Decision aids to assist patients and professionals in choosing the right treatment for kidney failure

Visual decision aids to support communication and shared decision-making: How are they valued and used in practice?

BACKGROUND

It is unknown how visual decision aids support communication and shared decision-making in everyday clinical practice, and how they are perceived by patients with varying levels of health literacy and their healthcare providers. Recently, three visual decision aids have been developed for renal replacement treatment, osteoarthritis of the knee, and osteoarthritis of the hip. This study aims to explore how patients and healthcare providers use and value these visual decision aids.

METHODS

The evaluation of the visual decision aids was performed by coding video-recorded outpatient consultations (n = 35), by conducting reflective practice interviews with healthcare providers (n = 9), and through interviews with patients (n = 29). Consultations were coded using the 5-item OPTION instrument to measure shared decision-making, and self-developed items based on the visual decision aids and user guide.

RESULTS

Both healthcare providers and patients valued the use of the visual decision aids, especially the overview page with all treatment options. Accordingly, it was observed that most providers mainly used the overview page. However, providers in nephrology discussed the individual treatment pages more often than providers in osteoarthritis care. This study also showed that most providers were unfamiliar with the user guide for the visual decision aids.

CONCLUSION

Visual decision aids for nephrology and osteoarthritis care seem particularly useful for patients with limited health literacy. Healthcare providers in this study mainly used the overview page of the visual decision aids. Although this is valued by both providers and patients, it is also important to discuss the individual treatment pages, including the pros and cons, with patients. This study also points to differences between outpatient clinics or departments in the use and implementation of the visual decision aids. The visual decision aids for osteoarthritis are used to a limited extent. In nephrology clinics, the visual decision aid is implemented.

Feasibility and acceptability of the ShareD dEciSIon making for patients with kidney failuRE to improve end-of-life care intervention: A pilot multicentre randomised controlled trial

Background

Kidney failure is associated with a high disease burden and high mortality rates. National and international guidelines recommend health professionals involve patients with kidney failure in making decisions about end-of-life care, but implementation of these conversations within kidney services varies. We developed the DESIRE (ShareD dEciSIon-making for patients with kidney failuRE to improve end-of-life care) intervention from our studies investigating multiple decision maker needs and experiences of end-of-life care in kidney services. The DESIRE intervention's three components are a training programme for health professionals, a patient decision aid, and a kidney service consultation held to facilitate shared decision-making conversations about planning end-of-life care.

Objectives

To assess the feasibility and acceptability of integrating the DESIRE intervention within kidney services.

Design

A pilot study using a multicentre randomised controlled design.

Setting

Four Danish nephrology departments.

Participants

Patients with kidney failure who were 75 years of age or above, their relatives, and health professionals.

Methods

Patients were randomised to either the intervention or usual care. Feasibility data regarding delivering the intervention, the trial design, and outcome measures were collected through questionnaires and audio recordings at four points in time: before, during, post, and 3 months after the intervention. Acceptability data were collected through semi-structured interviews with patients and relatives, as well as a focus group with health professionals post the intervention.

Results

Twenty-seven patients out of the 32 planned were randomised either to the intervention (n= 14) or usual care (n= 13). In addition, four relatives and 12 health professionals participated. Follow-up was completed by 81 % (n= 22) of patient participants. We found that both feasibility and acceptability data suggested health professionals improved their decision support and shared decision-making skills via the training. Patient and relative participants experienced the intervention as supporting a shared decision-making process; from audio recordings, we showed health professionals were able to support proactively decision-making about end-of-life care within these consultations. All stakeholders perceived the intervention to be effective in promoting shared decision-making and relevant for supporting end-of-life care planning.

Conclusions

Participant feedback indicated that the DESIRE intervention can be integrated into practice to support patients, relatives, and health professionals in planning end-of-life care alongside the management of worsening kidney failure. Minimising exhaustion and enhancing engagement with the intervention should be a focus for subsequent refinement of the intervention.

Registration

The study has been registered at ClinicalTrials.gov with the identifier: NCT05842772. Date of first recruitment: March 20, 2023.

Measuring healthcare professionals' perceptions of their ability to adopt shared decision making: Translation and psychometric evaluation of the Danish version of the IcanSDM questionnaire

BACKGROUND

Shared  decision making in healthcare is a fundamental right for patients. Healthcare professionals' perception of their own abilities to enable shared decision making is crucial for implementing shared decision making within service. IcanSDM (I can shared decision making) is a brief measure to investigate healthcare professionals' perception of shared decision making approaches to their practices. It was developed in Canada with French and English versions, and recently translated into German. This study aims to adapt the IcanSDM measure for Danish-speaking healthcare professionals, and evaluate its psychometric properties.

METHODS

Cultural adaptation and translation based on Beaton et al.'s approach was applied. A forward translation by ten people and a backward translation by two people were performed. To assess comprehensibility, cognitive interviews were conducted with 24 healthcare professionals. Eighty healthcare professionals who were trained in shared decision making for either one hour (n = 65) or one day (n = 15) participated in the psychometric evaluation. The evaluation concerned acceptance, item characteristics, skewness, item difficulties, corrected item-total correlations, inter-item correlations, factorial structure, internal consistency, and responsiveness.

RESULTS

The forward and backward translation revealed few discrepancies, and participants understood the items well. The psychometric evaluation showed a high completion rate and acceptable item difficulties and discrimination values. Both the factor analysis and the internal consistency showed a 2-factor structure: 1) healthcare professionals' capacity to implement shared decision making; and 2) healthcare professionals' capacity to practise shared decision making. The IcanSDM_Danish obtained a Cronbach's alpha coefficient of 0.74. The evaluation of responsiveness showed improvement, but was not statistically significant.

CONCLUSION

The IcanSDM_Danish has good cross-cultural validity and internal consistency, and a 2-factor structure. The IcanSDM_Danish is capable of providing reliable and valid measurement when evaluating constructed knowledge about shared decision making, and may be able to support the implementation of shared decision making training and evaluation of its impact.

Development of a Resource for Health Professionals to Raise Advance Care Planning Topics During Kidney Care Consultations: A Multiple User-Centered Design

Rationale & Objective

Planning and delivering treatment pathways that integrate end-of-life care, frailty assessment, and enhanced supportive care is a service priority. Despite this, people with kidney failure are less likely to have an advance care plan and receive hospice and palliative care compared with other chronic illness populations. This is linked to health professionals feeling unskilled initiating conversations around future treatment and care options. This article describes research underpinning the development of a guide for kidney health professionals discussing end-of-life and advance care planning options with people with kidney failure and family members.

Study Design

The study comprised 2 parts: an initial cross-sectional qualitative approach using in-depth interviews with older adults with kidney failure and (bereaved) carers followed by resource development with input from multiple stakeholders.

Setting & Participants

Older adults with kidney failure and (bereaved) carers recruited from 2 renal units in the North of England and by online advertisements with national United Kingdom-based kidney patient charities. Resource development included input from co-applicants, independent advisory committee, patient and public involvement team, multidisciplinary health professionals and academics in the United Kingdom and Denmark.

Analytical Approach

Thematic analysis was used to analyze the data.

Results

Twenty-seven people were interviewed: older adults with kidney failure (n = 18), carers (n = 5), bereaved carers (n = 4). Five themes are described: the context within which end-of-life conversations take place, preferences for end-of-life treatment and care, family members' role and needs in supporting people with kidney failure at the end-of-life, expectations and experience of dialysis treatment, and beliefs and experiences of death and dying.

Limitations

Participants were mainly White, British, and receiving hemodialysis.

Conclusions

People with (lived) experience of kidney failure informed a guide which aims to build on health professionals existing skills and improve confidence having conversations about future treatment and care. Kidney teams have expressed interest implementing the guide in practice and within their broader communications training packages.

Danish Women Make Decisions about Participation in Breast Cancer Screening prior to Invitation Information: An Online Survey Using Experimental Methods

INTRODUCTION

At mammography screening invitation, the Danish Health Authority recommends women aged 50 to 69 y make an informed decision about whether to be screened. Previous studies have shown that women have very positive attitudes about screening participation. Therefore, we hypothesized that Danish women may already have decided to participate in breast cancer screening prior to receiving their screening invitation at age 50 y.

METHODS

We invited a random sample of 2,952 Danish women aged 44 to 49 y (prescreening age) to complete an online questionnaire about barriers to informed screening decision making using the official digital mailbox system in Denmark. We asked participants about their screening intentions using 3 different questions to which women were randomized: screening presented 1) as an opportunity, 2) as a choice, and 3) as an opportunity plus a question about women's stage of decision making. All women completed questions about background characteristics, intended participation in the screening program, use and impact of screening information, and preferences for the decision-making process. Data were linked to sociodemographic register data.

RESULTS

A total of 790 (26.8%) women participated in the study. Herein, 97% (95% confidence interval: 96%-98%) reported that they wanted to participate in breast cancer screening when invited at age 50 y. When presented with the choice compared with the opportunity framing, more women rejected screening. When asked about their stage of decision making, most (87%) had already made a decision about screening participation and were unlikely to change their mind.

CONCLUSION

In our study, almost all women of prescreening age wanted to participate in breast cancer screening, suggesting that providing information at the time of screening invitation may be too late to support informed decision making.

HIGHLIGHTS

Almost all women of prescreening age (44-49 y) in our study wanted to participate in the Danish national mammography screening program starting at age 50 y.Early decision making represents a barrier for informed decision making as women in this study had intentions to participate in breast cancer screening prior to receiving an official screening invitation, and therefore, providing information at the time of screening invitation may be too late to support informed decision making.Very few women rejected screening participation; however, more women rejected screening when the information was framed as an active choice between having or declining breast cancer screening (continue with usual care) compared with presenting only the option of screening with no description of the alternative.Two-thirds of women reading the screening information in this study had unchanged attitudes toward screening after reading the presented information.

Survey of service needs to embed genome sequencing for motor neuron disease in neurology in the English National Health Service

All people with motor neuron disease (pwMND) in England are eligible for genome sequencing (GS), with panel-based testing. With the advent of genetically targeted MND treatments, and increasing demand for GS, it is important that clinicians have the knowledge and skills to support pwMND in making informed decisions around GS. We undertook an online survey of clinical genomic knowledge and genetic counselling skills in English clinicians who see pwMND. There were 245 respondents to the survey (160 neurology clinicians and 85 genetic clinicians). Neurology clinicians reported multiple, overlapping barriers to offering pwMND GS. Lack of time to discuss GS in clinic and lack of training in genetics were reported. Neurology clinicians scored significantly less well on self-rated genomic knowledge and genetic counselling skills than genetic clinicians. The majority of neurology clinicians reported that they do not have adequate educational or patient information resources to support GS discussions. We identify low levels of genomic knowledge and skills in the neurology workforce. This may impede access to GS and precision medicine for pwMND.

A report of resources used by clinicians in the UK to support motor neuron disease genomic testing

Genetic testing is a key decision-making point for people with motor neuron disease (MND); to establish eligibility for clinical trials, better understand the cause of their condition, and confirm the potential risk to relatives, who may be able to access predictive testing. Given the wide-reaching implications of MND genetic and predictive testing, it is essential that families are given adequate information, and that staff are provided with appropriate training. In this report we overview the information resources available to people with MND and family members around genetic testing, and the educational and training resources available to staff, based on information obtained through a freedom of information request to UK-based NHS Trusts. MND Association resources were most commonly used in information sharing, though we highlight distinctions between neurology and genetics centers. No respondents identified comprehensive training around MND genetic testing. We conclude with practice implications and priorities for the development of resources and training.