Enabling Patient Choice: The "Deciding Not to Decide" Option for Older Adults Facing Dialysis Decisions

Kidney replacement therapies in the older person: challenges to decide the best option

A multitude of challenges exist when supporting older adults in deciding on the optimal kidney replacement therapy (KRT), including frailty, comorbidity, cognitive impairment, dialysis modality, as well as local availability of services. The combination of these factors can determine treatment outcomes and quality of life (QoL), and as such the care of older people should be tailored to take these into account. Frailty in older people with chronic kidney disease (CKD) leads to higher rates of hospitalization, increased mortality, and a diminished QoL, while cognitive impairment, present in up to 50% of people with CKD, exacerbates these challenges and affects decision making. Dialysis, particularly haemodialysis, can accelerate physical and cognitive decline in frail older adults. Conversely, peritoneal dialysis (PD) presents a home-based alternative that may better support QoL, particularly for people wanting to prioritize treatment flexibility and independence. Assisted PD programmes have emerged as a valuable option for older people who cannot manage home-based care independently, improving access to KRT. Ultimately shared decision making should be employed when discussing KRT, incorporating patient goals, prognostic awareness, and QoL measures. There is also the emerging role of the geriatrician and the need for an integrated Comprehensive Geriatric Assessment. These elements support older adults to make informed choices that align with the individuals' values and health needs. In designing future health services to meet the needs of increasing numbers of older people, there needs to be increased access to assisted PD as well as multidisciplinary working to ensure patient-focused care surrounding KRT in older adults.

Uncovering Patient and Caregiver Goals for Goal-Concordant Care in Kidney Therapy Decisions

CONTEXT

In kidney therapy (KT) decisions, goal-concordant decision-making is recognized to be important, yet alignment with patients' goals during dialysis initiation is not always achieved.

OBJECTIVES

To explore older patients' and caregivers' hopes, goals, and fears related to KT and communication of these elements with members of their health care team.

METHODS

The study included patients aged ≥75 years with an estimated glomerular filtration rate ≤25 mL/min/1.73 m2 and their caregivers enrolled in a palliative care intervention for KT decision-making. Patients and caregivers were asked open-ended questions about their hopes, goals, and fears related to KT decisions. A survey assessed if patients shared their goals with members of their health care team. Qualitative data underwent content analysis, supplemented by demographic descriptive statistics.

RESULTS

The mean age of patients (n = 26) was 82.7 (±5.7) years, and caregivers (n = 15) had a mean age of 66.4 (±13.7) years. Among the participants, 13 patients and 11 caregivers were women, and 20 patients and 12 caregivers were White. Four themes emerged: (1) Maintaining things as good as they are by avoiding dialysis-related burdens; (2) seeking longevity while avoiding dialysis; (3) avoiding pain, symptoms, and body disfigurement; and (4) deferring decision-making. Patients rarely had shared their goals with the key members of their health care team.

CONCLUSION

Patients and caregivers prioritize maintaining quality of life, deferring decision-making regarding dialysis, and avoiding dialysis-related burdens. These goals are often unshared with their family and health care teams. Given our aging population, urgent action is needed to educate clinicians to actively explore and engage with patient goals in KT decision-making.

Palliative Care Acceptability for Older Adults with Advanced CKD: A Qualitative Study of Patients and Nephrologists

Rationale & Objective

Older adults in the United States often receive kidney therapies that do not align with their goals. Palliative care (PC) specialists are experts in assisting patients with the goals of care discussions and decision support, yet views and experiences of older patients who have received PC while contemplating kidney therapy decisions and their nephrologists remain unexplored. We evaluated the acceptability of CKD-EDU, a PC-based kidney therapy decision support intervention for adults ≥75 years of age.

Study Design

Qualitative study.

Setting & Participants

Two trained research coordinators interviewed patients and nephrologists participating in the CKD-EDU study.

Analytical Approach

Three coders analyzed the qualitative data using a thematic analysis approach to identify salient themes pertaining to intervention acceptability.

Results

Patients (n = 19; mean age: 80 years) viewed the PC intervention favorably, noting PC physicians' excellent communication skills, whole-person care, and decision-making support, including comprehension of prognostic information. Nephrologists (n = 24; mean age) welcomed PC assistance in decision making, support for conservative kidney management, and symptom management; a minority voiced concerns about third-party involvement in their practice.

Limitations

Single-center study.

Conclusions

Overall, patients and nephrologists generally found the PC intervention to be acceptable. Future testing of the current PC-based decision support intervention in a larger randomized controlled trial for older people navigating kidney therapy decisions is needed.

Providers' Experiences Discussing Care for Patients with Kidney Failure Who Forgo KRT: A National Qualitative Study

Background

Many nephrology providers express difficulty in discussing care options for patients who forgo KRT, which hampers their ability to help patients make decisions about their current and future treatment of kidney disease.

Methods

We conducted a qualitative study using interviews with a national sample of nephrology providers (i.e., physicians and advanced practice providers) who participated in US professional societies between July and December 2022. We performed a thematic analysis of interviews to identify emergent themes reflecting providers' experiences discussing care for patients who forgo KRT.

Results

There were 21 providers (age 54±13 years, female 81%, White 32%) who participated in interviews, of whom 43% were physicians and most (57%) practiced in academic settings. Three dominant themes emerged from interviews reflecting challenges to discussing the option to forgo KRT: (1) Inconsistent terminology: while providers sought to use terms to describe care for patients who forgo KRT that affirmed patients' decision, clearly conveyed that KRT would not be pursued, and were already familiar to patients and other providers, they disagreed about which terms satisfied these priorities; (2) blurred distinctions between KRT and its alternative: providers' descriptions of their care practices suggested that differences in their approaches to caring for patients who forgo KRT and those who are planning to pursue KRT could be opaque; and (3) deciphering patients' decision to forgo KRT: providers did not readily accept patients' expressed preferences to forgo KRT at face value and described using a variety of methods to assess whether patients would follow through with their decision.

Conclusions

Providers used different, inconsistent terms to describe care for patients who forgo KRT. They disagreed about what this care entailed and were uncertain about what patients might mean when they express not wanting to undergo KRT.

Shared decision making in elderly patients with kidney failure

'Elderly' is most commonly defined as an individual aged 65 years or older. However, this definition fails to account for the differences in genetics, lifestyle and overall health that contribute to significant heterogeneity among the elderly beyond chronological age. As the world population continues to age, the prevalence of chronic diseases, including chronic kidney disease (CKD), is increasing and CKD frequently progresses to kidney failure. Moreover, frailty represents a multidimensional clinical entity highly prevalent in this population, which needs to be adequately assessed to inform and support medical decisions. Selecting the optimal treatment pathway for the elderly and frail kidney failure population, be it haemodialysis, peritoneal dialysis or conservative kidney management, is complex because of the presence of comorbidities associated with low survival rates and impaired quality of life. Management of these patients should involve a multidisciplinary approach including doctors from various specialties, nurses, psychologists, dieticians and physiotherapists. Studies are mostly retrospective and observational, lacking adjustment for confounders or addressing selection and indication biases, making it difficult to use these data to guide treatment decisions. Throughout this review we discuss the difficulty of making a one-size-fits-all recommendation for the clinical needs of older patients with kidney failure. We advocate that a research agenda for optimization of the critical issues we present in this review be implemented. We recommend prospective studies that address these issues, and systematic reviews incorporating the complementary evidence of both observational and interventional studies. Furthermore, we strongly support a shared decision-making process matching evidence with patient preferences to ensure that individualized choices are made regarding dialysis vs conservative kidney management, dialysis modality and optimal vascular access.

Alignment Among Patient, Caregiver, and Health Care Provider Perspectives on Hemodialysis Vascular Access Decision-Making: A Qualitative Study

Background

Updates to the Kidney Disease Outcomes Quality Initiative Clinical Practice Guideline for Vascular Access emphasize the "right access, in the right patient, at the right time, for the right reasons." Although this implies a collaborative approach, little is known about how patients, their caregivers, and health care providers engage in vascular access (VA) decision-making.

Objective

To explore how the perspectives of patients receiving hemodialysis, their caregivers, and hemodialysis care team align and diverge in relation to VA selection.

Design

Qualitative descriptive study.

Setting

Five outpatient hemodialysis centers in Calgary, Alberta.

Participants

Our purposive sample included 19 patients receiving maintenance hemodialysis, 2 caregivers, and 21 health care providers (7 hemodialysis nurses, 6 VA nurses, and 8 nephrologists).

Methods

We conducted semi-structured interviews with consenting participants. Using an inductive thematic analysis approach, we coded transcripts in duplicate and characterized themes addressing our research objective.

Results

While participants across roles shared some perspectives related to VA decision-making, we identified areas where views diverged. Areas of alignment included (1) optimizing patient preparedness-acknowledging decisional readiness and timing, and (2) value placed on trusting relationships with the kidney care team-respecting decisional autonomy with guidance. Perspectives diverged in the following aspects: (1) differing VA priorities and preferences-patients' emphasis on minimizing disruptions to normalcy contrasted with providers' preferences for fistulas and optimizing biomedical parameters of dialysis; (2) influence of personal and peer experience-patients preferred pragmatic, experiential knowledge, whereas providers emphasized informational credibility; and (3) endpoints for VA review-reassessment of VA decisions was prompted by access dissatisfaction for patients and a medical imperative to achieve a functioning access for health care providers.

Limitations

Participation was limited to individuals comfortable communicating in English and from urban, in-center hemodialysis units. Few informal caregivers of people receiving hemodialysis and younger patients participated in this study.

Conclusions

Although patients, caregivers, and healthcare providers share perspectives on important aspects of VA decisions, conflicting priorities and preferences may impact the decisional outcome. Findings highlight opportunities to bridge knowledge and readiness gaps and integrate shared decision-making in the VA selection process.

Comprehensive conservative care: what doctors say, what patients hear

The demographic evolution of patients with advanced chronic kidney disease (CKD) has led to the advent of an alternative treatment option to kidney replacement therapy in the past couple of decades. The KDIGO controversies on Kidney Supportive Care called this approach "comprehensive conservative care" (CCC) and defined it as planned holistic patient-centered care for patients with CKD stage 5 that does not include dialysis. Although the benefit of this treatment option is now well-recognized, especially for the elderly, and comorbid and frail patients, its development remains limited in practice. While shared decision-making and advance care planning represent the cornerstones of the CCC approach, one of the main barriers in its development is the perfectible communication between nephrologists and patients, but also between all healthcare professionals involved in the care of advanced CKD patients. As a result, a significant gap has opened up between what doctors say and what patients hear. Indeed, although CCC is reported by nephrologists to be widely available in their facilities, few of their patients say that they have actually heard of it. The objectives of this review are to explore discrepancies between what doctors say and what patients hear, to identify the factors underlying this gap, and to formulate practical proposals for narrowing this gap in practice.

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

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

What does the French REIN registry tell us about Stage 4-5 CKD care in older adults?

The aim of this paper is to illustrate all the clinical epidemiology searches made within the French network REIN to improve CKD stage 4-5 care in older adults. We summarize various studies describing clinical practice, care organization, prognosis and health economics evaluation in order to develop personalized care plans and decision-making tools. In France, for 20 years now, various databases have been mobilized including the national REIN registry which includes all patients receiving dialysis or transplantation. REIN data are indirectly linked to the French administrative healthcare database. They are also pooled with data from the PSPA cohort, a multicenter prospective cohort study of patients aged 75 or over with advanced CKD, monitored for 5 years, and the CKD-REIN clinical-based prospective cohort which included 3033 patients with CKD stage 3-4 from 2013 to 2016. During our various research work, we identified heterogeneous trajectories specific to this growing older population, raising ethical, organizational and economic issues. Renal registries will help clinicians, health providers and policy-makers if suitable decision- making tools are developed and validated.

Dialysis Access Considerations in Kidney Palliative Care

In this review, we discuss common challenges at the interface between dialysis access planning, prognostication, and patient-centered decision making. Particularly for patients whose survival benefit from dialysis is attenuated by advanced age or other serious illness, knowing the potential complications and anticipated frequency of access procedures is essential for patients and families to be able to conceptualize what life on dialysis will look like. Although starting dialysis with a functioning graft or fistula is associated with reduced infection rates, mortality, hospitalizations, and cost compared with a central venous catheter, these benefits must be weighed against the chance that early access placement in an elderly or seriously ill patient is an unnecessary surgery because the chronic kidney disease never progresses, the patient dies before developing an indication to start dialysis, or, the patient prefers conservative kidney management over dialysis. Kidney palliative care is a growing subspecialty of nephrology focused on helping seriously ill patients navigate complex medical decisions, and may be useful for intensive goals-of-care discussions about treatment and access options for patients with limited anticipated survival because of age or other serious illness.

Physical Resilience Phenotype Trajectories in Incident Hemodialysis: Characterization and Mortality Risk Assessment

Introduction

Methods

Results

Conclusion