Development of an online patient decision aid for kidney failure treatment modality decisions

The use of outcome data in patient consultations from the healthcare professionals' and patients' perspectives: A mixed methods study

OBJECTIVES

To gain insight into healthcare professionals' (HCPs') perspectives on the use of outcome data in consultations and to understand which aggregated outcomes patients find important.

METHODS

This study had a mixed-methods design and consisted of two steps: RESULTS: HCPs indicated that aggregated outcome data are not routinely used in consultations. They pointed out various barriers to using outcome data, e.g., low response rates of PROMs, and suggested actions to address these barriers, including training of HCPs in outcome data usage. Patients rated the majority of aggregated outcomes as important, although preferences differed between the studied health conditions.

CONCLUSION

Both HCPs and patients underscored the importance of discussing outcome data in consultations. Nevertheless, HCPs encountered several barriers to using outcome data. Furthermore, patients with different health conditions have somewhat different information needs.

PRACTICE IMPLICATIONS

The study identified several actionable steps to enhance the collection and application of outcome data in consultations.

Clinical Decision Support Tools in the Electronic Medical Record

The integration of clinical decision support (CDS) tools into electronic medical record (EMR) systems has become common. Although there are many benefits for both patients and providers from successful integration, barriers exist that prevent consistent and effective use of these tools. Such barriers include tool alert fatigue, lack of interoperability between tools and medical record systems, and poor acceptance of tools by care providers. However, successful integration of CDS tools into EMR systems have been reported; examples of these include the Statin Choice Decision Aid, and the Kidney Failure Risk Equation (KFRE). This article reviews the history of EMR systems and its integration with CDS tools, the barriers preventing successful integration, and the benefits reported from successful integration. This article also provides suggestions and strategies for improving successful integration, making these tools easier to use and more effective for care providers.

Preparing for kidney replacement therapy in pediatric advanced CKD: a review of literature and defining a multi-disciplinary clinical approach to patient-caregiver education

Pediatric patients with progressive chronic kidney disease (CKD) approaching kidney replacement therapy (KRT) make up a small population but carry significant morbidity and mortality. Patients and caregivers require comprehensive kidney failure education to ensure a smooth start to KRT. Choice of KRT modality can be influenced by medical comorbidities, patient/caregiver comprehension, and comfort with a particular modality, social and economic factors, and/or implicit bias of the health care team. As KRT modality can influence morbidity, mortality, and quality of life, we created a pediatric advanced CKD clinic to provide comprehensive KRT education and to promote informed decision-making for our advanced CKD patients and their caregivers.

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.

Partnering with patients and caregivers to enrich research and care in kidney disease: values and strategies

Patient and caregiver involvement broadens the scope of new knowledge generated from research and can enhance the relevance, quality and impact of research on clinical practice and health outcomes. Incorporating the perspectives of people with lived experience of chronic kidney disease (CKD) affords new insights into the design of interventions, study methodology, data analysis and implementation and has value for patients, healthcare professionals and researchers alike. However, patient involvement in CKD research has been limited and data on which to inform best practice is scarce. A number of frameworks have been developed for involving patients and caregivers in research in CKD and in health research more broadly. These frameworks provide an overall conceptual structure to guide the planning and implementation of research partnerships and describe values that are essential and strategies considered best practice when working with diverse stakeholder groups. This article aims to provide a summary of the strategies most widely used to support multistakeholder partnerships, the different ways patients and caregivers can be involved in research and the methods used to amalgamate diverse and at times conflicting points of view.

Decisional Needs of People From Minority Ethnic Groups Around Living Donor Kidney Transplantation: A UK Healthcare Professionals' Perspective

Despite improved patient and clinical outcomes, living donor kidney transplantation is underutilized in the United Kingdom, particularly among minority ethnic groups, compared to deceased donor kidney transplantation. This may in part be due to the way in which kidney services present information about treatment options. With a focus on ethnicity, semi structured interviews captured the views of 19 kidney healthcare professionals from two renal centres in West Yorkshire, about the decisional needs and context within which people with advanced kidney disease make transplant decisions. Data were analysed using thematic analysis. Themes were categorized into three groups: 1) Kidney healthcare professionals: language, cultural awareness, trusted personnel, and staff diversity, 2) Patient information resources: timing and setting of education and suitability of patient-facing information and, 3) People with advanced kidney disease: knowledge, risk perception, and cultural/religious beliefs. To our knowledge, this is the first study in the United Kingdom to investigate in depth, healthcare professionals' views on living donor kidney transplantation decision making. Six recommendations for service improvement/delivery to support decision making around living donor kidney transplantation among minority ethnic groups are described.

Effectiveness and implementation of SHared decision-making supported by OUTcome information among patients with breast cancer, stroke and advanced kidney disease: SHOUT study protocol of multiple interrupted time series

INTRODUCTION

Within the value-based healthcare framework, outcome data can be used to inform patients about (treatment) options, and empower them to make shared decisions with their health care professional. To facilitate shared decision-making (SDM) supported by outcome data, a multicomponent intervention has been designed, including patient decision aids on the organisation of post-treatment surveillance (breast cancer); discharge location (stroke) and treatment modality (advanced kidney disease), and training on SDM for health care professionals. The SHared decision-making supported by OUTcome information (SHOUT) study will examine the effectiveness of the intervention and its implementation in clinical practice.

METHODS AND ANALYSIS

Multiple interrupted time series will be used to stepwise implement the intervention. Patients diagnosed with either breast cancer (N=630), stroke (N=630) or advanced kidney disease (N=473) will be included. Measurements will be performed at baseline, three (stroke), six and twelve (breast cancer and advanced kidney disease) months. Trends on outcomes will be measured over a period of 20 months. The primary outcome will be patients' perceived level of involvement in decision-making. Secondary outcomes regarding effectiveness will include patient-reported SDM, decisional conflict, role in decision-making, knowledge, quality of life, preferred and chosen care, satisfaction with the intervention, healthcare utilisation and health outcomes. Outcomes regarding implementation will include the implementation rate and a questionnaire on the health care professionals' perspective on the implementation process.

ETHICS AND DISSEMINATION

The Medical research Ethics Committees United in Nieuwegein, the Netherlands, has confirmed that the Medical Research Involving Human Subjects Act does not apply to this study. Bureau Onderzoek & Innovatie of Santeon, the Netherlands, approved this study. The results will contribute to insight in and knowledge on the use of outcome data for SDM, and can stimulate sustainable implementation of SDM.

TRIAL REGISTRATION NUMBER

NL8374, NL8375 and NL8376.