A working partnership: A review of shared decision-making in nephrology

Frailty in Kidney Disease: A Comprehensive Review to Advance Its Clinical and Research Applications

Frailty is a multisystem syndrome of decreased physiologic reserve that has been shown to strongly and independently predict morbidity and mortality. Frailty is prevalent in patients living with kidney disease and occurs earlier in individuals with kidney disease as compared to the general population. In this comprehensive review, we examine clinical and research applications of frailty in kidney disease populations. Specifically, we clarify the definition of frailty and address common misconceptions, review the mechanisms and epidemiology of frailty in kidney disease, discuss challenges and limitations in frailty measurement, and provide updated evidence related to risk factors for frailty, its associated adverse outcomes, and interventions. We further add to the literature in this topic by highlighting the potential applications of frailty measurement in the care of patients with kidney disease and conclude with our recommendations for future research related to this important syndrome.

Decision-Making Engagement Preferences among Older Adults with CKD

Key Points

Clinicians’ uncertainty about the degree to which older patients prefer to engage in decision making remains a key barrier to shared decision making. Most older adults with advanced CKD preferred a collaborative or active role in decision making.

Background

Older adults with kidney failure face preference-sensitive decisions regarding dialysis initiation. Despite recommendations, few older patients with kidney failure experience shared decision making. Clinician uncertainty about the degree to which older patients prefer to engage in decision making remains a key barrier.

Methods

This study follows a mixed-methods explanatory, longitudinal, sequential design at four diverse US centers with patients (English-fluent, aged ≥70 years, CKD stages 4–5, nondialysis) from 2018 to 2020. Patient preferences for engagement in decision making were assessed using the Control Preferences Scale, reflecting the degree to which patients want to be involved in their decision making: active (the patient prefers to make the final decision), collaborative (the patient wants to share decision making with the clinician), or passive (the patient wants the clinician to make the final decision) roles. Semistructured interviews about engagement and decision making were conducted in two waves (2019, 2020) with purposively sampled patients and clinicians. Descriptive statistics and ANOVA were used for quantitative analyses; thematic and narrative analyses were used for qualitative data.

Results

Among 363 patient participants, mean age was 78±6 years, 42% were female, and 21% had a high school education or less. Control Preferences Scale responses reflected that patients preferred to engage actively (48%) or collaboratively (43%) versus passively (8%). Preferred roles remained stable at 3-month follow-up. Seventy-six participants completed interviews (45 patients, 31 clinicians). Four themes emerged: control preference roles reflect levels of decisional engagement; clinicians control information flow, especially about prognosis; adapting a clinical approach to patient preferred roles; and clinicians' responsiveness to patient preferred roles supports patients' satisfaction with shared decision making.

Conclusions

Most older adults with advanced CKD preferred a collaborative or active role in decision making. Appropriately matched information flow with patient preferences was critical for satisfaction with shared decision making.

Clinical Trial registry name and registration number:

Decision Aid for Renal Therapy (DART), NCT03522740 .

Older patients and dialysis shared decision-making. Insights from an ethnographic discourse analysis of interviews and clinical interactions

OBJECTIVE

To describe and analyse the perspectives and communication practices of kidney clinicians and older patients (aged 60 +) during collaborative education and decision-making about dialysis.

METHODS

This qualitative study drew on pluralistic data sources and analytical approaches investigating elicited semi-structured interviews (n = 31) with doctors (n = 8), nurses (n = 8) and patients (n = 15), combined with ethnographic observations, written artefacts and audio-recorded naturally-occurring interactions (n = 23, education sessions n = 4; consultations n = 19) in a tertiary Australian kidney outpatient clinic. Data were analysed for themes and linguistic discourse features.

RESULTS

Five themes were identified across all data sources: 1) lost opportunity in education; 2) persistent disease knowledge gaps; 3) putting up with dialysis; 4) perceived and real involvement in decision-making and 5) complex role of family as decision-making brokers.

CONCLUSION

As the first study to complement interviews with evidence from naturally-occurring kidney interactions, this study balances the perspectives of how older patients and their clinicians view chronic kidney disease education, with how decision-making about dialysis is reflected in practice.

PRACTICE IMPLICATIONS

The study provides suggestions for contextualized, multi-perspectives formal and informal training for improving decision-making about dialysis, spanning from indications to boost communication efficiency, to reducing unexplained jargon, incorporating patient navigators and exploring different dialysis modalities.

Shared decision making in chronic kidney disease: a qualitative study of the impact of communication practices on treatment decisions for older patients

BACKGROUND

Effective interpersonal communication is critical for shared decision-making (SDM). Previous SDM communication training in nephrology has lacked context-specific evidence from ethnographic analysis of SDM interactions with older patients considering treatment options of end stage kidney disease (ESKD). This study explores communication strategies in SDM discussions in nephrology, specifically focusing on older patients considering dialysis as kidney replacement therapy (KRT).

METHODS

We conducted a qualitative study analysing naturally-occurring audio-recorded clinical interactions (n = 12) between Australian kidney doctors, patients aged 60+, and carers. Linguistic ethnography and qualitative socially-oriented functional approaches were used for analysis.

RESULTS

Two types of communication strategies emerged: (1) Managing and advancing treatment decisions: involving active checking of knowledge, clear explanations of options, and local issue resolution. (2) Pulling back: Deferring or delaying decisions through mixed messaging. Specifically for non-English speaking patients, pulling back was further characterised by communication challenges deferring decision-making including ineffective issue management, and reliance on family as interpreters. Age was not an explicit topic of discussion among participants when it came to making decisions about KRT but was highly relevant to treatment decision-making. Doctors appeared reluctant to broach non-dialysis conservative management, even when it appears clinically appropriate. Conservative care, an alternative to KRT suitable for older patients with co-morbidities, was only explicitly discussed when prompted by patients or carers.

CONCLUSIONS

The findings highlight the impact of different communication strategies on SDM discussions in nephrology. This study calls for linguistic-informed contextualised communication training and provides foundational evidence for nephrology-specific communication skills training in SDM for KRT among older patients. There is urgent need for doctors to become confident and competent in discussing non-dialysis conservative management. Further international research should explore naturally-occurring SDM interactions in nephrology with other vulnerable groups to enhance evidence and training integration.

Patient and Partner Perspectives of Pregnancy-Related Counseling and Information Needs in Women With Kidney Disease: An Australian National Survey

Introduction

The experiences and information needs for reproductive health counseling in women with chronic kidney disease (CKD) are poorly defined, despite the known importance of pregnancy planning in this higher-risk cohort.

Methods

Australian adult women with CKD and their partners or family members completed a consumer codesigned survey about experiences of and preferences for pregnancy-related counseling, support, and education. Data were analyzed descriptively and with qualitative content analysis of free-text responses.

Results

Responses were received from 102 women (CKD, n = 60; dialysis, n = 11; transplant, n = 26; unsure, n = 5 ) and 17 partners/family members. Pregnancy-related discussions were initiated mostly by women themselves (60.0%) compared to nephrologists (26.7%), and only after conception in 14.7%. Women found pregnancy-related discussions satisfactory (68.0%) and useful (50.7%) but also stressful (66.7%), with only 54.7% feeling in control of decision-making. Information deficits and quality, preformed decisions, clinician-patient disconnect, and burden of decision-making contributed to usefulness and outcomes of pregnancy-related counseling. Women received insufficient information about contraception (not provided in 35.2% of cases), medication safety (40.9%), fetal complications (33.8%) and emotional and psychological impact of pregnancy (73.2%). Women preferred counseling from nephrologists (86.4%), face-to-face settings (79.6%), websites (72.7%), handouts (61.4%), and online support groups (46.6%). High-quality, multiformat information by content experts, peer support, and psychological support were also strongly desired.

Conclusion

This study highlights that preconception counseling and information needs of women with CKD are currently not being met. Frameworks and tools to assist patients and clinicians, particularly nephrologists, to initiate and conduct sensitive, useful, and informed shared decision-making (SDM) about pregnancy are urgently needed.

Exploring the health-related decision-making experiences of people with chronic kidney disease and their caregivers: A qualitative study

BACKGROUND

This study aimed to explore the decision-making experience of patients with chronic kidney disease (CKD) and their caregivers.

METHODS

This was a qualitative descriptive study of the decision-making experiences of individuals with stage 3-end-stage CKD and their family caregivers. One-on-one, semistructured interviews were conducted using a guide developed and approved by a community advisory group. Data were analyzed using thematic analysis.

RESULTS

Three themes were identified: (1) decisions triggered by declining health and broad in scope, (2) challenges to decision-making and (3) factors influencing decision-making. Participants' experiences with health-related decision-making demonstrated that decisions were triggered when health declined. Yet, decisions that impact disease progression were being made in stage 3. Decision-making was made difficult due to lack of information, complex co-morbidities, and poor resource utilization. However, the structure and nature of the medical appointment, supportive caregivers, and resources served to remove challenges.

CONCLUSION

Decision-support interventions must train patients and caregivers to be empowered participants in answer-seeking behaviours upstream of advanced illness.

PUBLIC CONTRIBUTIONS

This work was conducted in full collaboration with a community advisory board consisting of patients with CKD, caregivers and clinicians. These members are noted in the acknowledgement section, and those who worked with the team to develop the interview guide, study protocols, and manuscript preparation are included as authors. As part of their role, advisory members met monthly, providing input on recruitment, study progress, inclusion of diverse voices and added relevance to study findings.

Views, attitudes, and reported practices of nephrology nurses regarding shared decision-making in end-of-life care

BACKGROUND

End-stage renal disease (ESRD) is the final stage of chronic kidney disease. Yet dialysis is not suitable for all ESRD patients. Moreover, while shared decision-making (SDM) is the preferred model for making medical decisions, little is known about SDM between nephrology nurses and ESRD patients in Israel.

RESEARCH OBJECTIVE

Assessing the views, attitudes, practices, and ethical dilemmas of nephrology nurses in Israel regarding SDM with ESRD patients.

METHODS

Using the descriptive quantitative approach, questionnaires were completed by 444 nephrology nurses in Israel. In addition to conducting descriptive statistics, t-tests for independent samples, f-tests for analysis of variance, and both tests for independence were also performed.

ETHICAL CONSIDERATIONS

The research aims, expected advantages and risks have been explained to respondents before completing the questionnaire to secure informed consent. Anonymity and confidentiality were ensured throughout the study. The study was approved by the Research Ethics Committee at the University of Haifa (Approval # 411/21).

RESULTS

About one-third (30%-36.5%) of nurses reported discussing quality of life issues with ESRD patients, asking about their advance directives/power of attorney, exploring cultural/religious beliefs in end-of-life care, and ask about their preferred place of death. Nurses who convey high levels of patient-centered care (68.9%, p<0.0001), have high end-of-life training (76.2%, p<0.0001), and report cooperating with interdisciplinary teams (63.8%, p = 0.0415), also reported higher SDM practices than others. Nurses who refer less patients to palliative care (70%, p<0.0001) reported higher involvement in SDM compared to other nurses.

CONCLUSIONS

Nephrology nurses in Israel do not tend to implement the SDM model, despite its potential for improving quality of life for ESRD patients and their families and increasing conservative care options. Policy makers and educators in Israel should develop and implement training programs and support in the workplace, to enhance SDM between nephrology nurses and ESRD patients.

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

Background

Kidney services vary in the way they involve people with kidney failure (PwKF) in treatment decisions as management needs change. We discuss how decision-science applications support proactively PwKF to make informed decisions between treatment options with kidney professionals.

Methods

A conceptual review of findings about decision making and use of decision aids in kidney services, synthesized with reference to: the Making Informed Decisions-Individually and Together (MIND-IT) multiple stakeholder decision makers framework; and the Medical Research Council-Complex Intervention Development and Evaluation research framework.

Results

This schema represents the different types of decision aids that support PwKF and professional reasoning as they manage kidney disease individually and together; adjustments at micro, meso and macro levels supports integration in practice.

Conclusion

Innovating services to meet clinical guidelines on enhancing shared decision making processes means enabling all stakeholders to use decision aids to meet their goals within kidney pathways at individual, service and organizational levels.

Shared decision making: a personal view from two kidney doctors and a patient

Shared decision making (SDM) combines the clinician's expertise in the treatment of disease with the patient's expertise in their lived experience and what is important to them. All decisions made in the care of patients with kidney disease can potentially be explored through SDM. Adoption of SDM in routine kidney care faces numerous institutional and practical barriers. Patients with chronic disease who have become accustomed to paternalistic care may need support to engage in SDM-even though most patients actively want more involvement in decisions about their care. Nephrologists often underestimate the risks and overestimate the benefits of investigations and treatments and often default to recommending burdensome treatments rather than discussing prognosis openly. Guideline bodies continue to issue recommendations written for healthcare professionals without providing patient decision aids. To mitigate health inequalities, care needs to be taken to provide SDM to all patients, not just the highly health-literate patients least likely to need additional support in decision making. Kidney doctors spend much of their time in the consulting room, and it is unjustifiable that so little attention is paid to the teaching, audit and maintenance of consultation skills. Writing letters to the patient to summarise the consultation rather than sending them a copy of a letter between health professionals sets the tone for a consultation in which the patient is an active partner. Adoption of SDM will require nephrologists to relinquish long-established paternalistic models of care and restructure care around the values and preferences of patients.

A learning process to deliver virtual staff training involving patients in shared haemodialysis care

Shared haemodialysis (HD) care (SHC) is a person-centred approach delivering a flexible choice of options for centre-based HD patients to become more involved in their treatment. To support this, a 4-day course was developed to provide healthcare professionals with the confidence and skills to engage, involve, support and train patients in their care and has been accessed by >700 UK staff over 9 years. The disruption caused by the coronavirus disease 2019 pandemic in 2020 prompted a revision of what was deliverable within the restrictions. In response to this, we designed, developed and tested a virtual training program that was shorter and more accessible while remaining effective in meeting its core objectives. This provides a greater geographical reach and enables a collaborative team approach with patients and staff learning from and with each other, thus supporting a partnership approach advocated in shared decision making. In this review we explore the learning that informed the virtual training program 2022 and provide qualitative evaluation to demonstrate evidence of understanding, behavioural change and organisational benefit. Using a validated evaluation, we present key themes that support the initiation, development and sustainability of SHC in the form of a roadmap to guide strategic planning.

Home dialysis: conclusions from a Kidney Disease: Improving Global Outcomes (KDIGO) Controversies Conference

Home dialysis modalities (home hemodialysis [HD] and peritoneal dialysis [PD]) are associated with greater patient autonomy and treatment satisfaction compared with in-center modalities, yet the level of home-dialysis use worldwide is low. Reasons for limited utilization are context-dependent, informed by local resources, dialysis costs, access to healthcare, health system policies, provider bias or preferences, cultural beliefs, individual lifestyle concerns, potential care-partner time, and financial burdens. In May 2021, KDIGO (Kidney Disease: Improving Global Outcomes) convened a controversies conference on home dialysis, focusing on how modality choice and distribution are determined and strategies to expand home-dialysis use. Participants recognized that expanding use of home dialysis within a given health system requires alignment of policy, fiscal resources, organizational structure, provider incentives, and accountability. Clinical outcomes across all dialysis modalities are largely similar, but for specific clinical measures, one modality may have advantages over another. Therefore, choice among available modalities is preference-sensitive, with consideration of quality of life, life goals, clinical characteristics, family or care-partner support, and living environment. Ideally, individuals, their care-partners, and their healthcare teams will employ shared decision-making in assessing initial and subsequent kidney failure treatment options. To meet this goal, iterative, high-quality education and support for healthcare professionals, patients, and care-partners are priorities. Everyone who faces dialysis should have access to home therapy. Facilitating universal access to home dialysis and expanding utilization requires alignment of policy considerations and resources at the dialysis-center level, with clear leadership from informed and motivated clinical teams.

Shared Decision Making Among Older Adults With Advanced CKD

RATIONALE & OBJECTIVE

Older adults with advanced chronic kidney disease (CKD) face difficult decisions about dialysis initiation. Although shared decision making (SDM) can help align patient preferences and values with treatment options, the extent to which older patients with CKD experience SDM remains unknown.

STUDY DESIGN

A cross-sectional analysis of patient surveys examining decisional readiness, treatment options education, care partner support, and SDM.

SETTING & PARTICIPANTS

Adults aged 70 years or older from Boston, Chicago, San Diego, or Portland (Maine) with nondialysis advanced CKD.

PREDICTORS

Decisional readiness factors, treatment options education, and care partner support.

OUTCOMES

Primary: SDM measured by the 9-item Shared Decision Making Questionnaire (SDM-Q-9) instrument, with higher scores reflecting greater SDM. Exploratory: Factors associated with SDM.

ANALYTICAL APPROACH

We used multivariable linear regression models to examine the associations between SDM and predictors, controlling for demographic and health factors.

RESULTS

Among 350 participants, mean age was 78 ± 6 years, 58% were male, 13% identified as Black, and 48% had diabetes. Mean SDM-Q-9 score was 52 ± 28. SDM item agreement ranged from 41% of participants agreeing that "my doctor and I selected a treatment option together" to 73% agreeing that "my doctor told me that there are different options for treating my medical condition." In multivariable analysis adjusted for demographic characteristics, lower estimated glomerular filtration rate, and diabetes, being "well informed" and "very well informed" about kidney treatment options, having higher decisional certainty, and attendance at a kidney treatment options class were independently associated with higher SDM-Q-9 scores.

LIMITATIONS

The cross-sectional study design limits the ability to make temporal associations between SDM and the predictors.

CONCLUSIONS

Many older patients with CKD do not experience SDM when making dialysis decisions, emphasizing the need for greater access to and delivery of education for individuals with advanced CKD.

Peritoneal dialysis in the modern era

The practice and clinical outcomes of peritoneal dialysis (PD) have demonstrated significant improvement over the past 20 years. The aim of this review is to increase awareness and update healthcare professionals on current PD practice, especially with respect to patient and technique survival, patient modality selection, pathways onto PD, understanding patient experience of care and use prior to kidney transplantation. These improvements have been impacted, at least in part, by greater emphasis on shared decision-making in dialysis modality selection, the use of advanced laparoscopic techniques for PD catheter implantation, developments in PD connecting systems, glucose-sparing strategies, and modernising technology in managing automated PD patients remotely. Evidence-based clinical guidelines such as those prepared by national and international societies such as the International Society of PD have contributed to improved PD practice underpinned by a recognition of the place of continuous quality improvement processes.