Portal de Periódicos da CAPES

Characterizing Approaches to Dialysis Decision Making with Older Adults

2018; Lippincott Williams & Wilkins; Volume: 13; Issue: 8 Linguagem: Inglês

10.2215/cjn.01740218

1555-905X

Keren Ladin, Renuka Pandya, Ronald D. Perrone, Klemens B. Meyer, Allison Kannam, Rohini Loke, Tira Oskoui, Daniel E. Weiner, John B. Wong,

Patient Dignity and Privacy

Background and objectives Despite guidelines recommending shared decision making, nephrologists vary significantly in their approaches to discussing conservative management for kidney replacement therapy with older patients. Many older patients do not perceive dialysis initiation as a choice or receive sufficient information about conservative management for reasons incompletely understood. We examined how nephrologists’ perceptions of key outcomes and successful versus failed treatment discussions shape their approach and characterized different models of decision making, patient engagement, and conservative management discussion. Design, setting, participants, & measurements Our qualitative study used semistructured interviews with a sample of purposively sampled nephrologists. Interviews were conducted from June 2016 to May 2017 and continued until thematic saturation. Data were analyzed using typological and thematic analyses. Results Among 35 nephrologists from 18 practices, 20% were women, 66% had at least 10 years of nephrology experience, and 80% were from academic medical centers. Four distinct approaches to decision making emerged: paternalist, informative (patient led), interpretive (navigator), and institutionalist. Five themes characterized differences between these approaches, including patient autonomy, engagement and deliberation (disclosing all options, presenting options neutrally, eliciting patient values, and offering explicit treatment recommendation), influence of institutional norms, importance of clinical outcomes ( e.g. , survival and dialysis initiation), and physician role (educating patients, making decisions, pursuing active therapies, and managing symptoms). Paternalists and institutionalists viewed initiation of dialysis as a measure of success, whereas interpretive and informative nephrologists focused on patient engagement, quality of life, and aligning patient values with treatment. In this sample, only one third of providers presented conservative management to patients, all of whom followed either informative or interpretive approaches. The interpretive model best achieved shared decision making. Conclusions Differences in nephrologists’ perceptions of their role, patient autonomy, and successful versus unsuccessful encounters contribute to variation in decision making for patients with kidney disease.