Processes toward the end of life and dialysis withdrawal Physicians' and nurses' perspectives

The Surprise Question and Health-Related Quality of Life in Patients on Hemodialysis: A Cross-Sectional Multicenter Study

Background

The Surprise Question (SQ) is a common method aimed at identifying frail patients who need serious illness conversations to integrate a palliative approach. However, little is known about whether the SQ identifies patients on hemodialysis who perceive that they are declining or have low health-related quality of life (HRQoL)-important aspects when considering the need for serious illness conversations.

Objective

To explore how nurses and physicians' responses to the SQ are associated with patients' self-reported HRQoL.

Design

Cross-sectional study.

Subjects

In total, 282 patients on hemodialysis were included.

Measurements

One nurse and one physician responded to the SQ for each patient. The patient-reported HRQoL was measured with the RAND 36-Item Health Survey 1.0 (RAND-36) and the EuroQual vertical visual analogue scale (EQ-VAS) from the EuroQual-5 Dimension Questionnaire (EQ-5D).

Results

Nurses' responses "no, not surprised" to the SQ were associated with patient-reported worsened health compared to one year ago (RAND-36), and lower perceived overall health (EQ-VAS). Physicians' responses "no, not surprised" were associated with lower overall health and lower physical functioning. Patient-reported pain, general health, fatigue, and emotional and social aspects were not associated with responses to the SQ.

Conclusions

The findings indicate that the SQ identifies patients on hemodialysis who report low overall health and low physical functioning. However, the SQ did not identify patients who reported pain, emotional problems, or fatigue, which are also important aspects to consider in identifying needs for serious illness conversations, symptom management, and to be able to integrate a palliative approach.

Assessment of the perceptions of health-related quality of life in Greek patients undergoing automated peritoneal dialysis with remote monitoring: A qualitative study

BACKGROUND

This study aimed to explore in depth the lived experience and quality of life outcomes in patients receiving automated peritoneal dialysis (APD) treatment.

METHODS

The study adhered to the standards of the Consolidated Criteria for Reporting Qualitative Research. A total of 19 APD patients were recruited and assessed using in-depth semi-structured interviews on various aspects of life with respect to APD modality. The interviews were transcribed verbatim and analyzed using Interpretive Phenomenological Analysis.

RESULTS

Study findings generated five superordinate themes: (a) treatment-free daily routine, (b) sleep disturbances, (c) remote care, (d) limitations of peritoneal dialysis, and (e) the dimension of chronic disease. Further analysis of the material revealed the relationship of these themes with individual patient characteristics.

CONCLUSIONS

Overall, our findings suggest that APD characteristics contribute to the perceptions of quality of life in patients under dialysis considerably.

Unravelling complex choices: multi-stakeholder perceptions on dialysis withdrawal and end-of-life care in kidney disease

BACKGROUND

For patients on dialysis with poor quality of life and prognosis, dialysis withdrawal and subsequent transition to palliative care is recommended. This study aims to understand multi-stakeholder perspectives regarding dialysis withdrawal and identify their information needs and support for decision-making regarding withdrawing from dialysis and end-of-life care.

METHODS

Participants were recruited through purposive sampling from eight dialysis centers and two public hospitals in Singapore. Semi-structured in-depth interviews were conducted with 10 patients on dialysis, 8 family caregivers, and 16 renal healthcare providers. They were held in-person at dialysis clinics with patients and caregivers, and virtually via video-conferencing with healthcare providers. Interviews were audio-recorded, transcribed, and thematically analyzed. The Ottawa Decision Support Framework's decisional-needs manual was used as a guide for data collection and analysis, with two independent team members coding the data.

RESULTS

Four themes reflecting perceptions and support for decision-making were identified: a) poor knowledge and fatalistic perceptions; b) inadequate resources and support for decision-making; c) complexity of decision-making, unclear timing, and unpreparedness; and d) internal emotions of decisional conflict and regret. Participants displayed limited awareness of dialysis withdrawal and palliative care, often perceiving dialysis withdrawal as medical abandonment. Patient preferences regarding decision-making ranged from autonomous control to physician or family-delegated choices. Cultural factors contributed to hesitancy and reluctance to discuss end-of-life matters, resulting in a lack of conversations between patients and providers, as well as between patients and their caregivers.

CONCLUSIONS

Decision-making for dialysis withdrawal is complicated, exacerbated by a lack of awareness and conversations on end-of-life care among patients, caregivers, and providers. These findings emphasize the need for a culturally-sensitive tool that informs and prepares patients and their caregivers to navigate decisions about dialysis withdrawal and the transition to palliative care. Such a tool could bridge information gaps and stimulate meaningful conversations, fostering informed and culturally aligned decisions during this critical juncture of care.

Discrepancy in responses to the surprise question between hemodialysis nurses and physicians, with focus on patient clinical characteristics: A comparative study

INTRODUCTION

The surprise question (SQ) "Would I be surprised if this patient died within the next xx months" can be used by different professions to foresee the need of serious illness conversations in patients approaching end of life. However, little is known about the different perspectives of nurses and physicians in responses to the SQ and factors influencing their appraisals. The aim was to explore nurses' and physicians' responses to the SQ regarding patients on hemodialysis, and to investigate how these answers were associated with patient clinical characteristics.

METHODS

This comparative cross-sectional study included 361 patients for whom 112 nurses and 15 physicians responded to the SQ regarding 6 and 12 months. Patient characteristics, performance status, and comorbidities were obtained. Cohen's kappa was used to analyze the interrater agreement between nurses and physicians in their responses to the SQ and multivariable logistic regression was applied to reveal the independent association to patient clinical characteristics.

FINDINGS

Proportions of nurses and physicians responding to the SQ with "no, not surprised" was similar regarding 6 and 12 months. However, there was a substantial difference concerning which specific patient the nurses and physicians responded "no, not surprised", within 6 (κ = 0.366, p < 0.001, 95% CI = 0.288-0.474) and 12 months (κ = 0.379, p < 0.001, 95% CI = 0.281-0.477). There were also differences in the patient clinical characteristics associated with nurses' and physicians' responses to the SQ.

DISCUSSION

Nurses and physicians have different perspectives in their appraisal when responding to the SQ for patients on hemodialysis. This may reinforce the need for communication and discussion between nurses and physicians to identify the need of serious illness conversations in patients approaching the end of life, in order to adapt hemodialysis care to patient preferences and needs.

Exploring what is reasonable: uncovering moral reasoning of vascular surgeons in daily practice

BACKGROUND

Vascular surgery offers a range of treatments to relieve pain and ulcerations, and to prevent sudden death by rupture of blood vessels. The surgical procedures involve risk of injury and harm, which increases with age and frailty leading to complex decision-making processes that raise ethical questions. However, how vascular surgeons negotiate these questions is scarcely studied. The aim was therefore to explore vascular surgeons' moral reasoning of what ought to be done for the patient.

METHODS

Qualitative, semi-structured interviews were conducted with 19 vascular surgeons working at three Swedish university hospitals. Data were analysed according to systematic text condensation.

RESULTS

The surgeons' moral reasoning about what ought to be done comprised a quest to relieve suffering and avoid harm by exploring what is reasonable to do for the patient. Exploring reasonableness included to shift one´s perspective from the vessels to the whole person, to balance patient's conflicting needs and to place responsibility for right decision on one´s shoulders. The shift from blood vessels to the whole person implied gaining holistic knowledge in pondering of what is best, struggling with one´s authority for surgery through dialogue, and building relationship for mutual security. To balance patient's conflicting needs implied weighing the patient's independence and a sense of being whole against ease of suffering, respecting the patient's will against protecting life and well-being, and weighing longer life against protecting the present well-being. Finally, to place responsibility on one´s shoulders was conveyed as an urge to remind oneself of the risk of complications, withholding one's power of proficiency, and managing time during the illness course.

CONCLUSIONS

This study contributes to uncovering how moral reasoning is embodied in the vascular surgeons' everyday clinical discourse as a tangible part of their patient care. The results underpin the significance of moral considerations in the assemblage of medical knowledge and technical skills to further understand vascular surgeons' clinical practice. The clinical application of these results is the need of forums with sufficient possibilities for articulating these important moral considerations in everyday care.