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

Different Perspectives of Spanish Patients and Professionals on How a Dialysis Unit Should Be Designed

Aim

The opinion of hemodialysis patients, professionals and family members is rarely considered in the design of a hemodialysis unit.

Purpose

To know and compare the opinion and preferences of patients, family members and professionals regarding the design of a dialysis unit and the potential activities they believe should be carried out during the session in order to provide architects with real information for the construction of a dialysis center.

Patients and Methods

Anonymous and voluntary survey in electronic format addressed to patients, relatives and professionals belonging to the 18 hemodialysis centers of the renal foundation and to ALCER and its different delegations, in relation to leisure activities to be carried out in the dialysis center and preferred design of the treatment room. The results obtained between the patient-family group and the professionals were compared.

Results

We received 331 responses, of which 215 were from patients and family members (65%) and 116 (35%) from professionals. The most represented category among professionals was nursing (53%), followed by assistants (24%) and physicians (12.9%). A higher proportion of patients (66%) preferred rooms in groups of 10-12 patients as opposed to professionals who preferred open-plan rooms (p<0.001). The options that showed the most differences between patients and professionals were chatting with colleagues and intimacy (options most voted by patients/families), versus performing group activities and visibility (professionals).

Conclusion

The professionals' view of patients' needs does not always coincide with the patients' perception. The inclusion of the perspective of people with kidney disease continues to be a pending issue in which we must improve both patient organizations and professionals, and the opinion of professionals and patients must be included in the design of a dialysis unit and the activities to be developed in it.

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.

Do patient decision aids help people who are facing decisions about solid organ transplantation? A systematic review

BACKGROUND

Decisions about solid organ transplantation are complex. Patient decision aids (PDAs) enhance traditional education, by improving knowledge and supporting patients to align their values with treatments. There are increasing numbers of transplantation PDAs, however, it is unclear whether these are effective. We conducted a systematic review of studies assessing the impact of PDA use in transplantation.

METHODS

We searched the Cochrane Register of Controlled Trials, CINAHL, EMBASE, MEDLINE, and PsycINFO databases from database inception to October 26, 2020. We included primary studies of solid organ transplantation PDAs defined by the International Patient Decision Aids Standards. All comparators and reported outcomes were included. Mean difference in knowledge (before vs. after) was standardized on a 100-point scale. Pooled-effect for PDAs was calculated and compared to the standard of care for randomized controlled trials (RCTs) and meta-analyzed using random effects. Analysis of all other outcomes was limited due to heterogeneity (PROSPERO registration, CRD42020215940).

RESULTS

Seven thousand four hundred and sixty-three studies were screened, 163 underwent full-text review, and 15 studies with 4278 participants were included. Nine studies were RCTs. Seven RCTs assessed knowledge; all demonstrated increased knowledge with PDA use (mean difference, 8.01;95%CI 4.69-11.34, p < .00001). There were many other outcomes, including behavior and acceptability, but these were too heterogenous and infrequently assessed for meaningful synthesis.

CONCLUSIONS

This review found that PDAs increase knowledge compared to standard education, though the effect size is small. PDAs are mostly considered acceptable; however, it is difficult to determine whether they improve other decision-making components due to the limited evidence about non-knowledge-based outcomes.

Appropriateness of the dialysis modality selection process: A cross-sectional study

Studies that specifically quantify the appropriateness of the process of dialysis modality selection are lacking. Peritoneal dialysis (PD) offers clinical and social advantages over hemodialysis (HD), but may be underused. We aimed to determine the appropriateness of the process of dialysis modality selection and quantify the percentage of patients who could potentially have been PD candidates. We performed a cross-sectional study that included adult patients from a hospital Nephrology Department in Barcelona who started dialysis between 2014 and 2015. We assessed the appropriateness of dialysis modalities selection by defining 3 sequential domains based on 3 critical steps in choosing a dialysis modality: eligibility for either treatment, information about modalities, and shared decision-making. We obtained data using medical records and a patient questionnaire. The dialysis modality selection process was considered appropriate when patients had no contraindications for the selected option, received complete information about both modalities, and voluntarily chose the selected option. A total of 141 patients were included in this study. The median age was 72 years (interquartile range 63-82 years), and 65% of the patients were men. The dialysis modality selection process was potentially inappropriate in 22% of the participants because of problems related to information about dialysis modalities (15%) or shared decision-making (7%). Appropriate PD use can potentially increase from 17% to 38%. Patient age and lack of information regarding dialysis options were independently associated with the potential degree of inappropriate dialysis modality selection. Our findings indicate areas for improvement in the selection of dialysis modalities. With better education and shared decision-making, the number of patients with PD could potentially double. The analysis of appropriateness is a helpful approach for studying renal replacement treatment patterns and identifying strategies to optimize their use.

Shared decision-making in advanced kidney disease: a scoping review

OBJECTIVES

To provide a comprehensive overview of interventions that support shared decision-making (SDM) for treatment modality decisions in advanced kidney disease (AKD). To provide summarised information on their content, use and reported results. To provide an overview of interventions currently under development or investigation.

DESIGN

The JBI methodology for scoping reviews was followed. This review conforms to the Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses Extension for Scoping Reviews (PRISMA-ScR) checklist.

DATA SOURCES

MEDLINE, Embase, Web of Science, Cochrane Library, Emcare, PsycINFO, PROSPERO and Academic Search Premier for peer-reviewed literature. Other online databases (eg, clinicaltrials.gov, OpenGrey) for grey literature.

ELIGIBILITY FOR INCLUSION

Records in English with a study population of patients >18 years of age with an estimated glomerular filtration rate <30 mL/min/1.73 m². Records had to be on the subject of SDM, or explicitly mention that the intervention reported on could be used to support SDM for treatment modality decisions in AKD.

DATA EXTRACTION AND SYNTHESIS

Two reviewers independently screened and selected records for data extraction. Interventions were categorised as prognostic tools (PTs), educational programmes (EPs), patient decision aids (PtDAs) or multicomponent initiatives (MIs). Interventions were subsequently categorised based on the decisions they were developed to support.

RESULTS

One hundred forty-five interventions were identified in a total of 158 included records: 52 PTs, 51 EPs, 29 PtDAs and 13 MIs. Sixteen (n=16, 11%) were novel interventions currently under investigation. Forty-six (n=46, 35.7%) were reported to have been implemented in clinical practice. Sixty-seven (n=67, 51.9%) were evaluated for their effects on outcomes in the intended users.

CONCLUSION

There is no conclusive evidence on which intervention is the most efficacious in supporting SDM for treatment modality decisions in AKD. There is a lot of variation in selected outcomes, and the body of evidence is largely based on observational research. In addition, the effects of these interventions on SDM are under-reported.

The experience of urgent dialysis patients with end-stage renal disease: A qualitative study

Purpose

Taiwan is among the countries with the highest global prevalence of chronic renal disease. However, when advised to undergo dialysis therapy, patients with end-stage renal disease often hesitate. Attitudes toward medication and Taiwanese cultures are the main reasons for this delay, and delay conditioning requires urgent dialysis. This study aimed to explore the experience of urgent dialysis patients with end-stage renal disease.

Methods

This study used a purposive sampling strategy with semi-structured interviews leading to in-depth interviews. Patients were recruited from the nephrology ward and hemodialysis center of a northern Taiwanese hospital. All participants were aged over 20 years with end-stage renal disease. Although advised by doctors to undergo dialysis, these patients delayed their treatment and later suffered severe complications. After emergency hospitalization, the patients’ condition improved. Data were analyzed by content analysis.

Results

Interviews with five participants suffering from end-stage renal disease identified six themes: “experiencing a sudden jolt,” “silent organ brings the most pain,” “feeling angry: why me?,” “facing a dilemma,” “taking risks,” and “facing consequences.”

Conclusion

These patients delayed their treatment and later suffered severe complications, even though doctors advised them to undergo dialysis. Health professionals play an important role in communication and coordination, assisting patients in coping with their situation. The analysis of the reasons for the delay in undergoing dialysis, therefore, should help health professionals provide proper guidance and care to patients who are faced with the decision to accept dialysis treatment.

Shared Decision-Making for a Dialysis Modality

The prevalence of kidney failure continues to rise globally. Dialysis is a treatment option for individuals with kidney failure; after the decision to initiate dialysis has been made, it is critical to involve individuals in the decision on which dialysis modality to choose. This review, based on evidence arising from the literature, examines the role of shared decision-making (SDM) in helping those with kidney failure to select a dialysis modality. SDM was found to lead to more people with kidney failure feeling satisfied with their choice of dialysis modality. Individuals with kidney failure must be cognizant that SDM is an active and iterative process, and their participation is essential for success in empowering them to make decisions on dialysis modality. The educational components of SDM must be easy to understand, high quality, unbiased, up to date, and targeted to the linguistic, educational, and cultural needs of the individual. All individuals with kidney failure should be encouraged to participate in SDM and should be involved in the design and implementation of SDM approaches.

OUP accepted manuscript

Background

Non-dialytic conservative care (CC) has been proposed as a treatment option for patients with kidney failure. This systematic review and meta-analysis aims at comparing survival outcomes between dialysis and CC in studies where patients made an explicit treatment choice.

Methods

Five databases were systematically searched from origin through 25 February 2021 for studies comparing survival outcomes among patients choosing dialysis versus CC. Adjusted and unadjusted survival rates were extracted and meta-analysis performed where applicable. Risk of bias analysis was performed according to the Cochrane Risk Of Bias In Non-randomized Studies of Interventions.

Results

A total of 22 cohort studies were included covering 21 344 patients. Most studies were prone to selection bias and confounding. Patients opting for dialysis were generally younger and had fewer comorbid conditions, fewer functional impairments and less frailty than patients who chose CC. The unadjusted median survival from treatment decision or an estimated glomerular filtration rate <15 mL/min/1.73 m² ranged from 20 and 67 months for dialysis and 6 and 31 months for CC. Meta-analysis of 12 studies that provided adjusted hazard ratios (HRs) for mortality showed a pooled adjusted HR of 0.47 (95% confidence interval 0.39–0.57) for patients choosing dialysis compared with CC. In subgroups of patients with older age or severe comorbidities, the reduction of mortality risk remained statistically significant, although analyses were unadjusted.

Conclusions

Patients opting for dialysis have an overall lower mortality risk compared with patients opting for CC. However, a high risk of bias and heterogeneous reporting preclude definitive conclusions and results cannot be translated to an individual level.

Sexo y género en la donación de riñón: visiones desde la consulta

Introducción: En el trasplante renal de donante vivo son las mujeres las que donan con más frecuencia. Las profesionales de nefrología tienen un papel muy importante en la información sobre los tratamientos de sustitución renal y la ayuda en la toma de decisiones. Objetivo: Explorar cómo influye la perspectiva de género en el trasplante renal de donante vivo desde la visión de las profesionales de nefrología.Metodología: Estudio cualitativo fenomenológico. Participaron 13 profesionales de las Unidades de Nefrología y Trasplante Renal de Catalunya. Se realizaron entrevistas semiestructuradas y se analizaron a través de un análisis temático. Resultados: Las opiniones y percepciones de las profesionales de nefrología se clasificaron a través de los siguientes temas: 1) manera de informar sobre los tratamientos; 2) donación habitual; 3) predisposición para donar y 4) actitud de la persona donante. Las mujeres se muestran más predispuestas a donar debido a los mandatos de género, además de las desigualdades en el mercado laboral. Cabe destacar que, la forma en la toma de decisión es igual para hombres y mujeres. Así mismo, las mujeres se muestran más preparadas psicológicamente y se recuperan más rápido del postoperatorio. Conclusiones: La feminización en la donación de riñón es la suma de factores médicos, socioculturales y económicos. Los roles de género influyen en las mujeres en sus actitudes y comportamientos a lo largo de todo el proceso de trasplante renal de vivo. Las profesionales de nefrología entrevistadas describen las diferencias entre hombres y mujeres en la donación de riñón.

Utilization of CMS pre-ESRD Kidney Disease Education services and its associations with the home dialysis therapies

BACKGROUND

Kidney Disease Education (KDE) has been shown to improve informed dialysis selection and home dialysis use, two long-held but underachieved goals of US nephrology community. In 2010, the Center for Medicare and Medicaid Services launched a policy of KDE reimbursements for all Medicare beneficiaries with advanced chronic kidney disease. However, the incorporation of KDE service in real-world practice and its association with the home dialysis utilization has not been examined.

METHODS

Using the 2016 US Renal Data System linked to end-stage renal disease (ESRD) and pre-ESRD Medicare claim data, we identified all adult incident ESRD patients with active Medicare benefits at their first-ever dialysis during the study period (1 January 2010 to 31 December 2014). From these, we identified those who had at least one KDE service code before their dialysis initiation (KDE cohort) and compared them to a parsimoniously matched non-KDE control cohort in 1:4 proportions for age, gender, ESRD network, and the year of dialysis initiation. The primary outcome was home dialysis use at dialysis initiation, and secondary outcomes were home dialysis use at day 90 and anytime through the course of ESRD.

RESULTS

Of the 369,968 qualifying incident ESRD Medicare beneficiaries with their first-ever dialysis during the study period, 3469 (0.9%) received KDE services before dialysis initiation. African American race, Hispanic ethnicity, and the presence of congestive heart failure and hypoalbuminemia were associated with significantly lower odds of receiving KDE services. Multivariate analyses showed that KDE recipients had twice the odds of initiating dialysis with home modalities (15.0% vs. 6.9%; adjusted odds ratio (aOR):95% confidence interval (CI) 2.0:1.7-2.4) and had significantly higher odds using home dialysis throughout the course of ESRD (home dialysis use at day 90 (17.6% vs. 9.9%, aOR:CI 1.7:1.4-1.9) and cumulatively (24.7% vs. 15.1%, aOR:CI 1.7:1.5-1.9)).

CONCLUSIONS

Utilization of pre-ESRD KDE services is associated with significantly greater home dialysis utilization in the incident ESRD Medicare beneficiaries. The very low rates of utilization of these services suggest the need for focused systemic evaluations to identify and address the barriers and facilitators of this important patient-centered endeavor.

Key elements in selection of pre-dialysis patients for home dialysis

BACKGROUND

Most pre-dialysis patients are medically eligible for home dialysis, and home dialysis has several advantages over incentre dialysis. However, accurately selecting patients for home dialysis appears to be difficult, since uptake of home dialysis remains low. The aim of this study was to investigate which medical or psychosocial elements contribute most to the selection of patients eligible for home dialysis.

METHODS

All patients from a Dutch teaching hospital, who received treatment modality education and subsequently started dialysis treatment, were included. The pre-dialysis programme consisted of questionnaires for the patient, nephrologist and social worker, followed by an assessment of eligibility for home dialysis by a multidisciplinary team. Clinimetric assessment and logistic regression were used to identify domains and questions associated with home dialysis treatment.

RESULTS

A total of 135 patients were included, of whom 40 were treated with home dialysis and 95 with incentre haemodialysis. The key elements associated with long-term home dialysis treatment were part of the domains 'suitability of the housing', 'self-care', 'social support' and 'patient capacity', with adjusted odds ratios ranging from 0.13 for negative to 18.3 for positive associations.

CONCLUSION

The assessment of contraindications by a nephrologist followed by the assessment of possibilities by a social worker or dialysis nurse who investigates four key elements, ideally during a home visit, and subsequent detailed education offered by specialized nurses is an optimal way to select patients for home dialysis.

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.

Shared decision-making in dialysis choice has potential to improve self-management in people with kidney disease: A qualitative follow-up study

AIMS

To explore how patients remained involved in their treatment and care of their own health following a shared decision-making intervention for dialysis choice.

DESIGN

A follow-up study using semi-structured interviews.

METHODS

Individual interviews with 13 patients were conducted immediately following their participation in a shared decision-making intervention for dialysis choice and again 3 months after initiating dialysis. This study reports findings from the follow-up interviews 3 month after dialysis initiation. Data were collected from August 2017-February 2019 and analysed using systematic text condensation.

RESULTS

The analysis revealed five main findings, which indicated differing levels of: (a) involvement in the decision-making process; (b) involvement in treatment; (c) involvement in care of own health; (d) involvement of a relative; and (e) support from healthcare professionals.

CONCLUSIONS

Following the shared decision-making intervention, patients who chose home-based treatment had become more involved in their treatment and care of their own health. The involvement of relatives and support from healthcare professionals contributed positively to this. In contrast, patients who had chosen hospital-based treatment were less involved in their treatment.

IMPACT

Shared decision-making in dialysis choice has potential to improve self-management in people with kidney disease. However, support from healthcare professionals for patients and their relatives should be prioritized in an effort to increase all patients' involvement in their treatment and care of their own health.

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.

Influencia del proceso educativo en la consulta de ERCA sobre la elección de tratamiento renal sustitutivo

Introducción: La finalidad de las consultas de Enfermedad Renal Crónica es potenciar los autocuidados y autonomía del paciente. El proceso de información y elección de tratamiento renal sustitutivo en estos pacientes es un aspecto clave para su tratamiento.Objetivo: Determinar si el tipo de proceso educativo que recibe el paciente en la consulta ERCA influye sobre la opción de tratamiento renal sustitutivo elegida.Material y Método: Estudio observacional retrospectivo en pacientes seguidos en consulta de Enfermedad Renal Crónica en el periodo 2015-2020. Se recogieron datos clínicos y sociodemográficos de la historia clínica del paciente, opción terapéutica elegida por el paciente y proceso educativo recibido (sólo nefrólogo o equipo multidisciplinar: nefrólogo y enfermera).Resultados: Se incluyeron 294 pacientes candidatos a tratamiento renal sustitutivo. El 51% de la muestra optó por hemodiálisis en centro como la opción más frecuente. Los pacientes que fueron educados por el equipo multidisciplinar presentan tasas de elección de hemodiálisis de 36,4% y de tratamiento conservador del 18,2% frente al 56,7% y 5,1% respectivamente, del grupo informado sólo por el nefrólogo (p<0,01).Conclusiones: La hemodiálisis en centro es la opción más frecuente entre los pacientes. Cuando el paciente recibe un proceso informativo estructurado, sistemático y multidisciplinar la elección de las diferentes opciones tiende a equilibrarse y el tratamiento conservador es considerado una opción alternativa.

Choice of dialysis modality: patients' experiences and quality of decision after shared decision-making

BACKGROUND

Patients with kidney failure experience a complex decision on dialysis modality performed either at home or in hospital. The options have different levels of impact on their physical and psychological condition and social life. The purpose of this study was to evaluate the implementation of an intervention designed to achieve shared decision-making for dialysis choice. Specific objectives were: 1) to measure decision quality as indicated by patients' knowledge, readiness and achieved preferences; and 2) to determine if patients experienced shared decision-making.

METHOD

A mixed methods descriptive study was conducted using both questionnaires and semi-structured interviews. Eligible participants were adults with kidney failure considering dialysis modality. The intervention, based on the Three-Talk model, consisted of a patient decision aid and decision coaching meetings provided by trained dialysis coordinators. The intervention was delivered to 349 patients as part of their clinical pathway of care. After the intervention, 148 participants completed the Shared Decision-Making Questionnaire and the Decision Quality Measurement, and 29 participants were interviewed. Concordance between knowledge, decision and preference was calculated to measure decision quality. Interview transcripts were analysed qualitatively.

RESULTS

The participants obtained a mean score for shared decision-making of 86 out of 100. There was no significant difference between those choosing home- or hospital-based treatment (97 versus 83; p = 0.627). The participants obtained a knowledge score of 82% and a readiness score of 86%. Those choosing home-based treatment had higher knowledge score than those choosing hospital-based treatment (84% versus 75%; p = 0.006) but no significant difference on the readiness score (87% versus 84%; p = 0.908). Considering the chosen option and the knowledge score, 83% of the participants achieved a high-quality decision. No significant difference was found for decision quality between those choosing home- or hospital-based treatment (83% versus 83%; p = 0.935). Interview data informed the interpretation of these results.

CONCLUSIONS

Although there was no control group, over 80% of participants exposed to the intervention and responded to the surveys experienced shared decision-making and reached a high-quality decision. Both participants who chose home- and hospital-based treatment experienced the intervention as shared decision-making and made a high-quality decision. Qualitative findings supported the quantitative results.

TRIAL REGISTRATION

The full trial protocol is available at ClinicalTrials. Gov ( NCT03868800 ). The study has been registered retrospectively.

Home run-results of a chronic kidney disease Telemedicine Patient Education Study

Background

Chronic kidney disease (CKD) incidence is increasing and associated mortality and morbidity are high. Educating patients is effective in delaying progression and establishing optimal renal replacement therapy (RRT). Tele-education/telemedicine (TM) can be an effective tool to provide such education, but there are no available data quantifying its effectiveness. We attempted to establish such evidence correlating the effect of education in patient choices and with the start of actual RRT. We present results from a 3-year pilot study evaluating the effectiveness of comprehensive predialysis education (CPE) through TM for CKD patients compared with a standard care group [face to face (FTF)]. The patient’s ability to choose RRT was the primary endpoint.

Methods

This was a randomized controlled study providing CPE over three classes at nine sites (one FTF and eight TM). Three assessment tools were utilized to compare groups: CKD knowledge, literacy and quality of life.

Results

A total of 47.1% of FTF and 52.2% of TM patients reported not having enough information to choose a modality. This decreased by the third visit (FTF 7.4%, TM 13.2%). Home modality choices more than doubled in both groups (FTF 25.8–67.7%, TM 22.2–50.1%). In patients that completed one visit and needed to start RRT, 47% started on a home modality or received a pre-emptive transplant (home hemodialysis 6%, peritoneal dialysis 38%, transplant 3%).

Conclusions

Results show almost 90% (TM 87%, FTF 95%) of the attendees could choose a modality after education. Home modality choices doubled. Patients were able to make an informed choice regardless of the modality of education.

Optimal start in dialysis shows increased survival in patients with chronic kidney disease

OBJECTIVE

To compare the survival among patients with chronic kidney disease who had optimal starts of renal replacement therapy, dialysis or hemodialysis, with patients who had suboptimal starts.

METHODS

A retrospective cohort consisting of >18 year-old patients who started renal replacement therapy, using peritoneal dialysis or hemodialysis, in any public hospital or associated center of the Andalusian Public Health System, between the 1st of January of 2006 and the 15th of March of 2017. The optimal start was defined when all the following criteria were met: a planned dialysis start, a minimum of six-month follow-up by a nephrologist, and a first dialysis method coinciding with the one registered at 90 days. The information was obtained from the registry of the Information System of the Transplant Autonomic Coordination of Andalusia.

RESULTS

A total of 10,692 patients were studied. 4,377 (40.9%) of these patients died. A total of 4,937 patients (46.17%) achieved optimal starts of renal replacement therapy and showed higher survival rates (HR 0.669; 95% CI 0.628-0.712) in the multivariate analysis of Cox regression model.

CONCLUSIONS

Patients with an optimal start of renal replacement therapy have a greater survival than those who had a non-optimal start. Therefore, the necessary measures should be encouraged to increase the optimal start of the patient in dialysis.

Advanced chronic renal failure (ACRF) study. Baseline characteristics, evaluation of the application of the structured information for the election of renal replacement therapy and one-year evolution of the incident patients in the ACRF medical office

BACKGROUND AND OBJECTIVES

Analyze evolution Renal Chronic Failure stage 4-5 (ACRF) patients and influence information they receive (educational process, EP) in modality Renal Replacement Therapy (RRT) or conservative treatment (CT) in multidisciplinar ACRF Office.

MATERIAL AND METHODS

Prospective, multicenter study (3 centers). Inclusion: from June-01-2014 to October-01-2015; observation: 12 months or until start RRT or death if they occur before 12 months; ends October-01-2016.

RESULTS

336 patients were included (60% males), median and intercuartile rank 71.5 (17), 55% ≥ 70 years; Follow up initiation eGFR CKD-EPI: 21 (9) ml / min / 1.73m²; Charlson Index (ChI) with / without age 8 (3) / 4 (2); Diabetic patients: 52,4%. The EP was carried out in 168, eGFR 15 (10) ml / min / 1.73m². The initial treatment election: 26% peritoneal dialysis (PD), 45% hemodyalisis (HD), 26% CT, kidney trasplant 3%; 60 patients started RRT: 3.3% kidney traspant; 30% PD, 66% HD; 104 admissions in 73 patients, the most frequent cause: cardiovascular disease (42%). Fallecimiento: 23 patients (6.8%). Age was higher (78.4 (6) vs. 67.8 (13.4), P<.001), higher ChI 9.8 (2.1) vs. 7.4 (2.5), P<.001). All deceased who received EP had chosen CT; 61% of deceased had at least one hospital admission vs. 39% alive (P<0.001). Cox regression: age and Charlson index were the predictive mortality variables.

CONCLUSIONS

The population of ACRF patients is elder, comorbid, with high rate hospitalizations rate. The PD election is higher than usual. The EP has been very useful tool and has favored the PD choice.

What do the US advanced kidney disease patients want? Comprehensive pre-ESRD Patient Education (CPE) and choice of dialysis modality

Improvement in Home Dialysis (HoD) utilizations as a mean to improve the patient reported and health services outcomes, has been a long-held goal of the providers and healthcare system in United States. However, measures to improve HoD rates have yielded limited success so far. Lack of patient awareness of chronic kidney disease (CKD) and its management options, is one of the important barriers against patient adoption of HoD. Despite ample evidence that Comprehensive pre-ESERD Patient Education (CPE) improves patient awareness and informed HoD choice, use of CPE among US advanced CKD patients is low. Need for significant resources, lack of validated data showing unequivocal and reproducible benefits, and the lack of validated CPE protocols proven to have consistent efficacy in improving not only patient awareness but also HoD rates in US population, are major limitations deterring adoption of CPE in routine clinical practice. We recently demonstrated that if a structured, protocol based CPE is integrated within the routine nephrology care for patients with advanced CKD, it substantially improves informed HoD choice and utilizations. However, this requires establishing CPE resources within each nephrology practice. Efficacy of a stand-alone CPE model, independent of clinical care, has not been examined till date. In this report we report the efficacy of our structured CPE protocol, delivered outside the realm of routine nephrology care-as a stand-alone patient education program, in a geographically distant region, and show that: when provided opportunity for informed dialysis choice, a majority of advanced CKD patients in US would prefer HoD. We also show that initiating CPE leads to accelerated growth in HoD utilizations and reduces disparities in HoD utilizations, goals for system improvements. Finally, the reproducibility of our structured CPE protocol with consistent efficacy data suggest that initiating such programs at institutional levels has the potential to improve informed dialysis selection and HoD rates across any similar large healthcare institute within US.

Valoración de la elección de tratamiento conservador en la enfermedad renal crónica

Introducción: El tratamiento conservador es una opción de tratamiento en la enfermedad renal crónica. Esta elección es decisión del paciente y/o familia. Objetivo: Analizar el proceso de elección de tratamiento conservador, identificar el perfil de paciente que lo elige, su supervivencia y quien comunica la elección. Material y Método: Estudio observacional, retrospectivo. Se incluyeron pacientes que eligieron tratamiento conservador entre 2010-2017. Los datos se obtuvieron de los registros de enfermería en historia clínica. Se recogieron variables demográficas, supervivencia, Índice de Comorbilidad de Charlson, índice de Barthel y valores de los pacientes utilizando la herramienta Tarjetas de valores. Resultados: Se estudiaron 95 pacientes: 41,05% hombres, edad media 82,36±9 años, 27,37% institucionalizados. La familia comunicó la elección en el 62,11% de los casos. La media del filtrado glomerular al inicio de la información fue 11,53±2,73ml/min, mediana del Charlson 8(13-3), Barthel 55 (100-0) puntos. En el proceso de evidenciar valores, la tarjeta más elegida fue “personal sanitario responsable del tratamiento”. La supervivencia media fue 496,19 días±553,8. Viven menos los hombres y los institucionalizados, sin diferencia significativa. El riesgo de muerte es mayor, al aumentar el Charlson y disminuir el filtrado glomerular (p=0,01). La familia comunicó la elección de seguir tratamiento conservador en el 62,11% de los casos. Conclusiones: El paciente que opta por tratamiento conservador es, una persona anciana, dependiente, con comorbilidades, supervivencia media en torno a 18 meses y en más de la mitad de los casos es la familia quien comunica la decisión de optar por ese tratamiento.

Risk Factors for Unplanned Dialysis Initiation: A Systematic Review of the Literature

Background:

Unplanned dialysis initiation is common in patients with chronic kidney disease (CKD).

Objective:

To determine common definitions and patient risk factors for unplanned dialysis.

Design:

Systematic review.

Setting:

MEDLINE, EMBASE, and the Cochrane Library were searched from inception to February 2018.

Patients:

Studies that included incident chronic dialysis patients or patients with CKD that cited a definition or examined risk factors for unplanned dialysis were included.

Measurements:

Definitions and criteria for unplanned dialysis reported across studies. Patient characteristics associated with unplanned dialysis.

Methods:

Two reviewers independently extracted data using a standardized data abstraction form and assessed study quality using a modified New Castle Ottawa Scale.

Results:

From 2797 citations, 48 met eligibility criteria. Reported definitions for unplanned dialysis were variable. Most publications cited dialysis initiation under emergency conditions and/or with a central venous catheter. The association of patient characteristics with unplanned dialysis was reported in 26 studies, 18 were retrospective and 21 included incident dialysis patients. The most common risk factors in univariate analyses were (number of studies) increased age (n = 7), cause of kidney disease (n = 6), presence of cardiovascular disease (n = 7), lower serum hemoglobin (n = 9), lower serum albumin (n = 10), higher serum phosphate (n = 6), higher serum creatinine or lower estimated glomerular filtration rate (eGFR) at dialysis initiation (n = 7), late referral (n = 5), lack of dialysis education (n = 6), and lack of follow-up in a predialysis clinic prior to dialysis initiation (n = 5). A minority of studies performed multivariable analyses (n = 10); the most common risk factors were increased age (n = 4), increased comorbidity score (n = 3), late referral (n = 5), and lower eGFR at dialysis initiation (n = 3).

Limitations:

Comparison of results across studies was limited by inconsistent definitions for unplanned dialysis. High-quality data on patient risk factors for unplanned dialysis are lacking.

Conclusions:

Well-designed prospective studies to determine modifiable risk factors are needed. The lack of a consensus definition for unplanned dialysis makes research and quality improvement initiatives in this area more challenging.

Shared decision-making in advanced chronic kidney disease in the elderly

Chronic kidney disease is common in people >65years of age. The development and improvement of dialysis techniques has allowed its generalisation to the entire population, when there is a situation of terminal nephropathy, without limit of use due to chronological age. Decision making in elderly patients with advanced chronic kidney disease is complex: in addition to renal parameters, both comorbidity and the presence of geriatric syndromes must be considered. This review addresses the management of information, the decision making of different treatment modalities that can be offered to these patients, and the time of initiation and/or withdrawal of dialysis.

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.

Developing and pilot testing a shared decision-making intervention for dialysis choice

BACKGROUND

Evidence is inconclusive on how best to guide the patient in decision-making around haemodialysis and peritoneal dialysis choice. International guidelines recommend involvement of the patient in the decision to choose the dialysis modality most suitable for the individual patient. Nevertheless, studies have shown lack of involvement of the patient in decision-making.

OBJECTIVES

To develop and pilot test an intervention for shared decision-making targeting the choice of dialysis modality.

METHODS

This study reflects the first two phases of a complex intervention design: phase 1, the development process and phase 2, feasibility and piloting. Because decision aids were a part of the intervention, the International Patient Decision Aid Standards were considered. The pilot test included both the intervention and the feasibility of the validated shared decision-making questionnaire (SDM Q9) and the Decision Quality Measure (DQM) applied to evaluate the intervention.

RESULTS

A total of 137 patients tested the intervention. After the intervention, 80% of the patients chose dialysis at home reflecting an increase of 23% in starting dialysis at home prior to the study. The SDM Q9 showed the majority of the patients experienced this intervention as shared decision-making.

CONCLUSION

An intervention based on shared decision-making supported by decision aids seemed to increase the number of patients choosing home dialysis. The SDM Q9 and DQM were feasible evaluation tools. Further research is needed to gain insight into the patients' experiences of involvement and the implications for their choice of dialysis modality.

The Choice of Renal Replacement Therapy (CORETH) project: dialysis patients' psychosocial characteristics and treatment satisfaction

Background

Until today, research has underestimated the role of psychosocial conditions as contributing factors to dialysis modality choice. The novelty within the Choice of Renal Replacement Therapy (CORETH) project (German Clinical Trials Register #DRKS00006350) is its focus on the multivariate associations between these aspects and their consecutive significance regarding treatment satisfaction (TS) in peritoneal dialysis (PD) versus haemodialysis (HD) patients. In this article, we present the baseline results of a multicentre study, which is supported by a grant from the German Ministry for Education and Research.

Methods

Six to 24 months after initiation of dialysis, 780 patients from 55 dialysis centres all over Germany were surveyed. The questionnaire addressed psychosocial, physical, socio-demographic and shared decision-making (SDM) aspects. Furthermore, cognitive functioning was tested. After indexing the measures, two propensity score-matched groups (n = 482) were compared in a first step, after having chosen PD or HD. In a second step, a moderated multiple regression (n = 445) was conducted to initially investigate the multivariate impact of patient characteristics on TS.

Results

In comparison with HD patients, PD patients were more satisfied with their treatment (P < 0.001), had a more autonomy-seeking personality (P = 0.04), had better cognitive functioning (P = 0.001), indicated more satisfying SDM (P < 0.001) and had a larger living space (P < 0.001). All patients were more satisfied when they had a good psychological state and received SDM. Especially in HD patients, TS was higher when the patient had a less autonomous personality, lower cognitive functioning, more social support, a poorer physical state and poorer socio-demographic conditions (R2 = 0.26).

Conclusions

Psychosocial characteristics play a major role in TS in dialysis patients. Within a multivariate approach, these factors are even more important than physical or environment-related factors. In practice, focusing on SDM and screening patient characteristics at an early stage can foster patients’ TS. Changes will be examined in a 1-year follow-up.

Role of telehealth in renal replacement therapy education

The prevalence of end-stage renal disease is rising in the United States, which bears high financial and public health burden. The most common modality of renal replacement therapy (RRT) in the United States is in-center hemodialysis. Many patients report lack of comprehensive and timely education about their treatment options, which may preclude them from participating in home-based dialysis therapies and kidney transplantation evaluation. While RRT education has traditionally been provided in-person, the rise of telehealth has afforded new opportunities to improve upon the status quo. For example, technology-augmented RRT education has recently been implemented into telehealth nephrology clinics, informational websites and mobile applications maintained by professional organizations, patient-driven forums on social media, and multimodality programs. The benefits of technology in RRT education are increased access for geographically isolated and/or medically frail patients, versatility of content delivery, information repetition to enhance knowledge retention, and interpersonal connection for educational content and emotional support. Challenges center around privacy and accuracy of information sharing, in addition to differential access to technology due to age and socioeconomic status. A review of available scholarly and social media resources suggests that technology-aided delivery of education about treatment options for end-stage renal disease provides an important alternative and/or supplemental resource for patients and families.

How a Bottom-Up Multi-Stakeholder Initiative Helped Transform the Renal Replacement Therapy Landscape in Spain

Healthcare reforms aim to change certain parts of the health system to improve quality of care, access, or financial sustainability. Traditionally, healthcare reform is understood as an action undertaken by a government at a national or local level. However, bottom-up changes can also lead to improvements in the health system. This paper describes the efforts of a coordinated multi-stakeholder advocacy group in Spain to promote a more cost-effective and patient-centred treatment for people receiving renal replacement therapy and assesses the outcomes of their advocacy for health system financing and patient satisfaction. It concludes that bottom-up initiatives do indeed have the power to change health policy and that policy makers should pay attention to their arguments.

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.

Effects of A Comprehensive Predialysis Education Program on the Home Dialysis Therapies: A Retrospective Cohort Study

Background

Improvement in the rates of home dialysis has been a desirable but difficult-to-achieve target for United States nephrology. Provision of comprehensive predialysis education (CPE) in institutes with established home dialysis programs has been shown to facilitate a higher home dialysis choice amongst chronic kidney disease (CKD) patients. Unfortunately, limited data have shown the efficacy of such programs in the United States or in institutes with small home dialysis (HoD) programs.

Methods

We report the retrospective findings examining the efficacy of a CPE program in the early period after its establishment, with reference to its impact on the choice and growth of a small HoD program.

Results

Over the initial 22 months since its inception, 108 patients were enrolled in the CPE clinic. Seventy percent of patients receiving CPE chose HoD, of which 55% chose peritoneal dialysis (PD) and 15% chose home hemodialysis (HHD). Rates of HoD choice were similar across the spectrum of socio-economic variables. Of just over half (54.6%) of those choosing to return for more than 1 session, 25.3%, changed their modality preference after the first education session, and nearly all reached a final modality selection by the end of the third visit. Initiation of the CPE program resulted in a 216% growth in HoD census over the same period and resulted in near doubling of HoD prevalence to 38% of all dialysis patients.

Conclusions

Comprehensive patient education improves the choice and prevalence of HoD therapies. We further find that 3 sessions of CPE may provide needed resources for the large majority of subjects for adequate decision-making.

Conflict when making decisions about dialysis modality

AIMS AND OBJECTIVES

To explore decisional conflict and its influencing factors on choosing dialysis modality in patients with end-stage renal diseases. The influencing factors investigated include demographics, predialysis education, dialysis knowledge, decision self-efficacy and social support.

BACKGROUND

Making dialysis modality decisions can be challenging for patients with end-stage renal diseases; there are pros and cons to both haemodialysis and peritoneal dialysis. Patients are often uncertain as to which one will be the best alternative for them. This decisional conflict increases the likelihood of making a decision that is not based on the patient's values or preferences and may result in undesirable postdecisional consequences. Addressing factors predisposing patients to decisional conflict helps to facilitate informed decision-making and then to improve healthcare quality.

DESIGN

A predictive correlational cross-sectional study design was used.

METHODS

Seventy patients were recruited from the outpatient dialysis clinics of two general hospitals in Taiwan. Data were collected with study questionnaires, including questions on demographics, dialysis modality and predialysis education, the Dialysis Knowledge Scale, the Decision Self-Efficacy scale, the Social Support Scale, and the Decisional Conflict Scale.

RESULTS

The mean score on the Decisional Conflict Scale was 29.26 (SD = 22.18). Decision self-efficacy, dialysis modality, predialysis education, professional support and dialysis knowledge together explained 76.4% of the variance in decisional conflict.

CONCLUSIONS

Individuals who had lower decision self-efficacy, did not receive predialysis education on both haemodialysis and peritoneal dialysis, had lower dialysis knowledge and perceived lower professional support reported higher decisional conflict on choosing dialysis modality.

RELEVANCE TO CLINICAL PRACTICE

When providing decisional support to predialysis stage patients, practitioners need to increase patients' decision self-efficacy, provide both haemodialysis and peritoneal dialysis predialysis education, increase dialysis knowledge and provide professional support.

American Society of Nephrology Quiz and Questionnaire 2015: ESRD/RRT

The Nephrology Quiz and Questionnaire remains an extremely popular session for attendees of the Annual Kidney Week Meeting of the American Society of Nephrology. During the 2015 meeting, the conference hall was once again overflowing with eager quiz participants. Topics covered by the experts included electrolyte and acid-base disorders, glomerular disease, ESRD and dialysis, and kidney transplantation. Complex cases representing each of these categories together with single best answer questions were prepared and submitted by the panel of experts. Before the meeting, training program directors of nephrology fellowship programs and nephrology fellows in the United States answered the questions through an internet-based questionnaire. During the live session, members of the audience tested their knowledge and judgment on the same series of case-oriented questions in a quiz. The audience compared their answers in real time using a cellphone application containing the answers of the nephrology fellows and training program directors. The results of the online questionnaire were displayed, and then, the quiz answers were discussed. As always, the audience, lecturers, and moderators enjoyed this highly educational session. This article recapitulates the session and reproduces selected content of educational value for the readers of the Clinical Journal of the American Society of Nephrology Enjoy the clinical cases and expert discussions.

Preparation of the Dialysis Access in Stages 4 and 5 CKD

Patients with Stages 4 and 5 CKD are optimally managed within a multidisciplinary care setting. This provides an opportunity to create a "patient centered" approach to renal replacement modality options and conservative care. The care team engages with the patient and caregivers to assist with the understanding of their health status, modality and vascular access selection, and overall living with the comorbidity of chronic illness. A systematic approach to provision of education, modality, and access selection, are in part, driven by the patient's expected survival and need for dialysis, the risks and benefits with different modalities, and access and adaptation to their preferences and home situations. Dialysis access education should be included in all education programs so that patients can consider risks and benefits of all modalities. Decision support interventions have been effective in reducing decisional conflict and informed values-based decision-making. For both hemodialysis and peritoneal dialysis, timing of the surgical referral and access creation should be individualized based on the rate of CKD progression, risk of complications, and ease of access to surgical services. The health care team should support the patients' decision balancing risks and benefits, as well as their lifestyle, values, beliefs, and preferences.

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.

Shared decision-making in chronic kidney disease: A retrospection of recently initiated dialysis patients in Germany

OBJECTIVE

To compare differences in shared decision-making (SDM) and treatment satisfaction (TS) between haemodialysis (HD) and peritoneal dialysis (PD) patients.

METHODS

6-24 months after initiation of dialysis, we surveyed 780 patients from throughout Germany (CORETH-project) regarding SDM, the reason for modality choice and TS. Data were compared between two age-, comorbidity-, education-, and employment status-matched groups (n=482).

RESULTS

PD patients rated all aspects of SDM more positively than did HD patients (total score: MPD=84.6, SD=24.1 vs. MHD=61.9, SD=37.3; p≤0.0001). The highest difference occurred for the item "announcement of a necessary decision" (delta=1.3 points on a 6-point Likert-scale). PD patients indicated their desire for independence as a motivator for choosing PD (65%), whereas HD patients were subject to medical decisions (23%) or wanted to rely on medical support (20%). We found positive correlations between SDM and TS (0.16≤r≤0.48; p≤0.0001).

CONCLUSION

Our findings increase awareness of a participatory nephrological counseling-culture and imply that SDM can pave the way for quality of life and treatment success for dialysis patients.

PRACTICE IMPLICATIONS

Practitioners can facilitate SDM by screening patient preferences at an early stage, being aware of biases in consultation, using easy terminology and encouraging passive patients to participate in the choice.