Using patient-reported outcome measures during the management of patients with end-stage kidney disease requiring treatment with haemodialysis (PROM-HD): a qualitative study

Perceived Life Expectancy Among Dialysis Recipients: A Scoping Review

Rationale & Objective

Greater prognostic understanding is associated with higher quality care at the end of life. We undertook a scoping review to explore how long dialysis recipients expect to live.

Study Design

Scoping Review.

Setting & Study Populations

People with kidney failure over 18 years old.

Search Strategy & Sources

Studies were identified by searching Medline, Embase, APA PsycINFO, HMIC, and ProQuest database for terms related to "life expectancy", "self-estimated", and "end stage kidney disease".

Data Extraction

Search strategies reported 349 unique, potentially eligible studies, with 8 studies meeting the inclusion criteria after screening.

Results

Significant mismatches between dialysis recipients and their health care provider's estimations of prognosis were reported, with patients predicting significantly higher life expectancies than health care professionals and almost no agreement between patient and nephrologist's estimates of 1-year survival. Documented cognitive impairment did not affect 1-year or 5-year prognosis estimates, nor did gender, age, time on dialysis, or discussing perceived life expectancy. Dialysis recipients who thought they were on the transplant list or who self-identified as African American reported higher perceived life expectancy, whereas people who were 75 years or older, or with fair or poor self-reported health status reported a lower perceived life expectancy. Those with a lower perceived life expectancy preferred care focusing on relieving pain and discomfort, whereas people who thought they had a higher chance of survival were significantly more likely to prefer life-extending care.

Limitations

There is a marked paucity of research in this area, with most studies conducted in North American cohorts.

Conclusions

Optimistic patient prognostic expectations persist in dialysis recipients. Given the effects of perceived life expectancy on treatment choices and subsequent quality of life, it is important that transparent discussions regarding prognosis are conducted with people receiving dialysis and their families.

Plain-Language Summary

Understanding illness severity and prognosis allows people to make decisions and prioritize areas of their lives that are important to them. We undertook a scoping review to explore how long dialysis recipients expect to live. We found significant mismatches between the perceived life expectancy of people treated with dialysis and their health care providers. Perceived life expectancy influenced treatment choices; thus, those who thought they would die sooner prioritized care focusing on relieving pain and discomfort. Those who thought they had a higher chance of survival were more likely to prefer life-extending care (with potential effects on quality of life). It is important to have frank discussions about prognosis with people receiving dialysis, to empower individuals and help them make informed decisions about their care.

Global use of electronic patient-reported outcome systems in nephrology: a mixed methods study

OBJECTIVES

The use of electronic patient-reported outcome (ePRO) systems to support the management of patients with chronic kidney disease is increasing. This mixed-methods study aimed to comprehensively identify existing and developing ePRO systems, used in nephrology settings globally, ascertaining key characteristics and factors for successful implementation.

STUDY DESIGN

ePRO systems and developers were identified through a scoping review of the literature and contact with field experts. Developers were invited to participate in a structured survey, to summarise key system characteristics including: (1) system objectives, (2) population, (3) PRO measures used, (4) level of automation, (5) reporting, (6) integration into workflow and (7) links to electronic health records/national registries. Subsequent semistructured interviews were conducted to explore responses.

SETTING AND PARTICIPANTS

Eligible systems included those being developed or used in nephrology settings to assess ePROs and summarise results to care providers. System developers included those with a key responsibility for aspects of the design, development or implementation of an eligible system.

ANALYTICAL APPROACH

Structured survey data were summarised using descriptive statistics. Interview transcripts were analysed using Codebook Thematic Analysis using domains from the Consolidated Framework for Implementation Research.

RESULTS

Fifteen unique ePRO systems were identified across seven countries; 10 system developers completed the structured survey and 7 participated in semistructured interviews. Despite system heterogeneity, reported features required for effective implementation included early and sustained patient involvement, clinician champions and expanding existing electronic platforms to integrate ePROs. Systems demonstrated several common features, with the majority being implemented within research settings, thereby affecting system implementation readiness for real-world application.

CONCLUSIONS

There has been considerable research investment in ePRO systems. The findings of this study outline key system features and factors to support the successful implementation of ePROs in routine kidney care.Cite Now.

Responsiveness and minimal important change of seven PROMIS computerized adaptive tests (CAT) in patients with advanced chronic kidney disease

BACKGROUND

The Patient-Reported Outcomes Measurement Information System (PROMIS®) has the potential to harmonize the measurement of health-related quality of life (HRQL) across medical conditions. We evaluated responsiveness and minimal important change (MIC) of seven Dutch-Flemish PROMIS computerized adaptive tests (CAT) in Dutch patients with advanced chronic kidney disease (CKD).

METHODS

CKD patients (eGFR < 30 ml/min.1.73m²) completed at baseline and after 6 months seven PROMIS CATs (assessing physical function, pain interference, fatigue, sleep disturbance, anxiety, depression, and ability to participate in social roles and activities), Short Form Health Survey 12 (SF-12), PROMIS Pain Intensity single item, Dialysis Symptom Index (DSI), and Global Rating Scales (GRS) of change. Responsiveness was assessed by testing predefined hypotheses about expected correlations among measures, area under the ROC Curve, and effect sizes. MIC was determined with predictive modelling.

RESULTS

207 patients were included; 186 (90%) completed the follow-up. Most results were in accordance with expectations (70-91% of hypotheses confirmed), with some exceptions for PROMIS Anxiety and Ability to Participate (60% and 42% of hypotheses confirmed, respectively). For PROMIS Anxiety and Depression correlations with the GRS were too low (0.04 and 0.20, respectively) to calculate a MIC. MIC values, representing minimal important deterioration, ranged from 0.4 to 2.5 T-score points for the other domains.

CONCLUSION

We found sufficient responsiveness of PROMIS CATs Physical Function, Fatigue, Sleep Disturbance, and Depression. The results for PROMIS CATs Pain Interference were almost sufficient, but some results for Anxiety and Ability to Participate in Social Roles and Activities were not as expected. Reported MIC values should be interpreted with caution because most patients did not change.

Measurement equivalence of the paper-based and electronic version of the Integrated Palliative care Outcome Scale (IPOS): A randomised crossover trial

BACKGROUND

The Integrated Palliative Care Outcome Scale (IPOS) validly and reliably measures symptoms and concerns of those receiving palliative care.

AIM

To determine the equivalence of the paper version with an electronic version of the IPOS (eIPOS).

DESIGN

Multicentre randomised crossover trial (NCT03879668) with a within-subject comparison of the two modes (washout period 30 min).

SETTING/PARTICIPANTS

Convenience sample of specialist inpatient and palliative home care patients aged over 18 years with cancer and non-cancer conditions was recruited. Scores were compared using intraclass correlation coefficients (ICC), Bland-Altman plots and via a mixed-effects analysis of variance.

RESULTS

Fifty patients were randomised to complete paper-electronic (n = 24) and electronic-paper (n = 26) IPOS with median age 69 years (range 24-95), 56% male, 16% non-cancer. The ICCs showed very high concordance for the total score (ICC 0.99, 95% CI 0.98-1.00), lowest ICCs being observed for symptoms 'Appetite loss' and 'Drowsiness' (ICC 0.95, 95% CI 0.92-0.97). Nine of seventeen items had ICCs above 0.98, as did all subscales. No statistically significant mode, order, age, and interaction effects were observed for IPOS total score and subscales, except for 'Communication' (F_mode = 5.9, p = 0.019). Fifty-eight percent preferred the electronic version. In the group 75+ years, 53% preferred the paper version. Only three entries in the free-text main problems differed between the versions.

CONCLUSION

The very high equivalence in scores and free text between the IPOS and the eIPOS demonstrates that eIPOS is feasible and reliable in an older palliative population.

A scoping review of applications of the Consolidated Framework for Implementation Research (CFIR) to telehealth service implementation initiatives

BACKGROUND

The Consolidated Framework for Implementation Research (CFIR), introduced in 2009, has the potential to provide a comprehensive understanding of the determinants of implementation-effectiveness of health service innovations. Although the CFIR has been increasingly used in recent years to examine factors influencing telehealth implementation, no comprehensive reviews currently exist on the scope of knowledge gained exclusively from applications of the CFIR to telehealth implementation initiatives. This review sought to address this gap.

METHODS

PRISMA-ScR criteria were used to inform a scoping review of the literature. Five academic databases (PUBMED, PROQUEST, SCIDIRECT, CINAHL, and WoS) were searched for eligible sources of evidence from 01.01.2010 through 12.31.2021. The initial search yielded a total of 18,388 records, of which, 64 peer-reviewed articles met the inclusion criteria for the review. Included articles were reviewed in full to extract data, and data collected were synthesized to address the review questions.

RESULTS

Most included articles were published during or after 2020 (64%), and a majority (77%) were qualitative or mixed-method studies seeking to understand barriers or facilitators to telehealth implementation using the CFIR. There were few comparative- or implementation-effectiveness studies containing outcome measures (5%). The database search however, revealed a growing number of protocols for implementation-effectiveness studies published since 2020. Most articles (91%) reported the CFIR Inner Setting domain (e.g., leadership engagement) to have a predominant influence over telehealth implementation success. By comparison, few articles (14%) reported the CFIR Outer Setting domain (e.g., telehealth policies) to have notable influence. While more (63%) telehealth initiatives were focused on specialty (vs primary) care, a vast majority (78%) were focused on clinical practice over medical education, healthcare administration, or population health.

CONCLUSIONS

Organized provider groups have historically paid considerable attention to advocating for telehealth policy (Outer Setting) reform. However, results suggest that for effective telehealth implementation, provider groups need to refocus their efforts on educating individual providers on the complex inter-relationships between Inner Setting constructs and telehealth implementation-effectiveness. On a separate note, the growth in implementation-effectiveness study protocols since 2020, suggests that additional outcome measures may soon be available, to provide a more nuanced understanding of the determinants of effective telehealth implementation based on the CFIR domains and constructs.

Discussing results of patient-reported outcome measures (PROMs) between patients and healthcare professionals in routine dialysis care: a qualitative study

OBJECTIVES

Patient-reported outcome measures (PROMs) provide insight into patients' experienced health and needs, and can improve patient-professional communication. However, little is known about how to discuss PROM results. This study aimed to provide in-depth knowledge of patients' and healthcare professionals' experiences with and perspectives on discussing PROM results as part of routine dialysis care.

DESIGN

A qualitative study was performed using an interpretive description approach. Individual semistructured interviews were conducted with 22 patients and healthcare professionals. Interviews focused on general and specific situations (eg, addressing sensitive topics or when no medical treatment is available). Interviews were transcribed verbatim and analysed inductively using thematic analysis.

SETTING

Participants were purposively sampled from eight dialysis centres across the Netherlands.

PARTICIPANTS

Interviews were conducted with 10 patients receiving dialysis treatment and 12 healthcare professionals (nephrologists and nurses).

RESULTS

Patients and healthcare professionals provided practical guidance for optimal discussion about PROM results. First, patients and healthcare professionals emphasised that PROM results should always be discussed and indicated how to create a suitable setting, adequately prepare, deal with time constraints and use PROMs as a tool for personalised holistic consultations. Second, patients should actively participate and healthcare professionals should take a guiding role. A trusting patient-professional relationship was considered a prerequisite and patient-professional interaction was described as a collaboration in which both contribute their knowledge, experiences and ideas. Third, follow-up after discussing PROM results was considered important, including evaluations and actions (eg, symptom management) structurally embedded into the multidisciplinary treatment process. These general themes also applied to the specific situations, for example: results should also be discussed when no medical treatment is available. Though, healthcare professionals were expected to take more initiative and a leading role when discussing sensitive topics.

CONCLUSIONS

This study provides insight into how to organise and conduct conversations about PROM results and lays the foundation for training healthcare professionals to optimally discuss PROM results in routine nephrology care. Further research is needed to provide guidance on follow-up actions in response to specific PROM results.

Key considerations to reduce or address respondent burden in patient-reported outcome (PRO) data collection

Patient-reported outcomes (PROs) are used in clinical trials to provide evidence of the benefits and risks of interventions from a patient perspective and to inform regulatory decisions and health policy. The collection of PROs in routine practice can facilitate monitoring of patient symptoms; identification of unmet needs; prioritisation and/or tailoring of treatment to the needs of individual patients and inform value-based healthcare initiatives. However, respondent burden needs to be carefully considered and addressed to avoid high rates of missing data and poor reporting of PRO results, which may lead to poor quality data for regulatory decision making and/or clinical care.

The collection of patient-reported outcomes (PROs) may capture patients’ assessments of their health status. Here authors highlight PRO-specific issues that should be considered to minimise respondent burden in clinical trials and routine care.