Developing a conceptual model of older patients' decision-making process in choosing dialysis or conservative care using meta-ethnography

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.

Shared decision-making in end-of-life care for end-stage renal disease patients: nephrologists' views and attitudes

BACKGROUND

The term end-stage renal disease (ESRD) refers to the final stage of chronic kidney disease. Not all ESRD patients are suitable for dialysis treatment, which despite its advantages, is not without risks. Shared nephrologist-patient decision-making could be beneficial at this stage, yet little is known about such practices in Israel. This study aimed at examining the practice of shared decision-making (SDM) between nephrologists and ESRD patients in Israel, while exploring related conflicts, ethical dilemmas, and considerations.

METHODS

The descriptive-quantitative approach applied in this study included a validated questionnaire for nephrologists, based on Emanual and Emanual (1992). The survey, which was distributed via social-media platforms and snowball sampling, was completed by 169 nephrologists. Data analysis included t-tests for independent samples, f-tests for analysis of variance, and t-tests and f-tests for independence. Descriptive analysis examined attitudes towards SDM in end-of-life care for ESRD patients.

RESULTS

The findings show that the research sample did not include nephrologists who typically act according to the paternalistic decision-making style. Rather, 53% of the respondents were found to act in line with the informative decision-making style, while 47% act according to the interpretive decision-making style. Almost 70% of all respondents reported their discussing quality-of-life with patients; 63.4% provide prognostic assessments; 61.5% inquire about the patient's desired place of death; 58.6% ask about advance directives or power-of-attorney; and 57.4% inquire about cultural and religious beliefs in end-of-life treatment. Additionally, informative nephrologists tend to promote the patients' autonomy over their health (P < 0.001); they are also in favor of conservative treatment, compared to paternalistic and interpretive nephrologists, and use less invasive methods than other nephrologists (P = 0.02).

CONCLUSIONS

Nephrologists in Israel only partially pursue an SDM model, which has the potential to improve quality-of-care for ESRD patients and their families. SDM programs should be developed and implemented for increasing such practices among nephrologists, thereby expanding the possibilities for providing conservative care at end-of-life.

Patient engagement during the transition from nondialysis-dependent chronic kidney disease to dialysis: A meta-ethnography

INTRODUCTION

Patient engagement, encompassing both patient experience and opportunities for involvement in care, has been associated with increased patient satisfaction and the overall quality of care. Despite its importance, there is limited knowledge regarding patient engagement in the transition from nondialysis-dependent chronic kidney disease (CKD) to dialysis-dependent treatment. This systematic review employs meta-ethnography to synthesize findings from qualitative studies examining patients' experiences of engagement during this transition, with the aim of developing a comprehensive theoretical understanding of patient engagement in the transition from nondialysis-dependent CKD to dialysis.

METHODS

A systematic search of six databases, namely the Cochrane Library, PsycINFO, Scopus, Embase, PubMed and Web of Science was conducted to identify eligible articles published between 1990 and 2022. Meta-ethnography was utilized to translate and synthesize the findings and develop a novel theoretical interpretation of 'patient engagement' during the transition to dialysis.

RESULTS

A total of 24 articles were deemed eligible for review, representing 21 studies. Patient engagement during a transition to dialysis was found to encompass three major domains: psychosocial adjustment, decision-making and engagement in self-care. These three domains could be experienced as an iterative and mutually reinforcing process, guiding patients toward achieving control and proficiency in their lives as they adapt to dialysis. Additionally, patient engagement could be facilitated by factors including patients' basic capability to engage, the provision of appropriate education, the establishment of supportive relationships and the alignment with values and resources.

CONCLUSIONS

The findings of this review underscore the necessity of involving patients in transitional dialysis care, emphasizing the need to foster their engagement across multiple domains. Recommendations for future interventions include the provision of comprehensive support to enhance patient engagement during this critical transition phase. Additional research is warranted to explore the effects of various facilitators at different levels.

PATIENT OR PUBLIC CONTRIBUTION

The studies included in our review involved 633 participants (547 patients, 14 family members, 63 healthcare providers and 9 managers). Based on their experiences, views and beliefs, we developed a deeper understanding of patient engagement and how to foster it in the future.

Kidney Clinicians' Perceptions of Challenges and Aspirations to Improve End-Of-Life Care Provision

Introduction

End-of-life care is an essential part of integrated kidney care. However, renal clinicians' experiences of care provision and perceptions of end-of-life care needs are limited. This study explored renal clinicians' experiences of providing end-of-life care and developed recommendations to improve experiences.

Methods

An exploratory qualitative study using semistructured focus groups and 1 interview was undertaken at 5 kidney services in Victoria, Australia. The transcripts were analyzed thematically.

Results

Between February and December 2017, 54 renal clinicians (21 doctors and 33 nurses) participated in the study. Clinicians reported multiple challenges of end-of-life care experiences resulting in compromised treatment planning and decision making and highlighted priorities to guide better care experiences. Challenges of providing end-of-life care were underpinned by mismatches in illness and treatment expectations, limited engagement in advance care planning, medical complexity, and differences between clinicians and patients in what constituted quality of life. These challenges were associated with compromised end-of-life care planning, which resulted in care experiences that were rushed with a prolonged treatment focus, risking limited preparation for death and moral distress. Clinicians aspired for positive end-of-life care experiences, including patient control and consensus in decision making, and a coordinated and collaborative approach across healthcare providers.

Conclusions

Renal clinicians highlighted multiple factors and circumstances which resulted in experiences of compromised end-of-life care for patients with kidney disease. To improve care experiences, clinician-directed priorities included more training and support to facilitate systematic and earlier discussions about illness expectations and end-of-life care planning and greater communication and collaboration across healthcare providers is required.