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.

Characterising patients and clinician experiences in comprehensive conservative care for kidney failure in Northern Queensland

BACKGROUND

Comprehensive conservative care (CCC) is an emerging treatment option in kidney failure (KF), but its implementation has been restricted by a limited understanding of KF populations, outcomes and clinician experiences.

AIMS

This pilot study aimed to investigate the characteristics of patients who are opting for (CCC) in North Queensland, Australia. It also aimed to highlight clinician factors impacting treatment discussions.

METHODS

It was an observational study facilitated through an online cross-sectional survey to nephrologists, nephrology advanced trainees and nurse practitioners working across North Queensland.

RESULTS

Study participants disagreed with the statement that patients commencing dialysis are more likely to have cardiac co-morbidities (46.7%), diabetes (40.0%), stroke (60.0%), liver disease (60.0%), chronic lung disease (53.3%), cognitive impairment (60.0%) and use of mobility aids (80.0%) than those commencing CCC. Conversely, they agreed that patients commencing dialysis are more likely to be independent (66.7%) and living in their private residence (40.0%). The median frailty score in patients choosing dialysis was 3.0 (interquartile range (IQR) 2.8-3.3), while that of patients selecting CCC was 4.5 (IQR 3.8-7.0). Our participants were aware of at least one clinical prognostication tool, and the one most frequently used was the 'Surprise Question' (46.2%, n = 6). Overall, our participants demonstrated low confidence (median 8.0%, IQR 6.0-8.0%) in facilitating CCC discussions.

CONCLUSION

Patients who are highly co-morbid and frail and have functional impairment are suitable candidates for CCC. More focus needs to be placed on objective prognostication of patients and the upskilling of clinicians to advocate for, and deliver, CCC.

Comprehensive conservative care for the management of advanced chronic kidney disease: overview and perspectives

Comprehensive “conservative care” is defined as any active therapeutic procedure for the management of stage 5 chronic kidney disease without recourse to dialysis. This therapeutic option is discussed in elderly, frail patients whose anticipated life expectancy is reduced with dialysis. The decision for conservative management primarily relies on an informed choice by the patient and his caregivers. This holistic approach, focused on quality of life, requires a multidisciplinary approach. The goals are to slow the progression of kidney disease, prevent complications, anticipate the risks of decompensation, provide support for the patient and his caregivers to maintain the best possible quality of life at home. This article describes the principles of conservative management, highlights various barriers to this care pathway, and proposes potential solutions.

Barriers to conservative care from patients' and nephrologists' perspectives: the CKD-REIN study

BACKGROUND

Conservative care is increasingly considered an alternative to kidney replacement therapy for kidney failure management, mostly among the elderly. We investigated its status and the barriers to its implementation from patients' and providers' perspectives.

METHODS

We analysed data from 1204 patients with advanced chronic kidney disease (CKD) [estimated glomerular filtration rate (eGFR) <30 mL/min/1.73 m2] enrolled at 40 nationally representative nephrology clinics (2013-16) who completed a self-administered questionnaire about the information they received and their preferred treatment option, including conservative care, if their kidneys failed. Nephrologists (n = 137) also reported data about their clinics' resources and practices regarding conservative care.

RESULTS

All participating facilities reported they were routinely able to offer conservative care, but only 37% had written protocols and only 5% had a person or team primarily responsible for it. Overall, 6% of patients were estimated to use conservative care. Among nephrologists, 82% reported they were fairly or extremely comfortable discussing conservative care, but only 28% usually or always offered this option for older (>75 years) patients approaching kidney failure. They used various terminology for this care, with conservative management and non-dialysis care mentioned most often. Among patients, 5% of those >75 years reported receiving information about this option and 2% preferring it.

CONCLUSIONS

Although reported by nephrologists to be widely available and easily discussed, conservative care is only occasionally offered to older patients, most of whom report they were not informed of this option. The lack of a person or team responsible for conservative care and unclear information appear to be key barriers to its implementation.

Shared Decision Making Among Older Adults With Advanced CKD

RATIONALE & OBJECTIVE

Older adults with advanced chronic kidney disease (CKD) face difficult decisions about dialysis initiation. Although shared decision making (SDM) can help align patient preferences and values with treatment options, the extent to which older patients with CKD experience SDM remains unknown.

STUDY DESIGN

A cross-sectional analysis of patient surveys examining decisional readiness, treatment options education, care partner support, and SDM.

SETTING & PARTICIPANTS

Adults aged 70 years or older from Boston, Chicago, San Diego, or Portland (Maine) with nondialysis advanced CKD.

PREDICTORS

Decisional readiness factors, treatment options education, and care partner support.

OUTCOMES

Primary: SDM measured by the 9-item Shared Decision Making Questionnaire (SDM-Q-9) instrument, with higher scores reflecting greater SDM. Exploratory: Factors associated with SDM.

ANALYTICAL APPROACH

We used multivariable linear regression models to examine the associations between SDM and predictors, controlling for demographic and health factors.

RESULTS

Among 350 participants, mean age was 78 ± 6 years, 58% were male, 13% identified as Black, and 48% had diabetes. Mean SDM-Q-9 score was 52 ± 28. SDM item agreement ranged from 41% of participants agreeing that "my doctor and I selected a treatment option together" to 73% agreeing that "my doctor told me that there are different options for treating my medical condition." In multivariable analysis adjusted for demographic characteristics, lower estimated glomerular filtration rate, and diabetes, being "well informed" and "very well informed" about kidney treatment options, having higher decisional certainty, and attendance at a kidney treatment options class were independently associated with higher SDM-Q-9 scores.

LIMITATIONS

The cross-sectional study design limits the ability to make temporal associations between SDM and the predictors.

CONCLUSIONS

Many older patients with CKD do not experience SDM when making dialysis decisions, emphasizing the need for greater access to and delivery of education for individuals with advanced CKD.

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.

Recommendations for Public Policy Changes to Improve Supportive Care for Seriously Ill Patients With Kidney Disease

National and international nephrology organizations have identified substantial unmet supportive care needs of patients with kidney disease and issued recommendations. In the United States, the most recent comprehensive effort to change kidney care, the Advancing American Kidney Health Initiative, does not explicitly address supportive care needs, although it attempts to implement more patient-centered care. This Perspective from the leaders of the Coalition for Supportive Care of Kidney Patients advocates for urgent policy changes to improve patient-centered care and the quality of life of seriously ill patients with kidney disease. It argues for the provision of supportive care by an interdisciplinary team led by nephrology clinicians to improve shared decision-making, advance care planning, pain and symptom management, the explicit offering of active medical management without dialysis as an option for patients who may not benefit from dialysis, and the removal by the Centers for Medicare & Medicaid Services and all other payors of financial and regulatory disincentives to quality supportive care, including hospice, for patients with or approaching kidney failure. It also emphasizes that all educational and accreditation programs for nephrology clinicians include kidney supportive care and its essential role in the care of patients with kidney disease.

Medical Record Documentation of Goals-of-Care Discussions Among Older Veterans With Incident Kidney Failure

RATIONALE & OBJECTIVE

Elicitation and documentation of patient preferences is at the core of shared decision making and is particularly important among patients with high anticipated mortality. The extent to which older patients with incident kidney failure undertake such discussions with their providers is unknown and its characterization was the focus of this study.

STUDY DESIGN

Retrospective cohort study.

SETTING & PARTICIPANTS

A random sample of veterans 67 years and older with incident kidney failure receiving care from the US Veterans Health Administration between 2005 and 2010.

EXPOSURES

Demographic and facility characteristics, as well as predicted 6-month mortality risk after dialysis initiation and documentation of resuscitation preferences.

OUTCOMES

Documented discussions of dialysis treatment and supportive care.

ANALYTICAL APPROACH

We reviewed medical records over the 2 years before incident kidney failure and up to 1 year afterward to ascertain the frequency and timing of documented discussions about dialysis treatment, supportive care, and resuscitation. Logistic regression was used to identify factors associated with these documented discussions.

RESULTS

The cohort of 821 veterans had a mean age of 80.9±7.2 years, and 37.2% had a predicted 6-month mortality risk>20% with dialysis. Documented discussions addressing dialysis treatment and resuscitation were present in 55.6% and 77.1% of patients, respectively. Those addressing supportive care were present in 32.4%. The frequency of documentation varied by mortality risk and whether the patient ultimately started dialysis. In adjusted analyses, the frequency and pattern of documentation were more strongly associated with geographic location and receipt of outpatient nephrology care than with patient demographic or clinical characteristics.

LIMITATIONS

Documentation may not fully reflect the quality and content of discussions, and generalizability to nonveteran patients is limited.

CONCLUSIONS

Among older veterans with incident kidney failure, discussions of dialysis treatment are decoupled from other aspects of advance care planning and are suboptimally documented, even among patients at high risk for mortality.