Shared patient and provider values in end-stage renal disease decision making: Identifying the tensions

The experience of shared decision-making for patients with end-stage kidney disease undergoing haemodialysis and their families-A scoping review

AIM

To identify the experiences of shared decision-making (SDM) for adults with end-stage kidney disease undergoing haemodialysis (HD) and their family members.

DESIGN

A scoping literature review.

METHOD

A scoping literature review, using Joanna Briggs Institute guidelines.

DATA SOURCES

Medline (OVID), EMBASE, CINAHL, Psych Info, ProQuest, Web of Science, Open grey and grey literature were searched covering years from January 2015 to July 2022. Empirical studies, unpublished thesis and studies in English were included. The scoping review was conducted using the Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Meta analysis-scoping review extension (PRISMA-Scr).

RESULTS

Thirteen studies were included in the final review. While SDM is welcomed by people undergoing HD, their experience is often limited to treatment decisions, with little opportunity to revisit decisions previously made. The role of the family/caregivers as active participants in SDM requires recognition.

CONCLUSION

People with end-stage kidney disease undergoing HD do and want to participate in the process of SDM, on a wide range of topics, in addition to treatment. A strategy is needed to ensure that SDM interventions are successful in achieving patient-driven outcomes and enhancing their quality of life.

IMPLICATIONS FOR CLINICAL PRACTICE

This review highlights the experiences of people undergoing HD and their family/caregivers. There is a wide variety of clinical decisions requiring consideration for people undergoing HD, including considering the importance who should be involved in the decision-making processes and when decisions should occur. Further study to ensure nurses understand the importance, and influence of including family members in conversations on both SDM processes and outcomes is needed. There is a need for research from both patient and healthcare professional (HCP) perspectives to ensure that people feel supported and have their needs met in the SDM process.

PATIENT AND PUBLIC CONTRIBUTION

No patient or public contribution.

Predictors of Self-Management Behaviors After Discharge Among Unplanned Dialysis Patients

BACKGROUND

Patients with unplanned dialysis must perform self-management behaviors to maintain their health in the community after discharge. Understanding the factors that predict the postdischarge self-management behaviors of patients with unplanned dialysis can assist nurses to implement appropriate discharge plans for this population.

PURPOSE

This study was designed to predict the effects of uncertainty in illness, self-care knowledge, and social-support-related needs during hospitalization on the self-management behaviors of patients with unplanned dialysis during their first 3 months after discharge from the hospital.

METHODS

One hundred sixty-nine patients with unplanned dialysis from the nephrology department of a medical center in Taiwan were enrolled in this prospective study using convenience sampling. At hospital admission, demographic, uncertainty in illness, self-care knowledge, and social support information was collected using a structured questionnaire. Information on self-management behavior was collected at 3 months postdischarge when the patients visited outpatient clinics.

RESULTS

Hierarchical multiple regression analyses showed that self-care knowledge, uncertainty in illness, and social support were important predictors of self-management behaviors at 3 months postdischarge, explaining 65.6% of the total variance in self-management behaviors. Social support increased the variance in self-management behaviors by 27.9%.

CONCLUSIONS/IMPLICATIONS FOR PRACTICE

Comprehensive discharge planning to improve the postdischarge self-management behaviors of patients with unplanned dialysis should involve interventions to improve self-care knowledge, reduce uncertainty in illness, and increase social support. Building social support should be given priority attention.

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

AIMS

To systematically review and synthesize qualitative evidence related to decision-making for treatment modalities among older adults with end-stage renal disease.

DESIGN

A meta-synthesis of the qualitative research was conducted.

DATA SOURCES

A comprehensive literature review using PubMed, CINAHL, PsycINFO, Embase, Web of Sciences and Cochrane was systematically conducted. Qualitative studies published in English from January 2010 to October 2020 were considered.

REVIEW METHODS

Qualitative studies were systematically identified and critically appraised. Data synthesis was performed independently by two reviewers. This review followed the Enhancing Transparency in Reporting the Synthesis of Qualitative Research statement.

RESULTS

Seven qualitative studies, with publication years ranging from 2015 to 2019, were included in the analysis. Overall, the review comprised studies with a total of 133 participants aged between 61 and 93 years. Through meta-synthesis, three themes were identified: 'reflecting on treatment options', 'confronting difficult decisions' and 'maintaining hope in everyday life'.

CONCLUSION

Our findings reflect that older adults have varying preferences for treatment options. These preferences are influenced by various factors such as considering the possibility of opting for dialysis and the practical applicability of treatment options. The synthesized conceptual model serves as the first step towards the conceptualization of the treatment-related decision-making process facilitated by adequate communication, in which patients should be encouraged to speak up, and healthcare providers should listen actively to their patients. This review can provide a strategy for providers to communicate treatment options with older patients with ESRD.

IMPACT

Healthcare providers should be sensitive to older adults' preferences, priorities and treatment goals related to worrying about burdening their families and their outlook on life before deciding treatment modality. Our findings highlight that shared decision-making should be tailored to each of the older patients to provide comprehensive and individualized patient-centred care.

Health literacy as predictors of fluid management in people receiving hemodialysis in China: A structural equation modeling analysis

OBJECTIVES

To explore the impact of health literacy (HL) on perceived benefits of fluid restriction (PBFR), self-reported fluid restriction (SRFR) and relative-interdialytic weight gain (R-IDWG) in people receiving hemodialysis (HD).

METHODS

We conducted a cross-sectional study in two nephrology departments from two hospitals in Guangzhou, China (n = 226). The HL questionnaire, PBFR Subscale of Health Belief Model Constructs and Fluid Adherence Subscale of the HD Patients Therapy Adherence Scale were used. R-IDWG was calculated by the mean IDWG (from 3 consecutive HD), divided by the dry weight.

RESULTS

In structural equation modeling, three domains of the HL questionnaire, namely Actively Managing My Health, Social Support and Actively Engaging with Healthcare Providers (HCPs), were directly and positively associated with PBFR. Higher Actively Managing My Health predicted higher SRFR both directly and indirectly. Sufficient Social Support and adequate Actively Engaging with HCPs predicted higher SRFR indirectly. All three HL domains predicted R-IDWG indirectly.

CONCLUSION

Improving patients' HL could increase their understanding of PBFR and be more apt to follow fluid restrictions and reduce R-IDWG.

PRACTICE IMPLICATIONS

A better understanding of the relationships among HL, PBFR, SRFR and R-IDWG will allow for tailored interventions to decrease R-IDWG in people receiving HD.

Nephrologists' experiences with patient participation when long-term dialysis is required

Background

For individuals in need of dialysis, patient participation is important when determining care goals and in decision making regarding dialysis modality. Nephrologists hold a key role in delivering evidence-based healthcare that integrates patient preferences and values throughout the trajectory, and their experiences with patient participation are important for improving health care. The aim of this study was to explore nephrologists’ experiences with patient participation in different phases of the end-stage renal disease trajectory for working-age individuals who require dialysis.

Methods

This explorative study comprised interviews with ten nephrologists from four different dialysis units in Central Norway. We analysed the interviews by applying an interpretive phenomenological approach.

Results

Nephrologists had varied experiences with patient participation throughout the different phases of the treatment trajectory. During decision making on the dialysis modality, nephrologists emphasised patients’ choices in two approaches. In the first approach, they expected patients to choose the modality based on the provided information, which could be actively steered. In the second approach, they recognised the patients’ values and lifestyle preferences through shared decision-making. Within hospital haemodialysis, nephrologists considered patients’ self-care activities equivalent to patient participation, seeing self-care as a source of patient empowerment. They identified divergent patient–professional values and organisational structures as barriers to patient participation.

Conclusion

Our study shows that nephrologists have different approaches to patient participation in different phases of the end-stage renal disease trajectory. Individual understanding as well as organisational structures are important factors to address to increase patient participation in end-stage renal disease care. Shared decision making, in which patient values are balanced against biomedical treatment targets, allows for mutual agreement between patients and healthcare professionals concerning medical plans and minimises the potential for patient–professional tensions.

Delivery of a patient-friendly functioning report to improve patient-centeredness of dialysis care: a pilot study

Background

Provider recognition of level of functioning may be suboptimal in the dialysis setting, and this lack of recognition may lead to less patient-centered care. We aimed to assess whether delivery of an app-based, individualized functioning report would improve patients’ perceptions of patient-centeredness of care.

Methods

In this pre-post pilot study at three outpatient dialysis facilities in metropolitan Atlanta, an individualized functioning report—including information on physical performance, perceived physical functioning, and community mobility—was delivered to patients receiving hemodialysis (n = 43) and their providers. Qualitative and quantitative approaches were used to gather patient and provider feedback to develop and assess the report and app. Paired t test was used to test for differences in patient perception of patient-centeredness of care (PPPC) scores (range, 1 = most patient-centered to 4 = least patient-centered) 1 month after report delivery.

Results

Delivery of the reports to both patients and providers was not associated with a subsequent change in patients’ perceptions of patient-centeredness of their care (follow-up vs. baseline PPPC scores of 2.35 vs. 2.36; P > 0.9). However, patients and providers generally saw the potential of the report to improve the patient-centeredness of care and reacted positively to the individualized reports delivered in the pilot. Patients also reported willingness to undergo future assessments. However, while two-thirds of surveyed providers reported always or sometimes discussing the reports they received, most (98%) participating patients reported that no one on the dialysis care team had discussed the report with them within 1 month.

Conclusions

Potential lack of fidelity to the intervention precludes definitive conclusions about effects of the report on patient-centeredness of care. The disconnect between patients’ and providers’ perceptions of discussions of the report warrants future study. However, this study introduces a novel, individualized, multi-domain functional report that is easily implemented in the setting of hemodialysis. Our pilot study provides guidance for improving its use both clinically and in future pragmatic research studies, both within and beyond the dialysis population.