Patient and health care professional decision-making to commence and withdraw from renal dialysis: A systematic review of qualitative research

Background and objectives. To ensure decisions to start and stop dialysis in end stage kidney disease are shared, the factors that affect patients and healthcare professionals in making such decisions need to be understood. This systematic review aims to explore how and why different factors mediate the choices about dialysis treatment. Design, setting, participants, and measurements. Medline, Embase, CINAHL and PsychINFO were searched for qualitative studies of factors that affect patients’ and/or healthcare professionals’ decisions to commence or withdraw from dialysis. A thematic synthesis was conducted. Results. Of 494 articles screened, 12 studies (conducted: 1985-2014) were included. These involved 206 predominantly haemodialysis patients and 64 healthcare professionals (age range: patients 26-93; professionals 26-61 years). (i) Commencing dialysis: patients based their choice on ‘gut-instinct’ as well as deliberating the impact of treatment on quality-of-life and survival. How individuals coped with decision-making was influential, some tried to take control of the problem of progressive renal failure, whilst others focussed on controlling their emotions. Healthcare professionals weighed-up biomedical factors and were led by an instinct to prolong life. Both patients and healthcare professionals described feeling powerless. (ii) Dialysis withdrawal: Only after prolonged periods of time on dialysis, were the realities of life on dialysis fully appreciated and past choice questioned. By this stage however patients were physically treatment dependent. Similar to commencing dialysis, individuals coped with treatment withdrawal in a problem or emotion-controlling way. Families struggled to differentiate choosing versus allowing death. Healthcare teams avoided and queried discussions regarding dialysis withdrawal. Patients however missed the dialogue they experienced during pre-dialysis education. Conclusions. Decision-making in end stage kidney disease is complex, dynamic, and evolves over time and towards death. The factors at work are multi-faceted and operate differently for patients and health professionals. More training and research on open-communication and shared decision-making is needed

Patient involvement in selection of immunosuppressive regimen following transplantation.

Transplantation has made a considerable difference to the lives of many patients. However, feedback from patients indicates that although having a transplant is a hugely positive experience, having to take medications indefinitely is one of the biggest challenges. An ideal scenario would be no medications following a transplant. A compromise would be a minimal number of medications, with minimal restrictions and as simple a regimen as possible. Although there is considerable research going into fine-tuning the management of the immune response to a transplant, to date there is no universal regimen that enables patients to remain free of immunosuppressant medications, making adherence paramount to maintain long-term allograft survival. This paper reviews the available immunosuppressant regimens and factors influencing choice from both the clinician's and the patient's perspective. Factors influencing the decision-making process, such as quality of life for patients, their satisfaction, acceptability, and adherence uptake are reviewed. We conclude with a further assessment of patient choice as a factor in regimen selection, its impact on adherence, and its implications

A Primer on Quality Assurance and Performance Improvement for Interprofessional Chronic Kidney Disease Care: A Path to Joint Commission Certification.

Interprofessional care for chronic kidney disease facilitates the delivery of high quality, comprehensive care to a complex, at-risk population. Interprofessional care is resource intensive and requires a value proposition. Joint Commission certification is a voluntary process that improves patient outcomes, provides external validity to hospital administration and enhances visibility to patients and referring providers. This is a single-center, retrospective study describing quality assurance and performance improvement in chronic kidney disease, Joint Commission certification and quality outcomes. A total of 440 patients were included in the analysis. Thirteen quality indicators consisting of clinical and process of care indicators were developed and measured for a period of two years from 2009-2017. Significant improvements or at least persistently high performance were noted for key quality indicators such as blood pressure control (85%), estimation of cardiovascular risk (100%), measurement of hemoglobin A1c (98%), vaccination (93%), referrals for vascular access and transplantation (100%), placement of permanent dialysis access (61%), discussion of advanced directives (94%), online patient education (71%) and completion of office visit documentation (100%). High patient satisfaction scores (94-96%) are consistent with excellent quality of care provided