Dataset Information

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

ABSTRACT: INTRODUCTION:Patients with advanced kidney disease (AKD) have to make difficult treatment modality decisions as their disease progresses towards end-stage kidney disease. International guidelines in nephrology suggest shared decision-making (SDM) to help patients make timely treatment modality decisions that align with their values and preferences. However, systematic reviews or scoping reviews on these SDM interventions and on their reported use or outcomes are lacking. This limits the adoption of SDM in clinical practice and hampers further research and development on the subject. Our aim is to provide a comprehensive and up-to-date overview of these SDM interventions by means of a scoping review of the literature. Scoping reviews can provide a broad overview of a topic, identify gaps in the research knowledge base and report on the types of evidence that address and inform practices. This paper presents our study protocol. METHODS AND ANALYSIS:The proposed scoping review will be performed in accordance with the Joanna Briggs Institute's (JBI) methodology for scoping reviews. It will cover both qualitative and quantitative scientific literature, as well as the grey literature on SDM interventions for treatment modality decisions in AKD. Only literature written in English will be considered for inclusion. Two independent reviewers will participate in an iterative process of screening the literature, paper selection and data extraction. Disagreements between the reviewers will be resolved by discussion until consensus is reached or after consultation with the research team when needed. Results will be reported with descriptive statistics and diagrammatic or tabular displayed information, accompanied by narrative summaries as explained in the JBI guidelines. ETHICS AND DISSEMINATION:Ethical approval for the conduct of this study is not required. We will analyse previously collected data for the proposed scoping review. Our results will be published in a peer-reviewed journal and disseminated through conferences and/or seminars.

SUBMITTER: Engels N

PROVIDER: S-EPMC7050317 | biostudies-literature | 2020 Feb

REPOSITORIES: biostudies-literature

ACCESS DATA

Publications

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

Engels Noel N de Graav Gretchen G van der Nat Paul P van den Dorpel Marinus M Bos Willem Jan WJ Stiggelbout Anne M AM

BMJ open 20200227 2

<h4>Introduction</h4>Patients with advanced kidney disease (AKD) have to make difficult treatment modality decisions as their disease progresses towards end-stage kidney disease. International guidelines in nephrology suggest shared decision-making (SDM) to help patients make timely treatment modality decisions that align with their values and preferences. However, systematic reviews or scoping reviews on these SDM interventions and on their reported use or outcomes are lacking. This limits the ...[more]

PMID: 32111615

Similar Datasets

Project description:OBJECTIVES:This review summarises the information available for clinicians counselling older patients with kidney failure about treatment options, focusing on prognosis, quality of life, the lived experiences of treatment and the information needs of older adults. DESIGN:We followed the Joanna Briggs Institute Methodology for Scoping Reviews. The final report conforms to the PRISMA-ScR guidelines. DATA SOURCES:PubMed, PsycINFO, CINAHL, Embase, Scopus, Web of Science, TRIP and online repositories (for dissertations, guidelines and recommendations from national renal associations). ELIGIBILITY CRITERIA FOR INCLUSION:Articles in English studying older adults with advanced kidney disease (estimated glomerular filtration rate <30?mL/min/1.73?m2); published between January 2000 and August 2018. Articles not addressing older patients separately or those comparing between dialysis modalities were excluded. DATA EXTRACTION AND SYNTHESIS:Two independent reviewers screened articles for inclusion and grouped them by topic as per the objectives above. Quantitative data were presented as tables and charts; qualitative themes were identified and described. RESULTS:248 articles were included after screening 15?445 initial results. We summarised prognostic scores and compared dialysis and non-dialytic care. We highlighted potentially modifiable factors affecting quality of life. From reports of the lived experiences, we documented the effects of symptoms, of ageing, the feelings of disempowerment and the need for adaptation. Exploration of information needs suggested that patients want to participate in decision-making and need information, in simple terms, about survival and non-survival outcomes. CONCLUSION:When discussing treatment options, validated prognostic scores are useful. Older patients with multiple comorbidities do not do well with dialysis. The modifiable factors contributing to the low quality of life in this cohort deserve attention. Older patients suffer a high symptom burden and functional deterioration; they have to cope with significant life changes and feelings of disempowerment. They desire greater involvement and more information about illness, symptoms and what to expect with treatment.

Project description:BackgroundCurrent healthcare trends emphasize the use of shared decision-making (SDM) for renal replacement treatment (RRT) in patients with chronic kidney disease (CKD). This is crucial to understand the relationship between SDM and illness perception of CKD patients. Few studies have focused on SDM and illness perception status of CKD patients and the impact of illness perception on RRT after SDM.MethodsIn this cross-sectional study, we used a questionnaire with purposive sampling from March 2019 to February 2020 at the nephrology outpatient department of a medical center in southern Taiwan. The nephrology medical team in this study used the SHARE five-step model of SDM to communicate with the patients about RRT and Brief Illness Perception Questionnaire (BIPQ) was applied to evaluate illness perception of these patients at the beginning of SDM. According to the SDM decision time, the study participants were classified general and delayed SDM groups. The distribution between SDM groups was estimated using independent two sample t-test, chi-squared test or Fisher's exact test. The correlation between illness perception and SDM decision time were illustrated and evaluated using Spearman's correlation test. A p-value less than 0.05 is statistically significant.ResultsA total of 75 patients were enrolled in this study. The average time to make a dialysis decision after initiating SDM was 166.2 ± 178.1 days. 51 patients were classified as general group, and 24 patients were classified as delayed group. The median SDM decision time of delayed group were significantly longer than general group (56 vs. 361 days, P < 0.001). Our findings revealed that delayed group was significantly characterized with not created early surgical assess (delayed vs. general: 66.7% vs. 27.5%, p = 0.001) compared to general group. The average BIPQ score was 54.0 ± 8.1 in our study. We classified the patients into high and low illness perception group according to the median score of BIPQ. The total score of BIPQ in overall participants might increase by the SDM decision time (rho = 0.83, p = 0.830) and the linear regression line also showed consistent trends between BIPQ and SDM decision time in correspond cohorts. However, no statistically significant findings were found.ConclusionsThe patients with advanced chronic kidney disease took an average of five and a half months to make a RRT decision after undergoing SDM. Although there is no statistical significance, the trend of illness perception seems correlated with decision-making time. The stronger the illness perception, the longer the decision-making time. Furthermore, shorter decision times may be associated with earlier establishment of surgical access. We need more research exploring the relationship between illness perception and SDM for RRT in CKD patients.

Project description:BackgroundShared decision-making (SDM) is a collaborative process whereby patients and clinicians jointly deliberate on the best treatment option that takes into account patients' preferences and values. In breast cancer care, different treatment options have become available to patients in the last decade. Various interventions, including patient decision aids (PtDAs), have been designed to promote SDM in this disease area. This study aimed at investigating the factors that influence the successful adoption and implementation of SDM interventions in real-world healthcare delivery settings.MethodsA scoping review of scientific and grey literature was conducted for the period 2006-2021 to analyse the support for SDM interventions and their adoption in breast cancer clinical practice. The interpretation of findings was based on the Practical, Robust Implementation and Sustainability Model (PRISM) for integrating research findings into practice.ResultsOverall, 19 studies were included for data synthesis, with more than 70% published since 2017. The availability of SDM tools does not automatically translate into their actual use in clinical settings. Factors related to users' co-creation, the clinical team's attitude and knowledge, organisational support and regulatory provisions facilitate the adoption of SDM interventions. However, overlooking aspects such as the re-organisation of care pathways, patient characteristics, and assigning of resources (human, financial, and facilities) can hinder implementation efforts.ConclusionsCompared to the mounting evidence on the efficacy of SDM interventions, knowledge to support their sustained implementation in daily care is still limited, albeit results show an increasing interest in strategies that facilitate their uptake in breast cancer care over time. These findings highlight different strategies that can be used to embed SDM interventions in clinical practice. Future work should investigate which approaches are more effective in light of organisational conditions and external factors, including an evaluation of costs and healthcare system settings.

Dataset Information

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

Publications

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

Similar Datasets

OmicsDI is part of the ELIXIR infrastructure

Tweets