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

Towards a better uptake of home dialysis in Europe: understanding the present and looking to the future

Use of peritoneal dialysis and home haemodialysis remains low in Europe, with the highest use in Scandinavian countries and the lowest in Eastern and Central Europe despite the advantages for people on dialysis and economic advantages for healthcare systems. This is partly due to the impact of the haemodialysis industry resulting in proliferation of haemodialysis units and nephrologist reimbursement related to use of haemodialysis. Equally important is the bias against home dialysis at both clinician and healthcare system levels. The underlying causes of this bias are discussed in relation to a mechanistic view of the human body, lack of compassion, failure to adjust dialysis provision for older age and frailty, proliferation of small dialysis centres, and complexity of decision-making and clinical care. For home dialysis to flourish, we need to foster a change in attitude to and vision of the aims of healthcare so that enabling meaningful activities of people requiring dialysis, as explored in the Standardized Outcomes in Nephrology initiative, rather than achieving biological numbers become the focus of care delivery.

Factors influencing renal replacement therapy modality choice from the nephrologist's perspective

BACKGROUND

Peritoneal dialysis (PD) offers quality of life and empowerment for persons with end-stage kidney disease (ESKD). Nevertheless, the prevalence of PD is low in Belgium and Europe in general. Reimbursement, patient mix and late referral have been quoted as underlying reasons. However, to date no one-size-fits-all solution increasing uptake of PD has been successfully implemented. We aimed to understand the nephrologist's perspective, beliefs, and experiences on dialysis modality selection and to clarify underlying process-level and intrinsic motivations steering final decisions.

METHODS

Using purposeful sampling, Belgian nephrologists (non-/academic, geographical spread, age, gender) were selected. We conducted semi-structured interviews, and audiotapes were transcribed verbatim. Meaningful units were grouped into (sub-)themes, and a conceptual framework was developed using grounded theory according to Charmaz as guidance.

RESULTS

Twenty-nine nephrologists were interviewed. We identified four themes: Trust and belief (in PD as a technique; own expertise, knowledge and team; in behavior of patient, family practitioner), feeling of control (paternalism; insecurity; prejudice), vision of care and approach (shared decision making; troubleshooting attitude; flexibility and creativity; complacency), and organizational issues (predialysis; access; financial; and assisted PD).

CONCLUSIONS

Based on these interviews, it is apparent that next to already identified singular issues such as late referral, predialysis education, patient mix and financial incentives, more intrinsic factors also impact uptake of home-based therapies. These factors intertwine and relate both to process-level topics and to attitudes and culture of the nephrologists within the team.

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.

Inequities in kidney health and kidney care

Health inequity refers to the existence of unnecessary and unfair differences in the ability of an individual or community to achieve optimal health and access appropriate care. Kidney diseases, including acute kidney injury and chronic kidney disease, are the epitome of health inequity. Kidney disease risk and outcomes are strongly associated with inequities that occur across the entire clinical course of disease. Insufficient investment across the spectrum of kidney health and kidney care is a fundamental source of inequity. In addition, social and structural inequities, including inequities in access to primary health care, education and preventative strategies, are major risk factors for, and contribute to, poorer outcomes for individuals living with kidney diseases. Access to affordable kidney care is also highly inequitable, resulting in financial hardship and catastrophic health expenditure for the most vulnerable. Solutions to these injustices require leadership and political will. The nephrology community has an important role in advocacy and in identifying and implementing solutions to dismantle inequities that affect kidney health.

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.

[REIN and international collaboration]

On the occasion of the 20th anniversary of the REIN (French Renal Epidemiology and Information Network), a summary work on the contributions of the national French ESKD register was carried out. On the issue of its international role, the following key messages were retained. Right from its inception, the REIN registry has been integrated into the family of European registries under the direction of the European society ERA and its registry based at the Academic Medical Centre of Amsterdam. In this context, the registry has been a part of numerous international publications and projects financed by the European Commission. The expertise of the Agency of Biomedicine and REIN on the registries has been sought on several occasions in the context of setting up registries of replacement therapies. Several foreign students outside the European Union have also been able to come and work in the REIN national coordination.

Choice of the Dialysis Modality: Practical Considerations

Chronic kidney disease and the need for kidney replacement therapy have increased dramatically in recent decades. Forecasts for the coming years predict an even greater increase, especially in low- and middle-income countries, due to the rise in metabolic and cardiovascular diseases and the aging population. Access to kidney replacement treatments may not be available to all patients, making it especially strategic to set up therapy programs that can ensure the best possible treatment for the greatest number of patients. The choice of the "ideal" kidney replacement therapy often conflicts with medical availability and the patient's tolerance. This paper discusses the pros and cons of various kidney replacement therapy options and their real-world applicability limits.

The European Kidney Health Alliance (EKHA) and the Decade of the KidneyTM

The European Kidney Health Alliance (EKHA) is an advocacy organization that defends the case of the kidney patients and the nephrological community at the level of the European Union (EU), and from there, top to bottom, also at the national level of the EU member states and the EU-associated countries. The Decade of the KidneyTM is a global initiative launched by the American Association of Kidney Patients (AAKP) to create greater awareness and organize patient demands for long overdue innovation in kidney care. This article describes the medical and patient burden of kidney disease, the history of EKHA, its major activities and tools for policy action and the need for innovation. We then describe the Decade of the KidneyTM initiative, the rationale why EKHA joined this activity to emanate parallel action at the European side, the novel professionalized structure of EKHA, and its immediate targets. The final aim is to align all major stakeholders for an action plan on kidney disease comparable to Europe's successful Beating Cancer Plan, with the additional intent that the EKHA model is applied also by the respective national kidney-related societies to create a broad mobilization at all levels. The ultimate aims are that the EU considers chronic kidney disease (CKD) as a major health and health-economic problem, to consequently have CKD included as a key health research target by the European Commission, and to improve quality of life and outcomes for all kidney patients.

Knowledge, Attitude, and Willingness Toward Kidney Donation Among Health Sciences Students at King Saud Bin Abdulaziz University

Background: End-stage renal disease, as one of the most serious and major health problems, does not have many treatment options available. One of the best treatment modalities used to cure this debilitating disease is kidney transplantation. However, with the continuous increase in number of patients diagnosed with it, there is not enough supply of the organ. The aim of our study is to assess knowledge about, attitude toward, and willingness to donate kidney among health science students at King Saud bin Abdulaziz University in comparison to the general population in Jeddah and to investigate the factors that play a role on their willingness.

Methods: This is an observational, analytical, cross-sectional study design conducted in 2019. Two target populations were included: King Saud bin Abdulaziz University for Health Sciences students and the general population in Jeddah. Data were collected via a self-administered, close-ended, structured, and previously validated questionnaire that contained 39 items divided into four sections. SPSS program version 22 was used in data analysis.

Results: Out of 685 surveyed participants, 179 (26.1%) were willing to donate their kidney, with students showing a higher rate of willingness (N = 101; 32.3%) than the general population (N = 78; 21%). However, only 46 (6.7%) out of the total population hold an organ donor card. In bivariate analysis, it was found that knowledge significantly associated with a higher rate of willingness among the student population than the general population, while positive beliefs were associated with increased willingness in the general population than students. Positive attitude appeared to play a role in higher willingness among the general population and student population.

Conclusion: There is a low perception of awareness regarding kidney donation in both populations of this study. The willingness rate of health science students at King Saud bin Abdulaziz University and the general population was low when compared with other studies conducted internationally.