A cross-sectional survey study was conducted in Shanghai, China.

PARTICIPANTS

A total of 244 responses were obtained, including 145 from general practitioners, 37 from nephrologists and 62 from renal nurses. We used a self-administered questionnaire to collect data through hospital unit/Community Health Service Centre visits. We performed exploratory factor analysis for behavioural intentions in CKD management. The Karlson-Holm-Breen method was used to decompose the total effect of roles on behavioural intentions in CKD management into direct and indirect (ie, mediational) effects and to calculate the mediated percentage.

RESULTS

The indirect effect of personal norm (should CKD management be included in daily work or not) accounted for 51.91% of the total effect of nephrologists on one-to-multiple CKD management intentions and 43.79% of the total effect of renal nurses on one-to-multiple CKD management intentions.

CONCLUSION

Our results support the mediating pathways of personal norms on the relationship between roles and behavioural intentions, but the mediating role of functional factors was not supported. These findings suggest that enhancing the personal norms of general practitioners may benefit their behavioural intentions in CKD management.

Disparities in kidney care in vulnerable populations: A multinational study from the ISN-GKHA

Vulnerable populations, such as the elderly, children, displaced people, and refugees, often encounter challenges in accessing healthcare. In this study, we used data from the third iteration of the International Society of Nephrology Global Kidney Health Atlas (ISN-GKHA) to describe kidney care access and delivery to vulnerable populations across countries and regions. Using data from an international survey of clinicians, policymakers, and patient advocates, we assessed the funding and coverage of vulnerable populations on all aspects of kidney replacement therapies (KRT). Overall, 167 countries or jurisdictions participated in the survey, representing 97.4% of the world's population. Children had less access than adults to KRT: hemodialysis (HD) in 74% of countries, peritoneal dialysis (PD) in 53% of countries, and kidney transplantation (KT) in 80% of countries. Available nephrologist workforce for pediatric kidney care was much lower than for adults (0.69 per million population [pmp] vs 10.08 pmp). Refugees or displaced people with kidney failure did not have access to HD, PD, or KT in 21%, 33%, and 37% of the participating countries, respectively. Low-income countries (LICs) were less likely to provide KRT access to refugees compared to high-income countries (HICs): HD: 13% vs 22%; PD: 19% vs 61%; KT: 30% vs 44%. Testing for kidney disease was routinely offered to elderly people in only 61% of countries: LICs (45%), lower-middle-income countries (56%), upper-middle-income countries (54%), and HICs (75%). Equitable access to kidney care for vulnerable people, particularly for children and displaced people, remains an area of unmet need. Strategies are needed to address this issue.

Barriers to conservative kidney management for Japanese healthcare professionals involved in the treatment of end-stage renal disease

BACKGROUND

Conservative kidney management (CKM) is a treatment alternative for patients with end-stage kidney disease (ESKD). Despite the increasing population of elderly dialysis patients in Japan, CKM is not as readily available compared with that in North America and Europe. Therefore, it is important to clarify the barriers to CKM in Japan.

METHODS

We interviewed 11 experts to explore their beliefs and issues regarding CKM. Based on the interviews, we categorized the CKM barriers into eight categories and created a 24-item questionnaire. A questionnaire survey was conducted among 112 medical professionals involved in ESKD management. To investigate the types of barriers, we conducted an exploratory factor analysis using the questionnaire results.

RESULTS

Responses were obtained from 53 (47.3%) of 112 subjects (18 doctors, 29 nurses, 6 clinical engineers), with 94.3% considering CKM as a treatment option for ESKD. Factor analysis categorized the questions into the following: (1) Lack of palliative care experience, (2) Ethics and responsibility, (3) Patient's problem, (4) Dialog with patients and families, and (5) Lack of support system. Regarding barriers to CKM, "lack of experience in palliative care" and "lack of support system" scored the highest, and "ethics and responsibility" scored the lowest.

CONCLUSIONS

Barriers to CKM may be classified into five factors, with "lack of experience in palliative care" and "lack of support system" being the important barriers to overcome. Additionally, most healthcare professionals consider CKM as the fourth option for renal replacement therapy.

Communicating treatment options to older patients with advanced kidney disease: a conversation analysis study

BACKGROUND

Choosing to have dialysis or conservative kidney management is often challenging for older people with advanced kidney disease. While we know that clinical communication has a major impact on patients' treatment decision-making, little is known about how this occurs in practice. The OSCAR study (Optimising Staff-Patient Communication in Advanced Renal disease) aimed to identify how clinicians present kidney failure treatment options in consultations with older patients and the implications of this for patient engagement.

METHODS

An observational, multi-method study design was adopted. Outpatient consultations at four UK renal units were video-recorded, and patients completed a post-consultation measure of shared decision-making (SDM-Q-9). Units were sampled according to variable rates of conservative management. Eligible patients were ≥ 65 years old with an eGFR of ≤ 20 mls/min/1.73m2 within the last 6 months. Video-recordings were screened to identify instances where clinicians presented both dialysis and conservative management. These instances were transcribed in fine-grained detail and recurrent practices identified using conversation-analytic methods, an empirical, observational approach to studying language and social interaction.

RESULTS

110 outpatient consultations were recorded (105 video, 5 audio only), involving 38 clinicians (doctors and nurses) and 94 patients: mean age 77 (65-97); 61 males/33 females; mean eGFR 15 (range 4-23). There were 21 instances where clinicians presented both dialysis and conservative management. Two main practices were identified: (1) Conservative management and dialysis both presented as the main treatment options; (2) Conservative management presented as a subordinate option to dialysis. The first practice was less commonly used (6 vs. 15 cases), but associated with more opportunities in the conversation for patients to ask questions and share their perspective, through which they tended to evaluate conservative management as an option that was potentially personally relevant. This practice was also associated with significantly higher post-consultation ratings of shared decision-making among patients (SDM-Q-9 median total score 24 vs. 37, p = 0.041).

CONCLUSIONS

Presenting conservative management and dialysis as on an equal footing enables patient to take a more active role in decision-making. Findings should inform clinical communication skills training and education.

CLINICAL TRIAL NUMBER

No trial number as this is not a clinical trial.

Palliative Care Acceptability for Older Adults with Advanced CKD: A Qualitative Study of Patients and Nephrologists

Rationale & Objective

Older adults in the United States often receive kidney therapies that do not align with their goals. Palliative care (PC) specialists are experts in assisting patients with the goals of care discussions and decision support, yet views and experiences of older patients who have received PC while contemplating kidney therapy decisions and their nephrologists remain unexplored. We evaluated the acceptability of CKD-EDU, a PC-based kidney therapy decision support intervention for adults ≥75 years of age.

Study Design

Qualitative study.

Setting & Participants

Two trained research coordinators interviewed patients and nephrologists participating in the CKD-EDU study.

Analytical Approach

Three coders analyzed the qualitative data using a thematic analysis approach to identify salient themes pertaining to intervention acceptability.

Results

Patients (n = 19; mean age: 80 years) viewed the PC intervention favorably, noting PC physicians' excellent communication skills, whole-person care, and decision-making support, including comprehension of prognostic information. Nephrologists (n = 24; mean age) welcomed PC assistance in decision making, support for conservative kidney management, and symptom management; a minority voiced concerns about third-party involvement in their practice.

Limitations

Single-center study.

Conclusions

Overall, patients and nephrologists generally found the PC intervention to be acceptable. Future testing of the current PC-based decision support intervention in a larger randomized controlled trial for older people navigating kidney therapy decisions is needed.

Providers' Experiences Discussing Care for Patients with Kidney Failure Who Forgo KRT: A National Qualitative Study

Background

Many nephrology providers express difficulty in discussing care options for patients who forgo KRT, which hampers their ability to help patients make decisions about their current and future treatment of kidney disease.

Methods

We conducted a qualitative study using interviews with a national sample of nephrology providers (i.e., physicians and advanced practice providers) who participated in US professional societies between July and December 2022. We performed a thematic analysis of interviews to identify emergent themes reflecting providers' experiences discussing care for patients who forgo KRT.

Results

There were 21 providers (age 54±13 years, female 81%, White 32%) who participated in interviews, of whom 43% were physicians and most (57%) practiced in academic settings. Three dominant themes emerged from interviews reflecting challenges to discussing the option to forgo KRT: (1) Inconsistent terminology: while providers sought to use terms to describe care for patients who forgo KRT that affirmed patients' decision, clearly conveyed that KRT would not be pursued, and were already familiar to patients and other providers, they disagreed about which terms satisfied these priorities; (2) blurred distinctions between KRT and its alternative: providers' descriptions of their care practices suggested that differences in their approaches to caring for patients who forgo KRT and those who are planning to pursue KRT could be opaque; and (3) deciphering patients' decision to forgo KRT: providers did not readily accept patients' expressed preferences to forgo KRT at face value and described using a variety of methods to assess whether patients would follow through with their decision.

Conclusions

Providers used different, inconsistent terms to describe care for patients who forgo KRT. They disagreed about what this care entailed and were uncertain about what patients might mean when they express not wanting to undergo KRT.

Decision-Making Engagement Preferences among Older Adults with CKD

Key Points

Clinicians’ uncertainty about the degree to which older patients prefer to engage in decision making remains a key barrier to shared decision making. Most older adults with advanced CKD preferred a collaborative or active role in decision making.

Background

Older adults with kidney failure face preference-sensitive decisions regarding dialysis initiation. Despite recommendations, few older patients with kidney failure experience shared decision making. Clinician uncertainty about the degree to which older patients prefer to engage in decision making remains a key barrier.

Methods

This study follows a mixed-methods explanatory, longitudinal, sequential design at four diverse US centers with patients (English-fluent, aged ≥70 years, CKD stages 4–5, nondialysis) from 2018 to 2020. Patient preferences for engagement in decision making were assessed using the Control Preferences Scale, reflecting the degree to which patients want to be involved in their decision making: active (the patient prefers to make the final decision), collaborative (the patient wants to share decision making with the clinician), or passive (the patient wants the clinician to make the final decision) roles. Semistructured interviews about engagement and decision making were conducted in two waves (2019, 2020) with purposively sampled patients and clinicians. Descriptive statistics and ANOVA were used for quantitative analyses; thematic and narrative analyses were used for qualitative data.

Results

Among 363 patient participants, mean age was 78±6 years, 42% were female, and 21% had a high school education or less. Control Preferences Scale responses reflected that patients preferred to engage actively (48%) or collaboratively (43%) versus passively (8%). Preferred roles remained stable at 3-month follow-up. Seventy-six participants completed interviews (45 patients, 31 clinicians). Four themes emerged: control preference roles reflect levels of decisional engagement; clinicians control information flow, especially about prognosis; adapting a clinical approach to patient preferred roles; and clinicians' responsiveness to patient preferred roles supports patients' satisfaction with shared decision making.

Conclusions

Most older adults with advanced CKD preferred a collaborative or active role in decision making. Appropriately matched information flow with patient preferences was critical for satisfaction with shared decision making.

Clinical Trial registry name and registration number:

Decision Aid for Renal Therapy (DART), NCT03522740 .

Choosing conservative care in advanced chronic kidney disease: a scoping review of patients' perspectives

BACKGROUND

Conservative care (CC) is a viable treatment option for some patients with kidney failure. Choosing between dialysis and CC can be a complex decision in which involvement of patients is desirable. Gaining insight into the experiences and preferences of patients regarding this decision-making process is an important initial step to improve care. We aimed to identify what is known about the perspective of patients regarding decision-making when considering CC.

METHODS

PubMed, EMBASE and Cochrane databases were systematically searched on 23 February 2023 for qualitative and quantitative studies on patient-reported experiences on decision-making about CC. Data were analysed thematically.

RESULTS

Twenty articles were included. We identified three major themes: creating awareness about disease and treatment choice, decision support and motivation to choose CC. Patients were often not aware of the option to choose CC. Patients felt supported by their loved ones during the decision-making process, although they perceived they made the final decision to choose CC themselves. Some patients felt pressured by their healthcare professional to choose dialysis. Reported reasons to choose CC were maintaining quality of life, treatment burden of dialysis, cost and the desire not to be a burden to others. In general, patients were satisfied with their decision for CC.

CONCLUSIONS

By focussing on the perspective of patients, we identified a wide range of patient experiences and preferences regarding the decision-making process. These findings can help to improve the complex decision-making process between dialysis and CC and to provide patient-centred care.

A National Survey of Conservative Kidney Management Practices for Patients Who Forgo RRT

Key Points

In the largest survey of US nephrology providers on conservative kidney management (CKM), most reported limited experience with CKM and varied approaches and local resources to provide CKM. There is need to enhance provider training and surveillance of CKM practices and to develop models of CKM that optimize care delivery and outcomes for these patients.

Background

Clinical practice guidelines advocate for conservative kidney management (CKM), a planned, holistic, patient-centered approach to caring for patients who forgo initiation of RRT. Little is known about the extent to which current care practices meet these expectations.

Methods

We conducted a cross-sectional survey of a national sample of nephrology providers recruited through US professional societies between March and July 2022 and inquired about their experiences with caring for patients who forgo RRT and their capacity to provide CKM.

Results

Overall, 203 nephrology providers (age 47±12 years, 53.2% White, 66.0% female), of which 49.8% were nephrologists and 50.2% advanced practice providers, completed the survey. Most (70.3%) reported that <10% of their practice comprised patients who had forgone RRT. Most indicated that they always or often provided symptom management (81.8%), multidisciplinary care (68.0%), tools to support shared decision making about treatment of advanced kidney disease (66.3%), and psychological support (52.2%) to patients who forgo RRT, while less than half reported that they always or often provided staff training on the care of these patients (47.8%) and spiritual support (41.4%). Most providers reported always or often working with primary care (72.9%), palliative medicine (68.8%), hospice (62.6%), social work (58.1%), and dietitian (50.7%) services to support these patients, while only a minority indicated that they always or often offered chaplaincy (23.2%), physical and/or occupational therapy (22.8%), psychology or psychiatry (31.5%), and geriatric medicine (28.1%).

Conclusions

Many nephrology providers have limited experience with caring for patients who forgo RRT. Our findings highlight opportunities to optimize comprehensive CKM care for these patients.

Factors that influence the selection of conservative management for end-stage renal disease - a systematic review

Background

Most patients with end-stage renal disease (ESRD) are managed with dialysis and less commonly kidney transplantation. However, not all are suitable for or desire either of these renal replacement therapies. Conservative management (CM) is an option. However, the selection of CM is often not easy for patients and clinicians. The aim of this systematic review is to identify the key factors that influence the selection of CM for ESRD.

Methods

Medline, Embase, PsychINFO, and CINAHL Plus were systematically searched from inception to 10 September 2021. Titles/abstracts and full texts were independently screened by two reviewers. Reference lists of included articles were searched. An update search via PubMed was conducted on 10 August 2023. A narrative synthesis of review findings was conducted.

Results

At the end of the screening process, 15 qualitative and 8 survey articles were selected. Reference checking yielded no additional relevant studies. Main themes were: (i) Patient-specific factors; (ii) Clinician-specific factors; (iii) Organisational factors; and (iv) National and international factors. Patient-specific factors were awareness and perceptions of CM and dialysis, beliefs about survival, preferred treatment outcomes and influence of family/caregivers and clinicians. Clinician-specific factors included perceptions of CM as 'non-intervention', perceptions of clinician role in the decision-making process, and confidence and ability to initiate sensitive treatment discussions. Relationships with and involvement of other healthcare professionals, time constraints, and limited clinical guidance were also important factors.

Conclusions

An improvement in the provision of education regarding CM for patients, caregivers, and clinicians is essential. Robust studies are required to generate crucial evidence for the development of stronger recommendations and guidance for clinicians.

Conservative Kidney Management Practice Patterns and Resources in the United States: A Cross-Sectional Analysis of CKDopps (Chronic Kidney Disease Outcomes and Practice Patterns Study) Data

Rationale & Objective

Conservative kidney management (CKM) is a viable treatment option for many patients with chronic kidney disease. However, CKM practices and resources in the United States are not well described. We undertook this study to gain a better understanding of factors influencing uptake of CKM by describing: (1) characteristics of patients who choose CKM, (2) provider practice patterns relevant to CKM, and (3) CKM resources available to providers.

Study Design

Cross-sectional study.

Setting & Participants

This study is a cross-sectional analysis of data from US nephrology clinics enrolled in the chronic kidney disease Outcomes and Practice Patterns Study (CKDopps) collected between 2014 and 2020. Data for this study includes chart-abstracted characteristics of patients with an estimated glomerular filtration rate ≤30mL/min/1.73m2 (n=1018) and available information on whether a decision had been made to pursue CKM at the time of kidney failure, patient (n=407) reports of discussions about forgoing dialysis, and provider (n=26) responses about CKM delivery and available resources in their health systems.

Analytical Approach

Descriptive statistics were used to report patient demographics, clinical information, provider demographics, and clinic characteristics.

Results

Among data from 1018 patients, 68 (7%) were recorded as planning for CKM. These patients were older, had more comorbidities, and were more likely to require assistance with transfers. Of the 407 patient surveys, 18% reported a conversation about forgoing dialysis with their nephrologist. A majority of providers felt comfortable discussing CKM; however, no clinics had a dedicated clinic or protocol for CKM.

Limitations

Inconsistent survey terminology and unlinked patient and provider responses.

Conclusions

Few patients reported discussion of forgoing dialysis with their providers and even fewer anticipated a choice of CKM on reaching kidney failure. Most providers were comfortable discussing CKM, but practiced in clinics that lacked dedicated resources. Further research is needed to improve the implementation of a CKM pathway.

Plain-Language Summary

For older comorbid adults with kidney failure, conservative kidney management (CKM) can be an appropriate treatment choice. CKM is a holistic approach with treatment goals of maximizing quality of life and preventing progression of chronic kidney disease (CKD) without initiation of dialysis. We investigated US CKM practices and found that among 1018 people with CKD, only 7% were planning for CKM. Of 407 surveyed patients, 18% reported a conversation with their provider about forgoing dialysis. In contrast, most providers felt comfortable discussing CKM; however, none reported working in an environment with a dedicated CKM clinic or protocol. Our data show the need for further CKM education in the United States as well as dedicated resources for its delivery.

Comprehensive conservative care: what doctors say, what patients hear

The demographic evolution of patients with advanced chronic kidney disease (CKD) has led to the advent of an alternative treatment option to kidney replacement therapy in the past couple of decades. The KDIGO controversies on Kidney Supportive Care called this approach "comprehensive conservative care" (CCC) and defined it as planned holistic patient-centered care for patients with CKD stage 5 that does not include dialysis. Although the benefit of this treatment option is now well-recognized, especially for the elderly, and comorbid and frail patients, its development remains limited in practice. While shared decision-making and advance care planning represent the cornerstones of the CCC approach, one of the main barriers in its development is the perfectible communication between nephrologists and patients, but also between all healthcare professionals involved in the care of advanced CKD patients. As a result, a significant gap has opened up between what doctors say and what patients hear. Indeed, although CCC is reported by nephrologists to be widely available in their facilities, few of their patients say that they have actually heard of it. The objectives of this review are to explore discrepancies between what doctors say and what patients hear, to identify the factors underlying this gap, and to formulate practical proposals for narrowing this gap in practice.

Perceived Life Expectancy Among Dialysis Recipients: A Scoping Review

Rationale & Objective

Greater prognostic understanding is associated with higher quality care at the end of life. We undertook a scoping review to explore how long dialysis recipients expect to live.

Study Design

Scoping Review.

Setting & Study Populations

People with kidney failure over 18 years old.

Search Strategy & Sources

Studies were identified by searching Medline, Embase, APA PsycINFO, HMIC, and ProQuest database for terms related to "life expectancy", "self-estimated", and "end stage kidney disease".

Data Extraction

Search strategies reported 349 unique, potentially eligible studies, with 8 studies meeting the inclusion criteria after screening.

Results

Significant mismatches between dialysis recipients and their health care provider's estimations of prognosis were reported, with patients predicting significantly higher life expectancies than health care professionals and almost no agreement between patient and nephrologist's estimates of 1-year survival. Documented cognitive impairment did not affect 1-year or 5-year prognosis estimates, nor did gender, age, time on dialysis, or discussing perceived life expectancy. Dialysis recipients who thought they were on the transplant list or who self-identified as African American reported higher perceived life expectancy, whereas people who were 75 years or older, or with fair or poor self-reported health status reported a lower perceived life expectancy. Those with a lower perceived life expectancy preferred care focusing on relieving pain and discomfort, whereas people who thought they had a higher chance of survival were significantly more likely to prefer life-extending care.

Limitations

There is a marked paucity of research in this area, with most studies conducted in North American cohorts.

Conclusions

Optimistic patient prognostic expectations persist in dialysis recipients. Given the effects of perceived life expectancy on treatment choices and subsequent quality of life, it is important that transparent discussions regarding prognosis are conducted with people receiving dialysis and their families.

Plain-Language Summary

Understanding illness severity and prognosis allows people to make decisions and prioritize areas of their lives that are important to them. We undertook a scoping review to explore how long dialysis recipients expect to live. We found significant mismatches between the perceived life expectancy of people treated with dialysis and their health care providers. Perceived life expectancy influenced treatment choices; thus, those who thought they would die sooner prioritized care focusing on relieving pain and discomfort. Those who thought they had a higher chance of survival were more likely to prefer life-extending care (with potential effects on quality of life). It is important to have frank discussions about prognosis with people receiving dialysis, to empower individuals and help them make informed decisions about their care.

Value Placed on Comfort vs Life Prolongation Among Patients Treated With Maintenance Dialysis

Importance

Patients receiving maintenance dialysis experience intensive patterns of end-of-life care that might not be consistent with their values.

Objective

To evaluate the association of patients' health care values with engagement in advance care planning and end-of-life care.

Design, Setting, and Participants

Survey study of patients who received maintenance dialysis between 2015 and 2018 at dialysis centers in the greater metropolitan areas of Seattle, Washington, and Nashville, Tennessee, with longitudinal follow-up of decedents. Logistic regression models were used to estimate probabilities. Data analysis was conducted between May and October 2022.

Exposures

A survey question about the value that the participant would place on longevity-focused vs comfort-focused care if they were to become seriously ill.

Main Outcomes and Measures

Self-reported engagement in advance care planning and care received near the end of life through 2020 using linked kidney registry data and Medicare claims.

Results

Of 933 patients (mean [SD] age, 62.6 [14.0] years; 525 male patients [56.3%]; 254 [27.2%] identified as Black) who responded to the question about values and could be linked to registry data (65.2% response rate [933 of 1431 eligible patients]), 452 (48.4%) indicated that they would value comfort-focused care, 179 (19.2%) that they would value longevity-focused care, and 302 (32.4%) that they were unsure about the intensity of care they would value. Many had not completed an advance directive (estimated probability, 47.5% [95% CI, 42.9%-52.1%] of those who would value comfort-focused care vs 28.1% [95% CI, 24.0%-32.3%] of those who would value longevity-focused care or were unsure; P < .001), had not discussed hospice (estimated probability, 28.6% [95% CI, 24.6%-32.9%] comfort focused vs 18.2% [95% CI, 14.7%-21.7%] longevity focused or unsure; P < .001), or had not discussed stopping dialysis (estimated probability, 33.3% [95% CI, 29.0%-37.7%] comfort focused vs 21.9% [95% CI, 18.2%-25.8%] longevity focused or unsure; P < .001). Most respondents wanted to receive cardiopulmonary resuscitation (estimated probability, 78.0% [95% CI, 74.2%-81.7%] comfort focused vs 93.9% [95% CI, 91.4%-96.1%] longevity focused or unsure; P < .001) and mechanical ventilation (estimated probability, 52.0% [95% CI, 47.4%-56.6%] comfort focused vs 77.9% [95% CI, 74.0%-81.7%] longevity focused or unsure; P < .001). Among decedents, the percentages of participants who received an intensive procedure during the final month of life (estimated probability, 23.5% [95% CI, 16.5%-31.0%] comfort focused vs 26.1% [95% CI, 18.0%-34.5%] longevity focused or unsure; P = .64), discontinued dialysis (estimated probability, 38.3% [95% CI, 32.0%-44.8%] comfort focused vs 30.2% [95% CI, 23.0%-37.8%] longevity focused or unsure; P = .09), and enrolled in hospice (estimated probability, 32.2% [95% CI, 25.7%-38.7%] comfort focused vs 23.3% [95% CI, 16.4%-30.5%] longevity focused or unsure; P = .07) were not statistically different.

Conclusions and Relevance

This survey study found that there appeared to be a disconnect between patients' expressed values, which were largely comfort focused, and their engagement in advance care planning and end-of-life care, which reflected a focus on longevity. These findings suggest important opportunities to improve the quality of care for patients receiving dialysis.

Knowledge, attitude, and practice of nephrologists on the decision for renal replacement therapy

BACKGROUND

This study aimed to investigate the Knowledge, Attitude, and Practice (KAP) of nephrologists on the decision of renal replacement therapy (RRT), including peritoneal dialysis, hemodialysis, and kidney transplantation.

METHODS

This multicenter cross-sectional study was conducted on qualified nephrologists who volunteered to participate between July and August 2022 by using a self-administered questionnaire.

RESULTS

Among 327 nephrologists, the total knowledge, attitude, and practice scores were 12.03 ± 2.11/16, 58.39 ± 6.62/75, and 27.15 ± 2.74/30, respectively. Multivariate logistic regression analysis showed that the attitude score (peritoneal dialysis: OR = 1.19, 95%CI: 1.13-1.25, P < 0.001; hemodialysis: OR = 1.14, 95%CI: 1.09-1.19, P < 0.001; kidney transplantation: OR = 1.12, 95%CI: 1.07-1.16, P < 0.001), 41-50 years of age (peritoneal dialysis: OR = 0.45, 95%CI: 0.21-0,98, P = 0.045; hemodialysis: OR = 0.27, 95%CI: 0.12-0.60, P = 0.001; kidney transplantation: OR = 0.45, 95%CI:0.20-0.97, P = 0.042), and > 50 years of age (peritoneal dialysis: OR = 0.27, 95%CI: 0.08-0.84, P = 0.024; hemodialysis: OR = 0.45, 95%CI: 0.20-0.97, P = 0.042; kidney transplantation: OR = 0.24, 95%CI: 0.08-0.77, P = 0.016) were independently associated with the consideration score of peritoneal dialysis, hemodialysis, and kidney transplantation.

CONCLUSION

Better attitudes may lead to more consideration by nephrologists when choosing between peritoneal dialysis, hemodialysis, and kidney transplantation and relatively less consideration by senior physicians when making decisions; in addition, having good knowledge and good attitudes may lead to better practice.

A Patient Decision Aid About Conservative Kidney Management in Advanced Kidney Disease: A Randomized Pilot Trial

RATIONALE & OBJECTIVE

Available decision aids for patients about treatment of advanced chronic kidney disease (CKD) often lack information on conservative kidney management (CKM). We assessed the feasibility and acceptability of a decision aid on CKM among patients with advanced CKD and their family members.

STUDY DESIGN

Randomized pilot trial.

SETTING & PARTICIPANTS

Patients aged≥75 years with stage 4 or 5 CKD and their family members at 4 medical centers in the greater Seattle area between August 2020 and December 2021.

INTERVENTIONS

Usual care with or without a decision aid on CKM.

OUTCOME

Acceptability was assessed by attrition rates between the initial study visit (T1) and the 3-month follow-up evaluation (T3). The primary outcome and measure of feasibility was the proportion of participants who discussed CKM with a health care provider between T1 and T3.

RESULTS

We randomized 92 patients of whom 86 (55.8% male; age 82±6 years; 82.6% White) completed T1-42 in the usual care arm and 44 in the usual care plus decision aid arm-and 56 family members of whom 53 (18.9% male; age 71±11 years; 86.8% White) completed T1-20 in usual care arm and 33 in the usual care plus decisions aid arm. The attrition rates were 21% versus 21% (P=1.0) for patients, and 10% versus 18% (P=0.46) for family members in the usual care versus usual care plus decisions aid arms. Receipt of the decision aid significantly increased discussion of CKM with a health care provider for patients (26.4% vs 3.0%, P=0.007) and family members (26.9% vs 0, P=0.02).

LIMITATIONS

Possible limited generalizability because participants were a relatively homogenous group. The decision aid focuses on CKM and may be less applicable to those with limited knowledge of kidney replacement therapies.

CONCLUSIONS

A CKM decision aid was feasible and acceptable, and increased discussion of this treatment option with health care providers. This aid may serve as a useful adjunct to the currently available educational tools on treatments for advanced CKD.

FUNDING

Grant from a not-for-profit entity (National Palliative Care Research Center).

TRIAL REGISTRATION

Registered at ClinicalTrials.gov with study number NCT04919941.

Conservative Kidney Management: When, Why, and For Whom?

Deciding between dialysis and conservative kidney management (CKM) in an elderly or seriously ill person with kidney failure is complex and requires shared decision making. Patients and families look to their nephrologist to provide an individualized recommendation that aligns with patient-centered goals. For a balanced and considered decision to be made, dialysis should not be the default and nephrologists need to be familiar with relevant prognostic information including survival, symptom burden, functional trajectory, and quality of life with dialysis and with CKM. CKM is a holistic, proactive, and multidisciplinary treatment for kidney failure. For some elderly comorbid patients, CKM improves symptom burden and aligns with quality-of-life goals, with modest or no loss of longevity. CKM can be provided by a nephrologist alone but ideally is managed through partnership with a dedicated supportive or palliative care service embedded within the nephrology practice. Treatment decisions are best discussed early in the disease trajectory and occur over many consultations, and nephrologists should be upskilled in communication to better support patients and families in these important conversations. Nephrologists should remain actively involved in their patients' care through to end-of-life care.

Hospice Care in Conservative Kidney Management

Hospice care offers multidisciplinary expertise to optimize symptom management and quality of life for patients with limited life expectancy and help ensure that patients receive care that reflects their personal goals and values. Many patients receiving conservative kidney management (CKM) and their loved ones can benefit from the additional support that hospice provides, particularly as symptom burdens and functional status worsen over the last few months of life. We provide an overview of hospice services and how they may benefit patients receiving CKM, describe the evolution of optimal CKM strategies and collaboration between nephrology and hospice clinicians over the course of disease progression, and explore challenges to effective hospice care delivery for patients with chronic kidney disease and how to address them.

Effectiveness of an Intervention to Improve Decision Making for Older Patients With Advanced Chronic Kidney Disease : A Randomized Controlled Trial

BACKGROUND

Older patients with advanced chronic kidney disease (CKD) face difficult decisions about managing kidney failure, frequently experiencing decisional conflict, regret, and treatment misaligned with preferences.

OBJECTIVE

To assess whether a decision aid about kidney replacement therapy improved decisional quality compared with usual care.

DESIGN

Multicenter, randomized, controlled trial. (ClinicalTrials.gov: NCT03522740).

SETTING

8 outpatient nephrology clinics associated with 4 U.S. centers.

PARTICIPANTS

English-fluent patients, 70 years and older with nondialysis CKD stages 4 to 5 recruited from 2018 to 2020.

INTERVENTION

DART (Decision-Aid for Renal Therapy) is an interactive, web-based decision aid for older adults with CKD. Both groups received written education about treatments.

MEASUREMENTS

Change in the decisional conflict scale (DCS) score from baseline to 3, 6, 12, and 18 months. Secondary outcomes included change in prognostic and treatment knowledge and change in uncertainty.

RESULTS

Among 400 participants, 363 were randomly assigned: 180 to usual care, 183 to DART. Decisional quality improved with DART with mean DCS declining compared with control (mean difference, -8.5 [95% CI, -12.0 to -5.0]; P < 0.001), with similar findings at 6 months, attenuating thereafter. At 3 months, knowledge improved with DART versus usual care (mean difference, 7.2 [CI, 3.7 to 10.7]; P < 0.001); similar findings at 6 months were modestly attenuated at 18 months (mean difference, 5.9 [CI, 1.4 to 10.3]; P = 0.010). Treatment preferences changed from 58% "unsure" at baseline to 28%, 20%, 23%, and 14% at 3, 6, 12, and 18 months, respectively, with DART, versus 51% to 38%, 35%, 32%, and 18% with usual care.

LIMITATION

Latinx patients were underrepresented.

CONCLUSION

DART improved decision quality and clarified treatment preferences among older adults with advanced CKD for 6 months after the DART intervention.

PRIMARY FUNDING SOURCE

Patient-Centered Outcomes Research Institute (PCORI).

Barriers to conservative care from patients' and nephrologists' perspectives: the CKD-REIN study

BACKGROUND

Conservative care is increasingly considered an alternative to kidney replacement therapy for kidney failure management, mostly among the elderly. We investigated its status and the barriers to its implementation from patients' and providers' perspectives.

METHODS

We analysed data from 1204 patients with advanced chronic kidney disease (CKD) [estimated glomerular filtration rate (eGFR) <30 mL/min/1.73 m2] enrolled at 40 nationally representative nephrology clinics (2013-16) who completed a self-administered questionnaire about the information they received and their preferred treatment option, including conservative care, if their kidneys failed. Nephrologists (n = 137) also reported data about their clinics' resources and practices regarding conservative care.

RESULTS

All participating facilities reported they were routinely able to offer conservative care, but only 37% had written protocols and only 5% had a person or team primarily responsible for it. Overall, 6% of patients were estimated to use conservative care. Among nephrologists, 82% reported they were fairly or extremely comfortable discussing conservative care, but only 28% usually or always offered this option for older (>75 years) patients approaching kidney failure. They used various terminology for this care, with conservative management and non-dialysis care mentioned most often. Among patients, 5% of those >75 years reported receiving information about this option and 2% preferring it.

CONCLUSIONS

Although reported by nephrologists to be widely available and easily discussed, conservative care is only occasionally offered to older patients, most of whom report they were not informed of this option. The lack of a person or team responsible for conservative care and unclear information appear to be key barriers to its implementation.

A Pilot Randomized Controlled Trial of Integrated Palliative Care and Nephrology Care

BACKGROUND

There has been a call by both patients and health professionals for the integration of palliative care with nephrology care, yet there is little evidence describing the effect of this approach. The objective of this paper is to report the feasibility and acceptability of a pilot randomized controlled trial testing the efficacy of integrated palliative and nephrology care.

METHODS

English speaking patients with CKD stage 5 were randomized to monthly palliative care visits for 3 months in addition to their usual care, as compared with usual nephrology care. Feasibility of recruitment, retention, completion of intervention processes, and feedback on participation was measured. Other outcomes included differences in symptom burden change, measured by the Integrated Palliative Outcome Scale-Renal, and change in quality of life, measured by the Kidney Disease Quality of Life questionnaire and completion of advance care planning documents.

RESULTS

Of the 67 patients approached, 45 (67%) provided informed consent. Of these, 27 patients completed the study (60%), and 14 (74%) of those in the intervention group completed all visits. We found small improvements in overall symptom burden (-2.92 versus 1.57) and physical symptom burden scores (-1.92 versus 1.79) in the intervention group. We did not see improvements in the quality-of-life scores, with the exception of the physical component score. The intervention group completed more advance care planning documents than controls (five health care proxy forms completed versus one, nine Medical Orders for Life Sustaining Treatment forms versus none).

CONCLUSIONS

We found that pilot testing through a randomized controlled trial of an ambulatory integrated palliative and nephrology care clinical program was feasible and acceptable to participants. This intervention has the potential to improve the disease experience for those with nondialysis CKD and should be tested in other CKD populations with longer follow-up.

CLINICAL TRIALS REGISTRY NAME AND REGISTRATION NUMBER

Pilot Randomized-controlled Trial of Integrated Palliative and Nephrology Care Versus Usual Nephrology Care, NCT04520984.

Systematic scoping review on moral distress among physicians

BACKGROUND

Concepts of moral distress (MD) among physicians have evolved and extend beyond the notion of psychological distress caused by being in a situation in which one is constrained from acting on what one knows to be right. With many accounts involving complex personal, professional, legal, ethical and moral issues, we propose a review of current understanding of MD among physicians.

METHODS

A systematic evidence-based approach guided systematic scoping review is proposed to map the current concepts of MD among physicians published in PubMed, Embase, PsycINFO, Web of Science, SCOPUS, ERIC and Google Scholar databases. Concurrent and independent thematic and direct content analysis (split approach) was conducted on included articles to enhance the reliability and transparency of the process. The themes and categories identified were combined using the jigsaw perspective to create domains that form the framework of the discussion that follows.

RESULTS

A total of 30 156 abstracts were identified, 2473 full-text articles were reviewed and 128 articles were included. The five domains identified were as follows: (1) current concepts, (2) risk factors, (3) impact, (4) tools and (5) interventions.

CONCLUSIONS

Initial reviews suggest that MD involves conflicts within a physician's personal beliefs, values and principles (personal constructs) caused by personal, ethical, moral, contextual, professional and sociocultural factors. How these experiences are processed and reflected on and then integrated into the physician's personal constructs impacts their self-concepts of personhood and identity and can result in MD. The ring theory of personhood facilitates an appreciation of how new experiences create dissonance and resonance within personal constructs. These insights allow the forwarding of a new broader concept of MD and a personalised approach to assessing and treating MD. While further studies are required to test these findings, they offer a personalised means of supporting a physician's MD and preventing burn-out.

[Comprehensive conservative care of stage 5-CKD: A practical guide]

In French-speaking countries, the anglicism "traitement conservateur" is commonly used in clinical practice for CKD 5 patients, meaning comprehensive conservative care. In 2015, the publication of KDIGO controversies put forward this "new" therapeutic option at the same level as dialysis or transplantation. However, its detailed contents remain heterogeneous due to cultural and ethical considerations, varying with regional or national health systems. This is the reason why the French-speaking society of Nephrology, Dialysis, Transplantation (SFNDT) set up an international debate to publish clinical guidelines in French.

Using Human-Centered Design Principles to Create a Decision Aid on Conservative Kidney Management for Advanced Kidney Disease

Background

Most patients are unaware of approaches to treating advanced chronic kidney disease (CKD) other than dialysis.

Methods

We developed a dedicated decision aid on conservative kidney management using human-centered design principles in three phases: (1) discovery: engagement of informants to understand their needs and preferences; (2) design: multiple rapid cycles of ideation, prototyping, and testing of a decision aid with a small group of informants; and (3) implementation: testing the decision aid in real-world settings with attention to how the decision aid can be further refined. Informants included a national patient advisory committee on kidney diseases, 50 patients with stage 4 or 5 CKD and 35 of their family members, and 16 clinicians recruited from the greater Seattle area between June 2019 and September 2021.

Results

Findings from the discovery phase informed an initial prototype of the decision aid, which included five sections: a description of kidney disease and its signs and symptoms, an overview of conservative kidney management and the kinds of supports provided, self-reflection exercises to elicit patients' values and goals, the pros and cons of conservative kidney management, and the option of changing one's mind about conservative kidney management. The prototype underwent several rounds of iteration during its design phase, which resulted in the addition of an introductory section describing the intended audience and more detailed information in other sections. Findings from its implementation phase led to the addition of examples of common questions that patients and family members had about conservative kidney management and a final section on other related educational resources.

Conclusions

Human-centered design principles supported a systematic and collaborative approach between researchers, patients, family members, and clinicians for developing a decision aid on conservative kidney management.

Asking the right questions: towards a person-centered conception of shared decision-making regarding treatment of advanced chronic kidney disease in older patients

An increasing number of older patients have to decide on a treatment plan for advanced chronic kidney disease (CKD), involving dialysis or conservative care. Shared decision-making (SDM) is recommended as the model for decision-making in such preference-sensitive decisions. The aim of SDM is to come to decisions that are consistent with the patient’s values and preferences and made by the patient and healthcare professional working together. In clinical practice, however, SDM appears to be not yet routine and needs further implementation. A shift from a biomedical to a person-centered conception might help to make the process more shared. Shared should, therefore, be interpreted as two persons bringing two perspectives to the table, that both need to be explored during the decision-making process. Starting from the patient’s perspective will enable to determine the mutual goals of care first and, subsequently, determine the best way for achieving those goals. To perform such SDM, the healthcare professional needs to become a skilled companion, being part of the patient’s relational context, and start asking the right questions about what matters to the patient as person. In this article, we describe the need for a person-centered conception of SDM for the setting of older patients with advanced CKD.

Older Patients with Advanced Chronic Kidney Disease and Their Perspectives on Prognostic Information: a Qualitative Study

BACKGROUND

Prognostic information is key to shared decision-making, particularly in life-limiting illness like advanced chronic kidney disease (CKD).

OBJECTIVE

To understand the prognostic information preferences expressed by older patients with CKD.

DESIGN AND PARTICIPANTS

Qualitative study of 28 consecutively enrolled patients over 65 years of age with non-dialysis dependent CKD stages 3b-5, receiving care in a multi-disciplinary CKD clinic.

APPROACH

Semi-structured telephone or in-person interviews to explore patients' preference for and perceived value of individualized prognostic information. Interviews were analyzed using inductive content analysis.

KEY RESULTS

We completed interviews with 28 patients (77.7 ± SD 6.8 years, 69% men). Patients varied in their preference for prognostic information and more were interested in their risk of progression to end-stage kidney disease (ESKD) than in life expectancy. Many conflated ESKD risk with risk of death, perceiving a binary choice between dialysis and quick decline and death. Patients expressed that prognostic information would allow them to plan, take care of important business, and think about their treatment options. Patients were accepting of prognostic uncertainty and imagined leveraging it to nurture hope or motivate them to better manage risk factors. They endorsed the desire to receive prognosis of life expectancy even though it may be hard to accept or difficult to talk about but worried it could create helplessness for other patients in their situation.

CONCLUSION

Most, but not all, patients were interested in prognostic information and could see its value in motivating behavior change and allowing planning. Some patients expressed concern that information on life expectancy might cause depression and hopelessness. Therefore, prognostic information is most appropriate as part of a clinical conversation that fosters shared decision-making and helps patients consider treatment risks, benefits, and burdens in context of their lives.

Dialysis Organization Online Information on Kidney Failure Treatments: A Content Analysis Using Corpus Linguistics

Rationale & Objective

Dialysis organizations’ websites may influence patient decision making, but the websites have received almost no consideration. We investigated how/whether these websites present all kidney replacement therapy options and how the quality of life of these options is portrayed.

Study Design

Content analysis using corpus linguistics (computer-assisted language analysis).

Setting

Website content aimed at patients from the 2 major dialysis organizations’ websites, totaling 226,968 words. The analysis took place from November 12, 2020, to March 30, 2021.

Analytical Approach

We used linguistic software (AntConc) to document the frequencies of words needed to present treatment options and quality of life information.

Results

Over both sites, dialysis mentions outstripped transplantation mentions. Organization A did not appear to reference conservative kidney management. Organization B mentioned dialysis more often than conservative management, at a ratio of 34:1. Organization A did not attribute symptoms to dialysis, whereas organization B had 12 mentions of dialysis-induced symptoms out of 87 total symptom references. Both organizations framed life on dialysis optimistically, suggesting that patients can continue to engage in “work,” “sex,” or “travel”; organization A referenced sex, work, and/or travel 123 times and organization B referenced these 262 times.

Limitations

We used quantitative analysis and linked ideas with certain keywords. We did not conduct a detailed qualitative inquiry.

Conclusions

The websites emphasized dialysis as a treatment for kidney failure, and the quality of life on dialysis was framed very optimistically. Qualitative studies of treatment modalities and the quality of life on dialysis in the patient-targeted material of dialysis organizations are needed.

Long-term Outcomes Among Patients With Advanced Kidney Disease Who Forgo Maintenance Dialysis: A Systematic Review

IMPORTANCE

An understanding of the long-term outcomes of patients with advanced chronic kidney disease not treated with maintenance dialysis is needed to improve shared decision-making and care practices for this population.

OBJECTIVE

To evaluate survival, use of health care resources, changes in quality of life, and end-of-life care of patients with advanced kidney disease who forgo dialysis.

EVIDENCE REVIEW

MEDLINE, Embase (Excerpta Medica Database), and CINAHL (Cumulative Index of Nursing and Allied Health Literature) were searched from inception through December 3, 2021, for all English language longitudinal studies of adults in whom there was an explicit decision not to pursue maintenance dialysis. Two investigators independently reviewed all studies and selected those reporting survival, use of health care resources, changes in quality of life, or end-of-life care during follow-up. Studies of patients who initiated and then discontinued maintenance dialysis and patients in whom it was not clear that there was an explicit decision to forgo dialysis were excluded. One author abstracted all study data, of which 12% was independently adjudicated by a second author (<1% error rate).

FINDINGS

Forty-one cohort studies comprising 5102 patients (range, 11-812 patients) were included in this systematic review (5%-99% men; mean age range, 60-87 years). Substantial heterogeneity in study designs and measures used to report outcomes limited comparability across studies. Median survival of cohorts ranged from 1 to 41 months as measured from a baseline mean estimated glomerular filtration rate ranging from 7 to 19 mL/min/1.73 m2. Patients generally experienced 1 to 2 hospital admissions, 6 to 16 in-hospital days, 7 to 8 clinic visits, and 2 emergency department visits per person-year. During an observation period of 8 to 24 months, mental well-being improved, and physical well-being and overall quality of life were largely stable until late in the illness course. Among patients who died during follow-up, 20% to 76% had enrolled in hospice, 27% to 68% died in a hospital setting and 12% to 71% died at home; 57% to 76% were hospitalized, and 4% to 47% received an invasive procedure during the final month of life.

CONCLUSIONS AND RELEVANCE

Many patients who do not pursue dialysis survived several years and experienced sustained quality of life until late in the illness course. Nonetheless, use of acute care services was common and intensity of end-of-life care highly variable across cohorts. These findings suggest that consistent approaches to the study of conservative kidney management are needed to enhance the generalizability of findings and develop models of care that optimize outcomes among conservatively managed patients.

The Role of Kidney Supportive Care and Active Medical Management Without Dialysis in Supporting Well-Being in Kidney Care

People living with kidney failure often experience a higher symptom burden (including anxiety and depression) and lower quality of life than patients with other serious chronic diseases. The end of life for these patients is characterized by high intensity of treatment (such as intensive care unit stays) and lack of support for family. Kidney supportive care, which emphasizes quality of life, person-centered care, and holistic care for the person and their family, is an approach that improves well-being by aligning care with the patient's preferences and goals. Kidney supportive care encompasses identifying seriously ill patients, eliciting patient values and goals through shared decision making and advance care planning, assessing and managing symptoms, communicating prognosis, offering active medical management without dialysis, and planning and managing care transitions, especially at the end of life. Models, strategies, and tools for incorporating kidney supportive care and active medical management without dialysis into existing workflows are available. However, barriers to implementation in the United States include clinician knowledge gaps, current workflows, and financial incentives, which make it difficult to break from the de facto default practice of starting dialysis for patients with kidney failure regardless of age, frailty, or debilitating condition. Policy changes are needed to fully implement kidney supportive care in the United States.

Results of the European EDITH nephrologist survey on factors influencing treatment modality choice for end-stage kidney disease

BACKGROUND

Access to forms of dialysis, kidney transplantation (Tx) and comprehensive conservative management (CCM) for patients with end-stage kidney disease (ESKD) varies across European countries. Attitudes of nephrologists, information provision and decision-making may influence this access and nephrologists may experience several barriers when providing treatments for ESKD.

METHODS

We surveyed European nephrologists and kidney transplant surgeons treating adults with ESKD about factors influencing modality choice. Descriptive statistics were used to compare the opinions of professionals from European countries with low-, middle- and high-gross domestic product purchasing power parity (GDP PPP).

RESULTS

In total, 681 professionals from 33 European countries participated. Respondents from all GDP categories indicated that ∼10% of patients received no information before the start of renal replacement therapy (RRT) (P = 0.106). Early information provision and more involvement of patients in decision-making were more frequently reported in middle- and high-GDP countries (P < 0.05). Professionals' attitudes towards several treatments became more positive with increasing GDP (P < 0.05). Uptake of in-centre haemodialysis was sufficient to 73% of respondents, but many wanted increased uptake of home dialysis, Tx and CCM. Respondents experienced different barriers according to availability of specific treatments in their centre. The occurrence of barriers (financial, staff shortage, lack of space/supplies and patient related) decreased with increasing GDP (P < 0.05).

CONCLUSIONS

Differences in factors influencing modality choice when providing RRT or CCM to adults with ESKD were found among low-, middle- and high-GDP countries in Europe. Therefore a unique pan-European policy to improve access to treatments may be inefficient. Different policies for clusters of countries could be more useful.

Perceptions of Telehealth vs In-Person Visits Among Older Adults With Advanced Kidney Disease, Care Partners, and Clinicians

Importance

Telehealth has been posited as a cost-effective means for improving access to care for persons with chronic conditions, including kidney disease. Perceptions of telehealth among older patients with chronic illness, their care partners, and clinicians are largely unknown but are critical to successful telehealth use and expansion efforts.

Objective

To identify patient, care partner, and nephrologists' perceptions of the patient-centeredness, benefits, drawbacks of telehealth compared to in-person visits.

Design, Setting, and Participants

This qualitative study used semistructured interviews conducted from August to December 2020 with purposively sampled patients (aged 70 years or older, chronic kidney disease stages 4 to 5), care partners, and clinicians in Boston, Massachusetts; Chicago, Illinois; Portland, Maine; and San Diego, California.

Main Outcomes and Measures

Participants described telehealth experiences, including factors contributing to and impeding engagement, satisfaction, and quality of care. Thematic analysis was used to analyze data.

Results

Of 60 interviews, 19 (32%) were with clinicians, 30 (50%) with patients, and 11 (18%) with care partners; 16 clinicians (84%) were nephrologists; 17 patient participants (43%) were non-Hispanic Black, and 38 (67%) were women. Four overarching themes characterized telehealth's benefits and drawbacks for patient-centered care among older, chronically ill adults: inconsistent quality of care, patient experience and engagement, loss of connection and mistrust (eg, challenges discussing bad news), and disparities with accessing telehealth. Although telehealth improved convenience and care partner engagement, participants expressed concerns about clinical effectiveness and limitations of virtual physical examinations and potentially widening disparities in access. Many participants shared concerns about harms to the patient-clinician relationship, limited ability to comfort patients in virtual settings, and reduced patient trust.

Conclusions and Relevance

Older patients, care partners, and kidney clinicians (ie, nephrologists and physician assistants) shared divergent views of patient-centered telehealth care, especially its clinical effectiveness, patient experience, access to care, and clinician-patient relationship. Understanding older patients' and kidney clinicians' perceptions of telehealth elucidate barriers that should be addressed to promote high-quality care and telehealth use.

Understanding the low take-up of home-based dialysis through a shared decision-making lens: a qualitative study

OBJECTIVES

To explore how people with chronic kidney disease who are pre-dialysis, family members and healthcare professionals together navigate common shared decision-making processes and to assess how this impacts future treatment choice.

DESIGN

Coproductive qualitative study, underpinned by the Making Good Decisions in Collaboration shared decision-model. Semistructured interviews with a purposive sample from February 2019 - January 2020. Interview data were analysed using framework analysis. Coproduction of logic models/roadmaps and recommendations.

SETTING

Five Welsh kidney services.

PARTICIPANTS

95 participants (37 patients, 19 family members and 39 professionals); 44 people supported coproduction (18 patients, 8 family members and 18 professionals).

FINDINGS

Shared decision-making was too generic and clinically focused and had little impact on people getting onto home dialysis. Preferences of where, when and how to implement shared decision-making varied widely. Apathy experienced by patients, caused by lack of symptoms, denial, social circumstances and health systems issues made future treatment discussions difficult. Families had unmet and unrecognised needs, which significantly influenced patient decisions. Protocols containing treatment hierarchies and standards were understood by professionals but not translated for patients and families. Variation in dialysis treatment was discussed to match individual lifestyles. Patients and professionals were, however, defaulting to the perceived simplest option. It was easy for patients to opt for hospital-based treatments by listing important but easily modifiable factors.

CONCLUSIONS

Shared decision-making processes need to be individually tailored with more attention on patients who could choose a home therapy but select a different option. There are critical points in the decision-making process where changes could benefit patients. Patients need to be better educated and their preconceived ideas and misconceptions gently challenged. Healthcare professionals need to update their knowledge in order to provide the best advice and guidance. There needs to be more awareness of the costs and benefits of the various treatment options when making decisions.

Advance care planning and health literacy in older dialysis patients: qualitative interview study

OBJECTIVES

Low health literacy among older adults is associated with limited engagement in end-of-life care planning, higher hospitalisation rates and increased mortality. Frequently, older dialysis patients derive no survival benefit from dialysis and their quality of life often deteriorates further on dialysis. Older dialysis patients' values and wishes are frequently unknown during key healthcare decision making and many endure medically intensive end-of-life scenarios. The objectives of this study were to explore older dialysis patients' understanding of haemodialysis, to explore their engagement in end-of-life care planning and to explore their satisfaction with life on haemodialysis.

METHODS

15 older dialysis patients participated in qualitative semistructured interviews in two haemodialysis units in Ireland. Thematic saturation was reached. Thematic analysis, applied inductively, was used to distill the data.

RESULTS

Themes identified included disempowerment among participants reflected limited health literacy, poor advance care planning compromised participant well-being, haemodialysis compromised participants' core values.

CONCLUSION

Health literacy levels among older dialysis patients are poor, patient empowerment is limited and their participation in shared decision making and advance care planning is suboptimal. Consequently, healthcare decision making, including haemodialysis, may jeopardise patients' core values. Improving health literacy through enhanced patient education and improved communication skills training for clinicians is necessary to promote patient participation in shared decision making. Clinician training to facilitate discussion of patients' values and wishes will help guide clinicians and patients towards healthcare decisions most concordant with patients' core values. This approach will optimise the circumstances for patient-centred care.

Disparities in Discussions about Kidney Replacement Therapy in CKD Care

Participants who identified as female and Black reported more thorough discussions of dialysis than transplant.Participants with low incomes and education reported more thorough discussions of dialysis than transplant.

Challenges to Shared Decision Making About Treatment of Advanced CKD: A Qualitative Study of Patients and Clinicians

RATIONALE AND OBJECTIVE

Greater understanding of the challenges to shared decision-making about treatment of advanced CKD is needed to support implementation of shared decision-making in clinical practice.

STUDY DESIGN

Qualitative study.

SETTING AND PARTICIPANTS

Patients aged ≥65 years with advanced CKD and their clinicians recruited from 3 medical centers participated in semi-structured interviews. In-depth review of patients' electronic medical records was also performed.

ANALYTICAL APPROACH

Interview transcripts and medical record notes were analyzed using inductive thematic analysis.

RESULTS

Twenty-nine patients (age 73±6 years, 66% male, 59% Caucasian) and 10 of their clinicians (age 52±12 years, 30% male, 70% Caucasian) participated in interviews. Four themes emerged from qualitative analysis: 1) Competing priorities - patients and their clinicians tended to differ on when to prioritize CKD and dialysis planning above other personal or medical problems; 2) Focusing on present or future -patients were more focused on living well now while clinicians were more focused on preparing for dialysis and future adverse events; 3) Standardized versus individualized approach to CKD - although clinicians tried to personalize care recommendations to their patients, patients perceived their clinicians as taking a monolithic approach to CKD that was predicated on clinical practice guidelines and medical literature rather than patients' lived experiences with CKD and personal values and goals; and 4) Power dynamics - while patients described cautiously navigating a power differential in their therapeutic relationship with their clinicians, clinicians seemed less attuned to these power dynamics.

LIMITATIONS

Thematic saturation was based on patient interviews. Themes presented might incompletely reflect clinicians' perspectives.

CONCLUSIONS

Efforts to improve shared decision-making for treatment of advanced CKD will likely need to explicitly address differences in approaches to decision-making about treatment of advanced CKD between patients and their clinicians and perceived power imbalances in the therapeutic relationship.

Advance care planning in older dialysis patients: health care literacy qualitative study

OBJECTIVES

Low health literacy among older adults is associated with limited engagement in end-of-life care plans, more hospitalisations and excess mortality. Frequently, older patients derive no survival benefit from dialysis and quality of life often deteriorates with dialysis. Older dialysis patients' values and wishes are often unknown during key healthcare decision-making and many endure medically intensive end-of-life interventions . The objectives of this study were to examine older dialysis patients' understanding of haemodialysis, their engagement in end-of-life care planning and their satisfaction with life on haemodialysis.

METHODS

15 older dialysis patients participated in qualitative semi-structured interviews in two haemodialysis units . Thematic saturation was reached. Thematic analysis, applied inductively, distilled the data.

RESULTS

Themes identified included disempowerment which reflected limited health literacy, poor advance care planning compromised well-being and haemodialysis compromised their core values.

CONCLUSION

Health literacy among older dialysis patients appeared poor, patient empowerment was limited and participation in shared decision-making and advance care planning suboptimal. Consequently, complex healthcare decision-making, including haemodialysis may jeopardise patients' core values. These findings have significant implications for the validity of the informed consent process prior to dialysis initiation. Improved health literacy through enhanced patient education and better communication skills for clinicians are necessary to promote patient participation in shared decision-making. Clinician training to facilitate discussion of patients' values and wishes will help guide clinicians and patients towards healthcare decisions most concordant with individual core values. This will optimise patient-centred care.

Communication principles and practices for making shared decisions about renal replacement therapy: a review of the literature

PURPOSE OF REVIEW

To provide an overview of the skill set required for communication and person-centered decision making for renal replacement therapy (RRT) choices, especially conservative kidney management (CKM).

RECENT FINDINGS

Research on communication and decision-making skills for shared RRT decision making is still in infancy. We adapt literature from other fields such as primary care and oncology for effective RRT decision making.

SUMMARY

We review seven key skills: (1) Announcing the need for decision making (2) Agenda Setting (3) Educating patients about RRT options (4) Discussing prognoses (5) Eliciting patient preferences (6) Responding to emotions and showing empathy, and (7) Investing in the end. We also provide example sentences to frame the conversations around RRT choices including CKM.

Clinician distress in seriously ill patient care: A dimensional analysis

BACKGROUND

Caring for patients with serious illness may severely strain clinicians causing distress and probable poor patient outcomes. Unfortunately, clinician distress and its impact historically has received little attention.

RESEARCH PURPOSE

The purpose of this article was to investigate the nature of clinician distress.

RESEARCH DESIGN

Qualitative inductive dimensional analysis.

PARTICIPANTS AND RESEARCH CONTEXT

After review of 577 articles from health sciences databases, a total of 33 articles were eligible for analysis.

ETHICAL CONSIDERATIONS

This study did not require ethical review and the authors adhered to appropriate academic standards in their analysis.

FINDINGS

A narrative of clinician distress in the hospital clinician in the United States emerged from the analysis. This included clinicians' perceptions and sense of should or the feeling that something is awry in the clinical situation. The explanatory matrix consequence of clinician distress occurred under conditions including: the recognition of conflict, the recognition of emotion, or the recognition of a mismatch; followed by a process of an inability to feel and act according to one's values due to a precipitating event.

DISCUSSION

This study adds three unique contributions to the concept of clinician distress by (1) including the emotional aspects of caring for seriously ill patients, (2) providing a new framework for understanding clinician distress within the clinician's own perceptions, and (3) looking at action outside of a purely moral lens by dimensionalizing data, thereby pulling apart what has been socially constructed.

CONCLUSION

For clinicians, learning to recognize one's perceptions and emotional reactions is the first step in mitigating distress. There is a critical need to understand the full scope of clinician distress and its impact on the quality of patient-centered care in serious illness.

Top Ten Tips Palliative Care Clinicians Should Know About Prognostication in Critical Illness and Heart, Kidney, and Liver Diseases

Specialty palliative care (PC) clinicians are frequently asked to discuss prognosis with patients and their families. When conveying information about prognosis, PC clinicians need also to discuss the likelihood of prolonged hospitalization, cognitive and functional disabilities, and death. As PC moves further and further upstream, it is crucial that PC providers have a broad understanding of curative and palliative treatments for serious diseases and can collaborate in prognostication with specialists. In this article, we present 10 tips for PC clinicians to consider when caring and discussing prognosis for the seriously ill patients along with their caregivers and care teams. This is the second in a three-part series around prognostication in adult and pediatric PC.

Implementation of Surprise Question Assessments using the Electronic Health Record in Older Adults with Advanced CKD

Background

The Surprise Question (SQ; "Would you be surprised if this patient died in the next 12 months?") is a validated prognostication tool for mortality and hospitalization among patients with advanced CKD. Barriers in clinical workflows have slowed SQ implementation in practice.

Objectives

The aims of this study were: (1) to evaluate implementation outcomes after the use of electronic health record (EHR) decision support to automate the collection of the SQ; and (2) to assess the prognostic utility of the SQ for mortality and hospitalization/emergency room (ER) visits.

Methods

We developed and implemented a best practice alert (BPA) in the EHR to identify nephrology outpatients ≥60 years of age with an eGFR <30 ml/min per 1.73 m2. At appointment, the BPA prompted the physician to answer the SQ. We assessed the rate and timeliness of provider responses. We conducted a post-hoc open-ended survey to assess physician perceptions of SQ implementation. We assessed the SQ's prognostic utility in survival and time-to-hospital encounter (hospitalization/ER visit) analyses.

Results

Among 510 patients for whom the BPA triggered, 95 (19%) had the SQ completed by 16 physicians. Among those completed, nearly all (98%) were on appointment day, and 61 (64%) the first time the BPA fired. Providers answered "no" for 27 (28%) and "yes" for 68 (72%) patients. By 12 months, six (22%) "no" patients died; three (4%) "yes" patients died (hazard ratio [HR] 2.86, ref: yes, 95% CI, 1.06 to 7.69). About 35% of "no" patients and 32% of "yes" patients had a hospital encounter by 12 months (HR, 1.85, ref: yes, 95% CI, 0.93 to 3.69). Physicians noted (1) they had goals-of-care conversations unprompted; (2) EHR-based interventions alone for goals-of-care are ineffective; and (3) more robust engagement is necessary.

Conclusions

We successfully integrated the SQ into the EHR to aid in clinical practice. Additional implementation efforts are needed to encourage further integration of the SQ in clinical practice.

NephroTalk Multimodal Conservative Care Curriculum for Nephrology Fellows

Conservative care, a comprehensive treatment path for advanced kidney disease most suitable for individuals unlikely to benefit from dialysis, is underutilized in the United States. One reason is an absence of robust education about this approach and how to discuss it with potential candidates. To address this need, we developed a multimodal conservative care curriculum for nephrology fellows. This curriculum consists of four online modules that address essential concepts and communication skills related to conservative care. It is followed by an in-person, interactive, "flipped classroom" session facilitated by designated nephrology educators at participating Accreditation Council for Graduate Medical Education nephrology training programs. Curriculum effect was assessed using surveys completed by participating fellows immediately before and following the curriculum and for participating nephrology educators following flipped classroom teaching; 148 nephrology trainees from 19 programs participated, with 108 completing both pre- and postcurriculum surveys. Mean self-reported preparedness (measured on a five-point Likert scale) increased significantly for all ten concepts taught in the curriculum. The mean correct score on eight knowledge questions increased from 69% to 82% following the curriculum (P<0.001). Fellows rated the curriculum highly and reported that they plan to practice skills learned. For the 19 nephrology program educators, the mean perceived preparedness to teach all curriculum domains increased after, compared with before, facilitating the flipped classroom, reaching significance for seven of the ten concepts measured. Data suggest that fellows' participation in a multimodal curriculum increased knowledge and preparation for fundamental conservative care concepts and communication skills. Fellows rated the curriculum highly. Educator participation appears to have increased preparedness for teaching the curriculum concepts, making it likely that future education in conservative care will become more widespread. Herein, we describe the curriculum content, which we have made publicly available in order to encourage broader implementation, and its effect on participating fellows and the nephrology educators who facilitated it.

Non-medical barriers reported by nephrologists when providing renal replacement therapy or comprehensive conservative management to end-stage kidney disease patients: a systematic review

BACKGROUND

Large international differences exist in access to renal replacement therapy (RRT) modalities and comprehensive conservative management (CCM) for patients with end-stage kidney disease (ESKD), suggesting that some patients are not receiving the most appropriate treatment. Previous studies mainly focused on barriers reported by patients or medical barriers (e.g. comorbidities) reported by nephrologists. An overview of the non-medical barriers reported by nephrologists when providing the most appropriate form of RRT (other than conventional in-centre haemodialysis) or CCM is lacking.

METHODS

We searched in EMBASE and PubMed for original articles with a cross-sectional design (surveys, interviews or focus groups) published between January 2010 and September 2018. We included studies in which nephrologists reported barriers when providing RRT or CCM to adult patients with ESKD. We used the barriers and facilitators survey by Peters et al. [Ruimte Voor Verandering? Knelpunten en Mogelijkheden Voor Verbeteringen in de Patiëntenzorg. Nijmegen: Afdeling Kwaliteit van zorg (WOK), 2003] as preliminary framework to create our own model and performed meta-ethnographic analysis of non-medical barriers in text, tables and figures.

RESULTS

Of the 5973 articles screened, 16 articles were included using surveys (n = 10), interviews (n = 5) and focus groups (n = 1). We categorized the barriers into three levels: patient level (e.g. attitude, role perception, motivation, knowledge and socio-cultural background), level of the healthcare professional (e.g. fears and concerns, working style, communication skills) and level of the healthcare system (e.g. financial barriers, supportive staff and practice organization).

CONCLUSIONS

Our systematic review has identified a number of modifiable, non-medical barriers that could be targeted by, for example, education and optimizing financing structure to improve access to RRT modalities and CCM.

Nephrology and Palliative Care Collaboration in the Care of Patients With Advanced Kidney Disease: Results of a Clinician Survey

Rationale & Objective

Despite calls for integrating palliative care into chronic kidney disease (CKD) care, uptake remains low. The study aim was to describe clinicians’ perceptions of the clinical and research priorities in CKD care and the main barriers to collaboration.

Study Design

This was a descriptive cross-sectional study using an online survey developed by clinicians and researchers as the primary data collection method.

Setting & Participants

Clinicians in nephrology and palliative care departments (N = 195) at an academic health center in Virginia were invited to participate. Of the 48.7% (n = 95) who responded, most were registered nurses (65.3%) in nephrology (80%) with more than 15 years’ experience (40%).

Predictors

Factors including discipline (nursing, social work, and physician) and practice area (palliative care or nephrology) were assessed.

Outcomes

Main outcomes of interest included clinicians’ perceptions of the role of palliative care, barriers to collaboration, and the top clinical and research priorities for patients with advanced CKD.

Analytic Approach

Survey data were analyzed using SPSS using descriptive statistics.

Results

Respondents reported being comfortable caring for patients near the end of life and endorsed advance care planning and collaboration between nephrology and palliative care teams. However, both rarely happen. Fragmentation, or poor coordination of care, was perceived to be the main barrier to collaboration. Perceptions regarding collaboration facilitation differed; nephrology clinicians identified patient/family education as the most important facilitator while palliative care clinicians identified clinician education as most important. Top clinical priorities differed. Palliative care clinicians reported pain/symptom management as taking priority while nephrology clinicians identified caregiver/family support. Developing interventions to support treatment-related decision making was the top research priority.

Limitations

Results reflect perceptions of about half the clinicians at 1 academic health center.

Conclusions

Additional studies to capture patients’ and families’ perspectives and examine end-of-life care processes are needed. Results may inform future targeted interventions.