Reflections on education interventions and optimal dialysis starts

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.

Educational Support Around Dialysis Modality Decision Making in Patients With Chronic Kidney Disease: Qualitative Study

BACKGROUND

Patients with chronic kidney disease (CKD) are asked to choose a renal replacement therapy or conservative management. Education and knowledge transfer play key roles in this decision-making process, yet they remain a partially met need.

OBJECTIVE

We sought to understand the dialysis modality decision-making process through exploration of the predialysis patient experience to better inform the educational process.

DESIGN

Qualitative descriptive study.

SETTING

Kidney Care Centre of London Health Sciences Centre in London, Ontario, Canada.

PATIENTS

Twelve patients with CKD, with 4 patients on in-center hemodialysis, home hemodialysis, and peritoneal dialysis, respectively.

MEASUREMENTS

Not applicable.

METHODS

We conducted semistructured interviews with each participant, along with any family members who were present. Interviews were transcribed verbatim. Conventional content analysis was used to analyze the transcripts for common themes. Representative quotes were decided via team consensus. A patient collaborator was part of the research team.

RESULTS

Three themes influenced dialysis modality decision making: (i) Patient Factors: individualization, autonomy, and emotions; (ii) Educational Factors: tailored education, time and preparation, and available resources; and (iii) Support Systems: partnership with health care team, and family and friends.

LIMITATIONS

Sample not representative of wider CKD population. Limited number of eligible patients. Poor recall may affect findings.

CONCLUSIONS

Modality decision making is a complex process, influenced by the patient's health literacy, willingness to accept information, predialysis lifestyle, support systems, and values. Patient education requires the flexibility to individualize the delivery of a standardized CKD curriculum in partnership with a patient-health care team, to fulfill the goal of informed, shared decision making.

Recent analysis of status and outcomes of peritoneal dialysis in the Tokai area of Japan: the second report of the Tokai peritoneal dialysis registry

BACKGROUND

Early withdrawal within 3 years after starting peritoneal dialysis (PD) and PD-related peritonitis have been major obstacles preventing increases in the population of PD patients. To address these problems, we implemented education programs for medical staff. This study analyzed the recent status and outcomes of PD therapy, focusing on findings such as the incidence and prognosis of peritonitis as of 5 years after our last study.

METHODS

We investigated background, laboratory data and status of PD therapy, reasons for withdrawal from PD and incidental statements on peritonitis from 2010 to 2012 (R2), and compared findings with those from our last study of 2005-2007 (R1).

RESULTS

Early PD therapy withdrawal in R2 clearly improved to 44.7 %, compared with 50.9 % in R1. Peritonitis incidence improved slightly from once per 42.8 months/patient in R1 to once per 47.3 months/patient in R2. Notably, PD-related peritonitis as a cause of mortality improved markedly in R2, but outcomes of PD-related peritonitis did not change significantly between R1 and R2. In contrast, social problems increased as a reason for withdrawal from PD therapy.

CONCLUSION

Our efforts at education might have been useful for improving early withdrawal from PD and deaths attributable to PD-related peritonitis. However, since improvements to incidence of PD-related peritonitis were limited by education, further improvement in PD-related peritonitis incidence requires development of new sterilized connecting systems during PD-bag exchanges to decrease PD-related peritonitis opportunities. Construction of medical support systems to address social problems is required to maintain long-term PD therapy.

Factors influencing access to education, decision making, and receipt of preferred dialysis modality in unplanned dialysis start patients

OBJECTIVES

Unplanned dialysis start (UPS) leads to worse clinical outcomes than planned start, and only a minority of patients ever receive education on this topic and are able to make a modality choice, particularly for home dialysis. This study aimed to determine the predictive factors for patients receiving education, making a decision, and receiving their preferred modality choice in UPS patients following a UPS educational program (UPS-EP).

METHODS

The Offering Patients Therapy Options in Unplanned Start (OPTiONS) study examined the impact of the implementation of a specific UPS-EP, including decision support tools and pathway improvement on dialysis modality choice. Linear regression models were used to examine the factors predicting three key steps: referral and receipt of UPS-EP, modality decision making, and actual delivery of preferred modality choice. A simple economic assessment was performed to examine the potential benefit of implementing UPS-EP in terms of dialysis costs.

RESULTS

The majority of UPS patients could receive UPS-EP (214/270 patients) and were able to make a decision (177/214), although not all patients received their preferred choice (159/177). Regression analysis demonstrated that the initial dialysis modality was a predictive factor for referral and receipt of UPS-EP and modality decision making. In contrast, age was a predictor for referral and receipt of UPS-EP only, and comorbidity was not a predictor for any step, except for myocardial infarction, which was a weak predictor for lower likelihood of receiving preferred modality. Country practices predicted UPS-EP receipt and decision making. Economic analysis demonstrated the potential benefit of UPS-EP implementation because dialysis modality costs were associated with modality distribution driven by patient preference.

CONCLUSION

Education and decision support can allow UPS patients to understand their options and choose dialysis modality, and attention needs to be focused on ensuring equity of access to educational programs, especially for the elderly. Physician practice and culture across units/countries is an important predictor of UPS patient management and modality choice independent of patient-related factors. Additional work is required to understand and improve patient pathways to ensure that modality preference is enacted. There appears to be a cost benefit of delivering education, supporting choice, and ensuring that the choice is enacted in UPS patients.