Author:
van Dulmen Sandra,Roodbeen Ruud,Schulze Lotte,Prantl Karen,Rookmaaker Maarten,van Jaarsveld Brigit,Noordman Janneke,Abrahams Alferso
Abstract
Abstract
Background
Given the complexity and variety in treatment options for advanced chronic kidney disease (CKD), shared decision-making (SDM) can be a challenge. SDM is needed for making decisions that best suit patients’ needs and their medical and living situations. SDM might be experienced differently by different stakeholders. This study aimed to explore clinical practice and perspectives on SDM in nephrology from three angles: observers, patients and healthcare professionals (HCPs).
Methods
An explanatory sequential mixed methods design was used. First, in the quantitative part of the study, outpatient consultations with patients with advanced chronic kidney disease (eGFR < 20 ml/min) were video recorded and SDM was assessed using the OPTION5 instrument. Subsequently, in the qualitative part, patients and HCPs reflected on their own SDM behaviour during individual stimulated recall interviews which were analysed using deductive thematic content analysis.
Results
Twenty nine consultations were recorded and observed in seven hospitals. The mean SDM score was 51 (range 25–80), indicating that SDM was applied to a moderate extent. The stimulated recall interviews with patients showed that they rely on the information provision and opinion of HCPs, expect consistency and support, and desire a proactive role. They also expect to be questioned by the HCP about their SDM preferences. HCPs said they were willing to incorporate patients’ preferences in SDM, as long as there are no medical contraindications. They also prefer patients to take a prominent role in SDM. HCPs ascribe various roles to themselves in supporting patients’ decision-making.
Conclusions
Although SDM was applied by HCPs to a moderate extent, improvement is needed, especially in helping patients get the information they need and in making sure that every patient is involved in SDM. This is even more important given the complex nature of the disease and the relatively high prevalence of limited health literacy among patients with chronic kidney disease.
Publisher
Springer Science and Business Media LLC
Reference44 articles.
1. Nierwijzer [Internet]. 2021 [cited 2021 Mar 2]. Available from: https://nierwijzer.nl/.
2. Hoekstra T, Dekker FW, Cransberg K, Bos WJ, Van Buren M, Hemmelder MH. RENINE annual report 2018 [Internet]. 2018 [cited 2021 Jan 29]. Available from: www.nefrovisie.nl
3. Ishani A, Slinin Y, Greer N, MacDonald R, Messana J, Rutks I, et al. Comparative effectiveness of home-based kidney Dialysis versus in-center or other outpatient kidney Dialysis locations – a systematic review. Comp eff home-based kidney dial versus in-center or other outpatient kidney dial Locat A Syst Rev [Internet] 2015 Mar 4 [cited 2021 Feb 1]; Available from: http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/26937543
4. Morton RL, Snelling P, Webster AC, Rose J, Masterson R, Johnson DW, et al. Dialysis modality preference of patients with CKD and family caregivers: a discrete-choice study. Am J Kidney Dis. 2012;60(1):102–11.
5. Chan CT, Blankestijn PJ, Dember LM, Gallieni M, Harris DCH, Lok CE, et al. Dialysis initiation, modality choice, access, and prescription: conclusions from a kidney disease: improving global outcomes (KDIGO) controversies conference. Kidney Int. 2019;96(1):37–47.
Cited by
5 articles.
订阅此论文施引文献
订阅此论文施引文献,注册后可以免费订阅5篇论文的施引文献,订阅后可以查看论文全部施引文献