Quality standards for predialysis education: results from a consensus conference

Eligibility test for advanced chronic kidney disease: Revision and proposal

Nowadays, chronic kidney disease (CKD) prevalence keeps increasing worldwide. The management of these patients usually requires renal replacement therapy (RRT). However, the complexity of patients' profiles comprises a great challenge to overcome. During the last decades, CKD units have been developed to offer multidisciplinary and coordinated attention to patients, helping in the decision-making of the RRT. Nevertheless, there is a huge variability in the performance and organization of care practice, implying an existing necessity to homogenize the RRT modality chosen. We propose a test composed of two parts: one to be completed by the medical staff (to evaluate contraindications for the different RRT techniques) and another by the patient or nursing staff (to consider patients' preferences). In this sense, it would be possible to have a common and useful tool to complement patient education in RRT, as well as sharing decision-making in the ACKD units taking into account patient preferences.

Needs and Considerations for Standardization of Kidney Disease Education in Patients with Advanced CKD

Kidney health advocacy organizations and leaders in the nephrology community have repeatedly emphasized the need to increase home dialysis utilization in the United States. Limited awareness and understanding of options for the management of kidney failure among patients living with advanced CKD is a significant barrier to increasing the selection and use of home dialysis. Studies have shown that providing targeted comprehensive patient education before the onset of kidney failure can improve patients' awareness of kidney disease and substantially increase the informed utilization of home dialysis. Unfortunately, in the absence of validated evidence-based education protocols, outcomes associated with home dialysis use vary widely among published studies, potentially affecting the routine implementation and reporting of these services among patients with advanced CKD. This review provides pragmatic guidance on establishing effective patient-centered education programs to empower patients to make informed decisions about their KRT and, in turn, increase home dialysis use.

Patient information about living donor kidney transplantation across UK renal units: A critical review

BACKGROUND

Patient information about living donor kidney transplantation is used to supplement conversations between health professionals, people with advanced kidney disease and potential kidney donors. It is not known if the information is designed to support decision-making about renal replacement options and if it helps people discuss living kidney donation with family and friends.

OBJECTIVE

Critical review of resources used in outpatient kidney consultations to support patients' decision-making about living kidney donor transplantation.

DESIGN

Mixed methods including an audit questionnaire and critical analysis of patient information leaflets.

PARTICIPANTS AND MEASUREMENTS

All kidney transplant centres and renal units in United Kingdom received a questionnaire to elicit by whom, how, and when information about living kidney donation is delivered. Copies of leaflets were requested. A coding frame was utilised to produce a quality score for each leaflet.

RESULTS

Thirty-nine (54%) units participated. Patients discussed living donor kidney transplantation with nephrologists (100%), living donor nurse (94%), transplant co-ordinator (94%), and predialysis nurse (86%). Twenty-three leaflets were provided and reviewed, mean quality scores for inclusion of information known to support shared decision-making was m = 2.82 out of 10 (range = 0-6, SD = 1.53). Readability scores indicated they were 'fairly difficult to read' (M = 56.3, range = 0-100, SD = 9.4). Few included cultural and faith information. Two leaflets were designed to facilitate conversations with others about donation.

CONCLUSIONS

Leaflets are unlikely to adequately support decision-making between options and discussions about donation. Services writing and updating patient leaflets may benefit from our six principles to guide their development.

Adapting a Dialysis Service for Delivery of Percutaneous Arteriovenous Fistulas

The percutaneous arteriovenous fistula (pAVF) is an exciting and novel addition to the vascular access options available to patients with end-stage kidney disease who require dialysis. Early clinical results have been promising, with high rates of maturation and low rates of reintervention. To successfully adapt an existing hemodialysis service to include the provision of pAVF formation, it is essential to identify and align the interests of key clinical and nonclinical stakeholders. Only through strong collaboration can the service be supported. The authors provide a comprehensive overview of the planning fundamentals required, including the referral pathway, screening and clinical assessment, and practical procedural elements and considerations, as well as follow-up requirements such as cannulation, fistula surveillance, and maintenance. Key staffing requirements are highlighted, including those pertaining to vascular US screening and dialysis nurse training. A broad and structured planning approach ensures that the entire network of key stakeholder interests is included and provides a strong foundation for a compelling business plan to attract the necessary funding and managerial support for the service. The authors present a systematic framework of the essential considerations necessary to facilitate the planning, funding, and ultimately delivery of a successful pAVF service. Online supplemental material is available for this article. ^©RSNA, 2022.

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.

Management of Kidney Failure in Patients with Diabetes Mellitus: What Are the Best Options?

Diabetic kidney disease (DKD) is the most frequent cause of kidney failure (KF). There are large variations in the incidence rates of kidney replacement therapy (KRT). Late referral to nephrology services has been associated with an increased risk of adverse outcomes. In many countries, when patients reach severely reduced glomerular filtration rate (GFR), they are managed by multidisciplinary teams led by nephrologists. In these clinics, efforts will continue to halt chronic kidney disease (CKD) progression and to prevent cardiovascular mortality and morbidity. In patients with diabetes and severely reduced GFR and KF, treating hyperglycemia is a challenge, since some drugs are contraindicated and most of them require dose adjustments. Even more, a decision-making process will help in deciding whether the patient would prefer comprehensive conservative care or KRT. On many occasions, this decision will be conditioned by diabetes mellitus itself. Effective education should cover the necessary information for the patient and family to answer these questions: 1. Should I go for KRT or not? 2. If the answer is KRT, dialysis and/or transplantation? 3. Dialysis at home or in center? 4. If dialysis at home, peritoneal dialysis or home hemodialysis? 5. If transplantation is desired, discuss the options of whether the donation would be from a living or deceased donor. This review addresses the determinant factors with an impact on DKD, aiming to shed light on the specific needs that arise in the management and recommendations on how to achieve a comprehensive approach to the diabetic patient with chronic kidney disease.

The Impact of a Pre-Dialysis Educational Program on the Mode of Renal Replacement Therapy in a Saudi Hospital: A Retrospective Cohort Study

Background

Self-care and peritoneal dialysis (PD) benefits have been underutilized in patients with end-stage renal disease (ESRD). The pre-dialysis education program (PDEP) has been generally introduced as an acceptable tool in increasing the rates of PD and has been reportedly recommended for ESRD patients as part of the introduced care. We aim to study the effect of PDEP on ESRD and whether they would prefer PD of center-based hemodialysis (HD).

Methods

This is a retrospective cohort study that was done at King Fahad Armed Forces Hospital in Jeddah, Saudi Arabia, in the dialysis center. Data were collected on patients and included demographics, preference of renal replacement therapy modality, and other possible factors that may affect patient choices such as educational level, economic status, and age.

Results

A total of 213 ESRD patients that met our criteria were included, with a total of 75 patients receiving PDEP. Out of those who received the PDEP, 57.3% and 42.7% of patients decided to perform HD and PD, respectively. There was a significant impact of PDEP on reducing HD choice [OR (95% CI) = 0.11 (0.05-0.24); P-value < 0.001]. Infections did not occur in 50.5% of the included patients while 45.8%, 3.3%, and 0.5% had central line-associated bloodstream infection (CLABSI), other infections, and peritonitis, respectively. Most of the PD patients (81.8%) did not have an infection as compared to 42.3% of the HD patients. HD was also associated with increased admission days [OR (95% CI) = 1.27 (1.07-1.51); P-value = 0.007].

Conclusion

We found that PDEP positively impacted the rate of PD while PD was associated with favorable outcomes and lower infection rates, emphasizing the importance of an educational program.

Kidney disease pathways, options and decisions: an environmental scan of international patient decision aids

BACKGROUND

Conservative management is recognized as an acceptable treatment for people with worsening chronic kidney disease; however, patients consistently report they lack understanding about their changing disease state and feel unsupported in making shared decisions about future treatment. The purpose of this review was to critically evaluate patient decision aids (PtDAs) developed to support patient-professional shared decision-making between dialysis and conservative management treatment pathways.

METHODS

We performed a systematic review of resources accessible in English using environmental scan methods. Data sources included online databases of research publications, repositories for clinical guidelines, research projects and PtDAs, international PtDA expert lists and reference lists from relevant publications. The resource selection was from 56 screened records; 17 PtDAs were included. A data extraction sheet was applied to all eligible resources, eliciting resource characteristics, decision architecture to boost/bias thinking, indicators of quality such as International Standards for Patient Decision Aids Standards checklist and engagement with health services.

RESULTS

PtDAs were developed in five countries; eleven were publically available via the Internet. Treatment options described were dialysis (n = 17), conservative management (n = 9) and transplant (n = 5). Eight resources signposted conservative management as an option rather than an active choice. Ten different labels across 14 resources were used to name 'conservative management'. The readability of the resources was good. Six publications detail decision aid development and/or evaluation research. Using PtDAs improved treatment decision-making by patients. Only resources identified as PtDAs and available in English were included.

CONCLUSIONS

PtDAs are used by some services to support patients choosing between dialysis options or end-of-life options. PtDAs developed to proactively support people making informed decisions between conservative management and dialysis treatments are likely to enable services to meet current best practice.

Advanced Chronic Kidney Disease Units in Spain: a national survey on standards of structure, resources, results and patient safety

BACKGROUND AND OBJECTIVE

Recently, the Advanced Chronic Kidney Disease Units (UERCA, in Spanish) have been developed in Spain to offer a better quality of life to patients with advanced chronic kidney disease (ACKD), improving their survival and reducing morbidity in this phase of the disease. Nowadays, there is not much evidence in the Spanish and international literature regarding the structure and how to achieve these objectives in the UERCA. From the ERCA working group of the Spanish Society of Nephrology (SEN), this project is promoted to improve care for ERCA patients through the definition of quality standards for the operation of the UERCA.

MATERIAL AND METHODS

An initial proposal for quality standards concerning the operation of the UERCA was configured through consultation with the main sources of references and the advice of an expert working group through face-to-face and telematic meetings. Base on this initial proposal of standards, a survey was conducted and sent it via email to 121 nephrology specialist and nursing professionals with experience in Spanish UERCA to find out, among others, the suitability of each standards, that is, its mandatory nature or recommendation as standards. The access to the survey was allowed between July 16^th, 2018, until September 26^th, 2018.

RESULTS

A total of 95 (78.5%) professionals participated out of the 121 who were invited to participate. Of these, 80 of the participants were nephrology specialists and 15 nursing professionals, obtaining a varied representation of professionals from the Spanish geography. After analyzing the opinions of these participants, the standards were defined to a total of 68, 37 of them (54.4%) mandatory and 31 of them (45.5%) recommended. Besides, it was observed that the volume of patients attended in the UERCA is usually above 100 patients, and the referral criteria is generally below 25-29 mL/min/1.73 m² of glomerular filtration.

CONCLUSIONS

This work constitutes a first proposal of quality standards for the operation of UERCA in Spain. The definition of these standards has made it possible to establish the bases for the standardization of the organization of UERCA, and to subsequently work on the configuration of a standards manual for the accreditation of ERCA Units.

Use of a Supportive Kidney Care Video Decision Aid in Older Patients: A Randomized Controlled Trial

BACKGROUND

There are few studies of patient-facing decision aids that include supportive kidney care as an option. We tested the efficacy of a video decision aid on knowledge of supportive kidney care among older patients with advanced CKD.

METHODS

Participants (age ≥ 65 years with advanced CKD) were randomized to receive verbal or video education. Primary outcome was knowledge of supportive kidney care (score range 0-3). Secondary outcomes included preference for supportive kidney care, and satisfaction and acceptability of the video.

RESULTS

Among all participants (n = 100), knowledge of supportive kidney care increased significantly after receiving education (p < 0.01); however, there was no difference between study arms (p = 0.68). There was no difference in preference for supportive kidney care between study arms (p = 0.49). In adjusted analyses, total health literacy score (aOR 1.08 [95% CI: 1.003-1.165]) and nephrologists' answer of "No" to the Surprise Question (aOR 4.87 [95% CI: 1.22-19.43]) were associated with preference for supportive kidney care. Most felt comfortable watching the video (96%), felt the content was helpful (96%), and would recommend the video to others (96%).

CONCLUSIONS

Among older patients with advanced CKD, we did not detect a significant difference between an educational verbal script and a video decision aid in improving knowledge of supportive kidney care or preferences. However, patients who received video education reported high satisfaction and acceptability ratings. Future research will determine the effectiveness of a supportive kidney care video decision aid on real-world patient outcomes.

TRIAL REGISTRATION

NCT02698722 (ClinicalTrials.gov).

Critical review of leaflets about conservative management used in uk renal services

BACKGROUND

Written information supplements nurse-led education about treatment options. It is unclear if this information enhances patients' reasoning about conservative management (CM) and renal replacement therapy decisions.

AIM

This study describes a critical review of resources U.K. renal staff use when providing CM options to people with Established Kidney Disease (EKD) during usual pre-dialysis education.

DESIGN

A survey using mixed methods identified and critically analysed leaflets about CM.

PARTICIPANTS & MEASUREMENTS

All 72 renal units in the United Kingdom received an 11-item questionnaire to elicit how CM education is delivered, satisfaction and/or needs with patient resources and staff training. Copies of leaflets were requested. A coding frame was utilised to produce a quality score for each leaflet.

RESULTS

Fifty-four (75%) units participated. Patients discuss CM with a nephrologist (98%) or nurse (100%). Eighteen leaflets were reviewed, mean scores were 8.44 out of 12 (range 5-12, SD = 2.49) for information presentation; 3.50 out of 6 (range 0-6, SD = 1.58) for inclusion of information known to support shared decision-making and 2.28 out of 6 (range 1-4, SD = 0.96) for presenting non-biased information.

CONCLUSIONS

Nurses preferred communicating via face-to-face contact with patients and/or families because of the emotional consequences and complexity of planning treatment for the next stage of a person's worsening kidney disease. Conversations were supplemented with written information; 66% of which were produced locally. Staff perceived a need for using leaflets, and spend time and resources developing them to support their services. However, no leaflets included the components needed to help people reason about conservative care and renal replacement therapy options during EKD education consultations.

Care for chronic renal patients - Role of multidisciplinary education

The aim of this study is to summarize the beneficial effects of the holistic approach to patients living with chronic renal failure, including multidisciplinary education and psychosocial care. By education, we enable our patients to reach self-management, appropriate compliance, and coping, which may decrease progression of renal failure, avoid urgent need for starting dialysis and may facilitate better modality selection, access planning, renal transplantation activity, and rehabilitation. Psychosocial care reduces anxiety and fear, modifies perception of illness' burden, and increases quality of life. Yet, both patients and nephrologists feel that transmission of information is often insufficient. Different methods can effectively be utilized as educational interventions, meetings with staff, and also with expert patients, group education sessions, written or online materials, or multimedia presentations. Patient care of such a high complexity can be provided only by multidisciplinary teams. A special Hungarian example of holistic care is presented, and the favorable results of the education and lifestyle camps for patients accompanied by their relatives are discussed. Accordingly, complex care of patients living with chronic renal failure on the long run is cost saving.

Barriers to Education and Shared Decision Making in the Chronic Kidney Disease Population: A Narrative Review

PURPOSE OF REVIEW

Provision of education to inform decision making for renal replacement therapy (RRT) is a key component in the management of chronic kidney disease (CKD), yet patients report suboptimal satisfaction with the process of selecting a dialysis modality. Our purpose is to review the influencers of RRT decision making in the CKD population, which will better inform the process of shared decision making between clinicians and patients.

SOURCES OF INFORMATION

PubMed and Google Scholar.

METHODS

A narrative review was performed using the main terms "chronic kidney disease," "CKD," "dialysis," "review," "decision-making," "decision aids," "education," and "barriers." Only articles in English were accessed. The existing literature was critically analyzed from a theoretical and contextual perspective and thematic analysis was performed.

KEY FINDINGS

Eight common themes were identified as influencers for decision making. "Patient-focused" themes including social influence, values and beliefs, comprehension, autonomy and sociodemographics, and "clinician-focused" themes including screening, communication, and engagement. Early predialysis education and decision aids can effectively improve decision making. Patient-valued outcomes need to be more fully integrated into clinical guidelines.

LIMITATIONS

This is not a systematic review; therefore, no formal tool was utilized to evaluate the rigor and quality of studies included and findings may not be generalizable.

IMPLICATIONS

Standardized comprehensive RRT education programs through multidisciplinary health teams can help optimize CKD patient education and shared decision making. Involving patients in the research process itself and implementing patient values and preferences into clinical guidelines can help to achieve a patient-centered model of care.

Educational Support Around Dialysis Modality Decision Making in Patients With Chronic Kidney Disease: Qualitative Study

BACKGROUND

Patients with chronic kidney disease (CKD) are asked to choose a renal replacement therapy or conservative management. Education and knowledge transfer play key roles in this decision-making process, yet they remain a partially met need.

OBJECTIVE

We sought to understand the dialysis modality decision-making process through exploration of the predialysis patient experience to better inform the educational process.

DESIGN

Qualitative descriptive study.

SETTING

Kidney Care Centre of London Health Sciences Centre in London, Ontario, Canada.

PATIENTS

Twelve patients with CKD, with 4 patients on in-center hemodialysis, home hemodialysis, and peritoneal dialysis, respectively.

MEASUREMENTS

Not applicable.

METHODS

We conducted semistructured interviews with each participant, along with any family members who were present. Interviews were transcribed verbatim. Conventional content analysis was used to analyze the transcripts for common themes. Representative quotes were decided via team consensus. A patient collaborator was part of the research team.

RESULTS

Three themes influenced dialysis modality decision making: (i) Patient Factors: individualization, autonomy, and emotions; (ii) Educational Factors: tailored education, time and preparation, and available resources; and (iii) Support Systems: partnership with health care team, and family and friends.

LIMITATIONS

Sample not representative of wider CKD population. Limited number of eligible patients. Poor recall may affect findings.

CONCLUSIONS

Modality decision making is a complex process, influenced by the patient's health literacy, willingness to accept information, predialysis lifestyle, support systems, and values. Patient education requires the flexibility to individualize the delivery of a standardized CKD curriculum in partnership with a patient-health care team, to fulfill the goal of informed, shared decision making.

How does pre-dialysis education need to change? Findings from a qualitative study with staff and patients

BACKGROUND

Pre-dialysis education (PDE) is provided to thousands of patients every year, helping them decide which renal replacement therapy (RRT) to choose. However, its effectiveness is largely unknown, with relatively little previous research into patients' views about PDE, and no research into staff views. This study reports findings relevant to PDE from a larger mixed methods study, providing insights into what staff and patients think needs to improve.

METHODS

Semi-structured interviews in four hospitals with 96 clinical and managerial staff and 93 dialysis patients, exploring experiences of and views about PDE, and analysed using thematic framework analysis.

RESULTS

Most patients found PDE helpful and staff valued its role in supporting patient decision-making. However, patients wanted to see teaching methods and materials improve and biases eliminated. Staff were less aware than patients of how informal staff-patient conversations can influence patients' treatment decision-making. Many staff felt ill equipped to talk about all treatment options in a balanced and unbiased way. Patient decision-making was found to be complex and patients' abilities to make treatment decisions were adversely affected in the pre-dialysis period by emotional distress.

CONCLUSIONS

Suggested improvements to teaching methods and educational materials are in line with previous studies and current clinical guidelines. All staff, irrespective of their role, need to be trained about all treatment options so that informal conversations with patients are not biased. The study argues for a more individualised approach to PDE which is more like counselling than education and would demand a higher level of skill and training for specialist PDE staff. The study concludes that even if these improvements are made to PDE, not all patients will benefit, because some find decision-making in the pre-dialysis period too complex or are unable to engage with education due to illness or emotional distress. It is therefore recommended that pre-dialysis treatment decisions are temporary, and that PDE is replaced with on-going RRT education which provides opportunities for personalised education and on-going review of patients' treatment choices. Emotional support to help overcome the distress of the transition to end-stage renal disease will also be essential to ensure all patients can benefit from RRT education.

Multidisciplinary staff attitudes to home haemodialysis therapy

Background: More than a decade after the National Institute for Health and Clinical Excellence recommendation of home haemodialysis (home HD) for 10-15% of those needing renal replacement therapy, the uptake across different regions in the UK remains uneven. Methods: This survey is part of the Barriers to Successful Implementation of Care in Home Haemodialysis (BASIC-HHD) study, an observational study of patient and organizational factor barriers and enablers of home HD uptake, in the UK. The study centres had variable prevalence of home HD by design [low: <3% (2), medium: 5-8% (2) and high: >8% (1)]. This survey was administered electronically in 2013, and had 20 questions pertaining to home HD beliefs and practices. A total of 104 members of staff across five study centres were approached to complete the survey. Results: The response rate was 46%, mostly from experienced HD practitioners. Most believed in the benefits of home HD therapy. Across all centres, respondents believed that preconceptions about patients' and carers' ability to cope with home HD (35% to a great or very great extent) and staff knowledge and bias influenced offer of home HD therapy (45%). Also, compared with respondents from high prevalence (HP) centre, those from low prevalence (LP) centres felt that display and presentation of dialysis information lacked clarity and uniformity (44% versus 18%), and that a better set-up for training patients for self-care HD was required (72.8% versus 33.3%). A greater proportion of respondents from the HP centre expressed concerns over caregiver support and respite care for patients on home HD (63.7% versus 33.3%). Conclusions: Survey results indicate that across all centres in the study, there is an appetite for growing home HD. There are some differences in attitudes and practice between LP and HP centres. There are other domains where all centres have expressed concern and addressing these will be influential in navigating change from the current course.

Offering Patients Therapy Options in Unplanned Start (OPTiONS): Implementation of an educational program is feasible and effective

Background

Patients with unplanned dialysis start (UPS) have worse clinical outcomes than non-UPS patients, and receive peritoneal dialysis (PD) less frequently. In the OPTiONS study of UPS patients, an educational programme (UPS-EP) aiming at improving care of UPS patients by facilitating care pathways and enabling informed choice of dialysis modality was implemented. We here report on impact of UPS-EP on modality choice and clinical outcomes in UPS patients.

Methods

This non-interventional, prospective, multi-center, observational study included 270 UPS patients from 26 centers in 6 European countries (Austria, Germany, Denmark, France, United Kingdom and Sweden) who prior to inclusion presented acutely, or were being followed by nephrologists but required urgent dialysis commencement by an acutely placed CVC or PD catheter. Effects of UPS-EP on choice and final decision of dialysis therapy and outcomes within 12 months of follow up were analysed.

Results

Among 270 UPS patients who had an unplanned start to dialysis, 214 were able to receive and 203 complete UPS-EP while 56 patients - who were older (p = 0.01) and had higher Charlson comorbidity index (CCI; p < 0.01) - did not receive UPS-EP. Among 177 patients who chose dialysis modality after UPS-EP, 103 (58%) chose PD (but only 86% of them received PD) and 74 (42%) chose HD (95% received HD). Logistic regression analysis showed that diabetes 1.88 (1.05 – 3.37) and receiving UPS-EP, OR = 4.74 (CI, 2.05 – 10.98) predicted receipt of PD. Patients choosing PD had higher CCI (p = 0.01), higher prevalence of congestive heart failure (p < 0.01) and myocardial infarction (p = 0.02), and were more likely in-patients (p = 0.02) or referred from primary care (p = 0.02). One year survival did not differ significantly between PD and HD patients. Peritonitis and bacteraemia rates were better than international guideline standards.

Conclusions

UPS-EP predicted patient use of PD but 14% of those choosing PD after UPS-EP still did not receive the modality they preferred. Patient survival in patients choosing and/or receiving PD was similar to HD despite age and comorbidity disadvantages of the PD groups.

Electronic supplementary material

The online version of this article (doi:10.1186/s12882-016-0419-z) contains supplementary material, which is available to authorized users.

Type of Referral, Dialysis Start and Choice of Renal Replacement Therapy Modality in an International Integrated Care Setting

INTRODUCTION

Integrated Care Settings (ICS) provide a holistic approach to the transition from chronic kidney disease into renal replacement therapy (RRT), offering at least both types of dialysis.

OBJECTIVES

To analyze which factors determine type of referral, modality provision and dialysis start on final RRT in ICS clinics.

METHODS

Retrospective analysis of 626 patients starting dialysis in 25 ICS clinics in Poland, Hungary and Romania during 2012. Scheduled initiation of dialysis with a permanent access was considered as planned RRT start.

RESULTS

Modality information (80% of patients) and renal education (87%) were more frequent (p<0.001) in Planned (P) than in Non-Planned (NP) start. Median time from information to dialysis start was 2 months. 89% of patients started on hemodialysis, 49% were referred late to ICS (<3 months from referral to RRT) and 58% were NP start. Late referral, non-vascular renal etiology, worse clinical status, shorter time from information to RRT and less peritoneal dialysis (PD) were associated with NP start (p<0.05). In multivariate logistic regression analysis, P start (p≤0.05) was associated with early referral, eGFR >8.2 ml/min, >2 months between information and RRT initiation and with vascular etiology after adjustment for age and gender. "Optimal care," defined as ICS follow-up >12 months plus modality information and P start, occurred in 23%.

CONCLUSIONS

Despite the high rate of late referrals, information and education were widely provided. However, NP start was high and related to late referral and may explain the low frequency of PD.

Factors influencing access to education, decision making, and receipt of preferred dialysis modality in unplanned dialysis start patients

OBJECTIVES

Unplanned dialysis start (UPS) leads to worse clinical outcomes than planned start, and only a minority of patients ever receive education on this topic and are able to make a modality choice, particularly for home dialysis. This study aimed to determine the predictive factors for patients receiving education, making a decision, and receiving their preferred modality choice in UPS patients following a UPS educational program (UPS-EP).

METHODS

The Offering Patients Therapy Options in Unplanned Start (OPTiONS) study examined the impact of the implementation of a specific UPS-EP, including decision support tools and pathway improvement on dialysis modality choice. Linear regression models were used to examine the factors predicting three key steps: referral and receipt of UPS-EP, modality decision making, and actual delivery of preferred modality choice. A simple economic assessment was performed to examine the potential benefit of implementing UPS-EP in terms of dialysis costs.

RESULTS

The majority of UPS patients could receive UPS-EP (214/270 patients) and were able to make a decision (177/214), although not all patients received their preferred choice (159/177). Regression analysis demonstrated that the initial dialysis modality was a predictive factor for referral and receipt of UPS-EP and modality decision making. In contrast, age was a predictor for referral and receipt of UPS-EP only, and comorbidity was not a predictor for any step, except for myocardial infarction, which was a weak predictor for lower likelihood of receiving preferred modality. Country practices predicted UPS-EP receipt and decision making. Economic analysis demonstrated the potential benefit of UPS-EP implementation because dialysis modality costs were associated with modality distribution driven by patient preference.

CONCLUSION

Education and decision support can allow UPS patients to understand their options and choose dialysis modality, and attention needs to be focused on ensuring equity of access to educational programs, especially for the elderly. Physician practice and culture across units/countries is an important predictor of UPS patient management and modality choice independent of patient-related factors. Additional work is required to understand and improve patient pathways to ensure that modality preference is enacted. There appears to be a cost benefit of delivering education, supporting choice, and ensuring that the choice is enacted in UPS patients.

The Concordance between Patients' Renal Replacement Therapy Choice and Definitive Modality: Is It a Utopia?

INTRODUCTION

It is desirable for patients to play active roles in the choice of renal replacement therapy (RRT). Patient decision aid tools (PDAs) have been developed to allow the patients to choose the option best suited to their individual needs.

MATERIAL AND METHODS

An observational, prospective registry was conducted in 26 Spanish hospitals between September 2010 and May 2012. The results of the patients' choice and the definitive RRT modality were registered through the progressive implementation of an Education Process (EP) with PDAs designed to help Chronic Kidney Disease (CKD) patients choose RRT.

RESULTS

Patients included in this study: 1044. Of these, 569 patients used PDAs and had made a definitive choice by the end of registration. A total of 88.4% of patients chose dialysis [43% hemodialysis (HD) and 45% peritoneal dialysis (PD)] 3.2% preemptive living-donor transplant (TX), and 8.4% conservative treatment (CT). A total of 399 patients began RRT during this period. The distribution was 93.4% dialysis (53.6% HD; 40% PD), 1.3% preemptive TX and 5.3% CT. The patients who followed the EP changed their mind significantly less often [kappa value of 0.91 (95% CI, 0.86-0.95)] than those who did not follow it, despite starting unplanned treatment [kappa value of 0.85 (95% CI, 0.75-0.95]. A higher agreement between the final choice and a definitive treatment was achieved by the EP and planned patients [kappa value of 0.93 (95% CI, 0.89-0.98)]. Those who did not go through the EP had a much lower index of choosing PD and changed their decision more frequently when starting definitive treatment [kappa value of 0.73 (95% CI, 0.55-0.91)].

CONCLUSIONS

Free choice, assisted by PDAs, leads to a 50/50 distribution of PD and HD choice and an increase in TX choice. The use of PDAs, even with an unplanned start, achieved a high level of concordance between the chosen and definitive modality.

Continuing education: preparing patients to choose a renal replacement therapy

BACKGROUND

Patients with progressive chronic kidney disease face a series of treatment decisions that will impact the quality of life of themselves and their family. Renal replacement therapy option education (RRTOE), generally provided by nurses, is recommended by international guidelines

OBJECTIVES

To provide nurses with advice and guidance on running RRTOE.

DESIGN

A consensus conference.

PARTICIPANTS

Four nurses, 5 nephrologists and 1 clinical psychologist (9 renal units; 6 European countries) from units that had extensive experience in RRTOE or were performing research in this field.

APPROACH

Experts brainstormed and discussed quality standards for the education team, processes, content/topics, media/material/funding and quality measurements for RRTOE.

RESULTS

Conclusions and recommendations from these discussions that are particularly pertinent to nurses are presented in this paper.

CONCLUSIONS

Through careful planning and smooth interdisciplinary cooperation, it is possible to implement an education and support programme that helps patients choose a form of RRT that is most suited to their needs. This may result in benefits in quality of life and clinical outcomes.

APPLICATION TO PRACTICE

There are large differences between renal units in terms of resources available and the demographics of the catchment area. Therefore, nurses should carefully consider how best to adapt the advice offered here to their own situation. Throughout this process, it is crucial to keep in mind the ultimate goal - providing patients with the knowledge and skill to make a modality choice that will enhance their quality of life to the greatest degree.

Predialysis education in practice: a questionnaire survey of centres with established programmes

BACKGROUND

There is growing evidence that renal replacement therapy option education (RRTOE) can result in enhanced quality of life, improved clinical outcomes, and reduced health care costs. However, there is still no detailed guidance on the optimal way to run such programmes. To help address this knowledge gap, an expert meeting was held in March 2013 to formulate a position statement on optimal ways to run RRTOE. Experts were selected from units that had extensive experience in RRTOE or were performing research in this field. Before the meeting, experts completed a pilot questionnaire on RRTOE in their own units. They also prepared feedback on how to modify this questionnaire for a large-scale study.

METHODS

A pilot, web-based questionnaire was used to obtain information on: the renal unit and patients, the education team, RRTOE processes and content, how quality is assessed, and funding.

RESULTS

Four nurses, 5 nephrologists and 1 clinical psychologist (9 renal units; 6 EU countries) participated. Nurses were almost always responsible for organising RRTOE. Nephrologists spent 7.5% (median) of their time on RRTOE. Education for the patient and family began several months before dialysis or according to disease progression. Key topics such as the 'impact of the disease' were covered by every unit, but only a few units described all dialysis modalities. Visits to the unit were almost always arranged. Materials came in a wide variety of forms and from a wide range of sources. Group education sessions were used in 3/9 centres. Expectations on the timing of patients' decisions on modality and permanent access differed substantially between centres. Common quality assurance measures were: patient satisfaction, course attendance, updated materials. Only 1 unit had a dedicated budget.

CONCLUSIONS

There were substantial variations in how RRTOE is run between the units. A modified version of this questionnaire will be used to assess RRTOE at a European level.