Dataset Information

Recommendations for the Care of Patients Receiving Conservative Kidney Management: Focus on Management of CKD and Symptoms.

ABSTRACT: Conservative kidney management is increasingly accepted as an appropriate treatment option for patients with eGFR category 5 CKD who are unlikely to benefit from dialysis and/or who choose a nondialysis care option. However, there remains great variation in the delivery of their care. As part of the development of a conservative kidney management pathway that is undergoing evaluation, a set of recommendations specific to conservative kidney management for managing the complications of CKD and common symptoms was developed. These recommendations focus on the patient's values and preferences and aim to optimize comfort and quality of life. Explanations for the interventions are provided to support the shared decision-making process between health care professionals, patients, and family members. The recommendations generally emphasize the preservation of function (cognitive, physical, and kidney) and address symptom burden, acknowledging that management priorities can change over time. The recommendations should be used in conjunction with other key elements of conservative kidney management, including clear communication and shared decision making for choosing conservative kidney management, advance care planning, and psychosocial support. Although there are limitations to the existing evidence specific to conservative kidney management, these recommendations are intended as a starting point toward reaching consensus and generating further evidence.

SUBMITTER: Davison SN

PROVIDER: S-EPMC6450361 | biostudies-literature | 2019 Apr

REPOSITORIES: biostudies-literature

ACCESS DATA

Publications

Recommendations for the Care of Patients Receiving Conservative Kidney Management: Focus on Management of CKD and Symptoms.

Davison Sara N SN Tupala Beth B Wasylynuk Betty Ann BA Siu Valerie V Sinnarajah Aynharan A Triscott Jean J

Clinical journal of the American Society of Nephrology : CJASN 20190228 4

Conservative kidney management is increasingly accepted as an appropriate treatment option for patients with eGFR category 5 CKD who are unlikely to benefit from dialysis and/or who choose a nondialysis care option. However, there remains great variation in the delivery of their care. As part of the development of a conservative kidney management pathway that is undergoing evaluation, a set of recommendations specific to conservative kidney management for managing the complications of CKD and co ...[more]

PMID: 30819670

Similar Datasets

Project description:IntroductionPredialysis education for patients with advanced chronic kidney disease (CKD) typically focuses narrowly on haemodialysis and peritoneal dialysis as future treatment options. However, patients who are older or seriously ill may not want to pursue dialysis and/or may not benefit from this treatment. Conservative kidney management, a reasonable alternative treatment, and advance care planning (ACP) are often left out of patient education and shared decision-making. In this study, we will pilot an educational intervention (Conservative Kidney Management Options and Advance Care Planning Education-COPE) to improve knowledge of conservative kidney management and ACP among patients with advanced CKD who are older and/or have poor functional status.Methods and analysisThis is a single-centre pilot randomised controlled trial at an academic centre in Philadelphia, PA. Eligible patients will have: age ?70 years and/or poor functional status (as defined by Karnofsky Performance Index Score <70), advanced CKD (estimated glomerular filtration rate<20?mL/min/1.73?m2), prefer to speak English during clinical encounters and self-report as black or white race. Enrolled patients will be randomised 1:1, with stratification by race, to receive enhanced usual care or usual care and in-person education about conservative kidney management and ACP (COPE). The primary outcome is change in knowledge of CKM and ACP. We will also explore intervention feasibility and acceptability, change in communication of preferences and differences in the intervention's effects on knowledge and communication of preferences by race. We will assess outcomes at baseline, immediately post-education and at 2 and 12 weeks.Ethics and disseminationThis protocol has been approved by the Institutional Review Board at the University of Pennsylvania. We will obtain written informed consent from all participants. The results from this work will be presented at academic conferences and disseminated through peer-reviewed journals.Trial registration numberThis trial is registered at ClinicalTrials.gov under NCT03229811.

Project description:BACKGROUND:Although dialysis may not provide a large survival benefit for older patients with kidney failure, few are informed about conservative management. Barriers and facilitators to discussions about conservative management and nephrologists' decisions to present the option of conservative management may vary within the nephrology provider community. STUDY DESIGN:Interview study of nephrologists. SETTING & PARTICIPANTS:National sample of US nephrologists sampled based on sex, years in practice, practice type, and region. METHODOLOGY:Qualitative semistructured interviews continued until thematic saturation. ANALYTICAL APPROACH:Thematic and narrative analysis of recorded and transcribed interviews. RESULTS:Among 35 semistructured interviews with nephrologists from 18 practices, 37% described routinely discussing conservative management ("early adopters"). 5 themes and related subthemes reflected issues that influence nephrologists' decisions to discuss conservative management and their approaches to these discussions: struggling to define nephrologists' roles (determining treatment, instilling hope, and improving patient symptoms), circumventing end-of-life conversations (contending with prognostic uncertainty, fearing emotional backlash, jeopardizing relationships, and tailoring information), confronting institutional barriers (time constraints, care coordination, incentives for dialysis, and discomfort with varied conservative management approaches), conservative management as "no care," and moral distress. Nephrologists' approaches to conservative management discussions were shaped by perceptions of their roles and by a common view of conservative management as no care. Their willingness to pursue conservative management was influenced by provider- and institutional-level barriers and experiences with older patients who regretted or had been harmed by dialysis (moral distress). Early adopters routinely discussed conservative management as a way of relieving moral distress, whereas others who were more selective in discussing conservative management experienced greater distress. LIMITATIONS:Participants' views are likely most transferable to large academic medical centers, due to oversampling of academic clinicians. CONCLUSIONS:Our findings clarify how moral distress serves as a catalyst for conservative management discussion and highlight points of intervention and mechanisms potentially underlying low conservative management use in the United States.

Project description:Background and objectivesDespite the potential benefits of conservative management, providers rarely discuss it as a viable treatment option for patients with advanced CKD. This survey was to describe the knowledge, attitudes, and practices of nephrologists and primary care providers regarding conservative management for patients with advanced CKD in the United States.Design, setting, participants, & measurementsWe developed a questionnaire on the basis of a literature review to include items assessing knowledge, attitudes, and self-reported practices of conservative management for patients with advanced CKD. Potential participants were identified using the American Medical Association Physician Masterfile. We then conducted a web-based survey between April and May of 2015.ResultsIn total, 431 (67.6% nephrologists and 32.4% primary care providers) providers completed the survey for a crude response rate of 2.7%. The respondents were generally white, men, and in their 30s and 40s. Most primary care provider (83.5%) and nephrology (78.2%) respondents reported that they were likely to discuss conservative management with their older patients with advanced CKD. Self-reported number of patients managed conservatively was >11 patients for 30.6% of nephrologists and 49.2% of primary care providers. Nephrologists were more likely to endorse difficulty determining whether a patient with CKD would benefit from conservative management (52.8% versus 36.2% of primary care providers), whereas primary care providers were more likely to endorse limited information on effectiveness (49.6% versus 24.5% of nephrologists) and difficulty determining eligibility for conservative management (42.5% versus 14.3% of nephrologists). There were also significant differences in knowledge between the groups, with primary care providers reporting more uncertainty about relative survival rates with conservative management compared with different patient groups.ConclusionsBoth nephrologists and primary care providers reported being comfortable with discussing conservative management with their patients. However, both provider groups identified lack of United States data on outcomes of conservative management and characteristics of patients who would benefit from conservative management as barriers to recommending conservative management in practice.

Project description:BackgroundOlder adults with chronic kidney disease stage 5 may be offered a choice between dialysis and conservative management. Few studies have explored patients' reasons for choosing conservative management and none have compared the views of those who have chosen different treatments across renal units.Study designQualitative study with semistructured interviews.Settings & participantsPatients 75 years or older recruited from 9 renal units. Units were chosen to reflect variation in the scale of delivery of conservative management.MethodologySemistructured interviews audiorecorded and transcribed verbatim.Analytical approachData were analyzed using thematic analysis.Results42 interviews were completed, 4 to 6 per renal unit. Patients were sampled from those receiving dialysis, those preparing for dialysis, and those choosing conservative management. 14 patients in each group were interviewed. Patients who had chosen different treatments held varying beliefs about what dialysis could offer. The information that patients reported receiving from clinical staff differed between units. Patients from units with a more established conservative management pathway were more aware of conservative management, less often believed that dialysis would guarantee longevity, and more often had discussed the future with staff. Some patients receiving conservative management reported that they would have dialysis if they became unwell in the future, indicating the conditional nature of their decision.LimitationsRecruitment of older adults with frailty and comorbid conditions was difficult and therefore transferability of findings to this population is limited.ConclusionsOlder adults with chronic kidney disease stage 5 who have chosen different treatment options have contrasting beliefs about the likely outcomes of dialysis for those who are influenced by information provided by renal units. Supporting renal staff in discussing conservative management as a valid alternative to dialysis for a subset of patients will aid informed decision making. There is a need for better evidence about conservative management to support shared decision making for older people with chronic kidney failure.

Dataset Information

Recommendations for the Care of Patients Receiving Conservative Kidney Management: Focus on Management of CKD and Symptoms.

Publications

Recommendations for the Care of Patients Receiving Conservative Kidney Management: Focus on Management of CKD and Symptoms.

Similar Datasets

OmicsDI is part of the ELIXIR infrastructure

Tweets