Decisional Regret Surrounding Dialysis Initiation: A Comparative Analysis.

Rationale & Objective: Dialysis comes with a substantial treatment burden, so patients must select care plans that align with their preferences. We aimed to deepen the understanding of decisional regret with dialysis choices. Study Design: This study had a mixed-methods explanatory sequential design. Setting & Participants: All patients from a single academic medical center prescribed maintenance in-center hemodialysis or presenting for home hemodialysis or peritoneal dialysis check-up during 3 weeks were approached for survey. A total of 78 patients agreed to participate. Patients with the highest (15 patients) and lowest decisional regret (20 patients) were invited to semistructured interviews. Predictors: Decisional regret scale and illness intrusiveness scale were used in this study. Analytical Approach: Quantitatively, we examined correlations between the decision regret scale and illness intrusiveness scale and sorted patients into the highest and lowest decision regret scale quartiles for further interviews; then, we compared patient characteristics between those that consented to interview in high and low decisional regret. Qualitatively, we used an adapted grounded theory approach to examine differences between interviewed patients with high and low decisional regret. Results: Of patients invited to participate in the interviews, 21 patients (8 high regret, 13 low regret) agreed. We observed that patients with high decisional regret displayed resignation toward dialysis, disruption of their sense of self and social roles, and self-blame, whereas patients with low decisional regret demonstrated positivity, integration of dialysis into their identity, and self-compassion. Limitations: Patients with the highest levels of decisional regret may have already withdrawn from dialysis. Patients could complete interviews in any location (eg, home, dialysis unit, and clinical office), which may have influenced patient disclosure. Conclusions: Although all patients experienced disruption after dialysis initiation, patients' approach to adversity differs between patients experiencing high versus low regret. This study identifies emotional responses to dialysis that may be modifiable through patient-support interventions.

As part of a quality improvement initiative in our dialysis practice, a patient stated, "I wish I never started dialysis." This quote served as the catalyst for embarking on a research project with the aim to understand why patients living with end-stage kidney disease have regret about starting and continuing dialysis, a lifesaving but time-intensive measure. We surveyed and interviewed patients on the topic and learned that patients experiencing regret had a disrupted sense of self and blamed themselves for their need of dialysis. Patients with little to no regret demonstrated positivity and self-compassion. These findings will help health care professionals as they work with patients considering dialysis or having newly started dialysis.

Impact of Program Changes Including Telemedicine and Telephonic Care During the COVID-19 Pandemic in Preventing 30-Day Hospital Readmission for Patients in a Care Transitions Program.

INTRODUCTION/OBJECTIVES: To describe health outcomes of older adults enrolled in the Mayo Clinic Care Transitions (MCCT) program before and during the COVID-19 pandemic compared to unenrolled patients. METHODS: We conducted a retrospective cohort study of adults (age >60 years) in the MCCT program compared to a usual care control group from January 1, 2019, to September 20, 2022. The MCCT program involved a home, telephonic, or telemedicine visit by an advanced care provider. Outcomes were 30- and 180-day hospital readmissions, emergency department (ED) visit, and mortality. We performed a subgroup analysis after March 1, 2020 (during the pandemic). We analyzed data with Cox proportional hazards regression models and hazard ratios (HRs) with 95% CIs. RESULTS: Of the 1,012 patients total, 354 were in the MCCT program and 658 were in the usual care group with a mean (SD) age of 81.1 (9.1) years overall. Thirty-day readmission was 16.9% (60 of 354) for MCCT patients and 14.7% (97 of 658) for usual care patients (HR, 1.24; 95% CI, 0.88-1.75). During the pandemic, the 30-day readmission rate was 15.1% (28 of 186) for MCCT patients and 14.9% (68 of 455) for usual care patients (HR, 1.20; 95% CI, 0.75-1.91). There was no difference between groups for 180-day hospitalization, 30- or 180-day ED visit, and 30- or 180-day mortality. CONCLUSIONS: Numerous factors involving patients, providers, and health care delivery systems during the pandemic most likely contributed to these findings.

Ethics Education in Health Sciences Should Engage Contentious Social Issues: Here Is Why and How.

Teaching ethics is crucial to health sciences education. Doing it well requires a willingness to engage contentious social issues. Those issues introduce conflict and risk, but avoiding them ignores moral diversity and renders the work of ethics education irrelevant. Therefore, when (not if) contentious issues and moral differences arise, they must be acknowledged and can be addressed with humility, collegiality, and openness to support learning. Faculty must risk moments when not everyone will "feel safe," so the candor implied in psychological safety can emerge. The deliberative and social work of ethics education involves generous listening, wading into difference, and wondering together if our beliefs and arguments are as sound as we once thought. By forecasting the need for candid engagement with contentious issues and moral difference, establishing ground rules, and bolstering due process structures for faculty and students, a riskier and more relevant ethics pedagogy can emerge. Doing so will prepare everyone for the moral diversity they can expect in our common life and in practice.

Older Patients with Advanced Chronic Kidney Disease and Their Perspectives on Prognostic Information: a Qualitative Study.

BACKGROUND: Prognostic information is key to shared decision-making, particularly in life-limiting illness like advanced chronic kidney disease (CKD). OBJECTIVE: To understand the prognostic information preferences expressed by older patients with CKD. DESIGN AND PARTICIPANTS: Qualitative study of 28 consecutively enrolled patients over 65 years of age with non-dialysis dependent CKD stages 3b-5, receiving care in a multi-disciplinary CKD clinic. APPROACH: Semi-structured telephone or in-person interviews to explore patients' preference for and perceived value of individualized prognostic information. Interviews were analyzed using inductive content analysis. KEY RESULTS: We completed interviews with 28 patients (77.7 ± SD 6.8 years, 69% men). Patients varied in their preference for prognostic information and more were interested in their risk of progression to end-stage kidney disease (ESKD) than in life expectancy. Many conflated ESKD risk with risk of death, perceiving a binary choice between dialysis and quick decline and death. Patients expressed that prognostic information would allow them to plan, take care of important business, and think about their treatment options. Patients were accepting of prognostic uncertainty and imagined leveraging it to nurture hope or motivate them to better manage risk factors. They endorsed the desire to receive prognosis of life expectancy even though it may be hard to accept or difficult to talk about but worried it could create helplessness for other patients in their situation. CONCLUSION: Most, but not all, patients were interested in prognostic information and could see its value in motivating behavior change and allowing planning. Some patients expressed concern that information on life expectancy might cause depression and hopelessness. Therefore, prognostic information is most appropriate as part of a clinical conversation that fosters shared decision-making and helps patients consider treatment risks, benefits, and burdens in context of their lives.

Do patients with high versus low treatment and illness burden have different needs? A mixed-methods study of patients living on dialysis.

BACKGROUND: Approximately 750,000 people in the U.S. live with end-stage kidney disease (ESKD); the majority receive dialysis. Despite the importance of adherence to dialysis, it remains suboptimal, and one contributor may be patients' insufficient capacity to cope with their treatment and illness burden. However, it is unclear what, if any, differences exist between patients reporting high versus low treatment and illness burden. METHODS: We sought to understand these differences using a mixed methods, explanatory sequential design. We enrolled adult patients receiving dialysis, including in-center hemodialysis, home hemodialysis, and peritoneal dialysis. Descriptive patient characteristics were collected. Participants' treatment and illness burden was measured using the Illness Intrusiveness Scale (IIS). Participants scoring in the highest quartile were defined as having high burden, and participants scoring in the lowest quartile as having low burden. Participants in both quartiles were invited to participate in interviews and observations. RESULTS: Quantitatively, participants in the high burden group were significantly younger (mean = 48.4 years vs. 68.6 years respectively, p = <0.001). No other quantitative differences were observed. Qualitatively, we found differences in patient self-management practices, such as the high burden group having difficulty establishing a new rhythm of life to cope with dialysis, greater disruption in social roles and self-perception, fewer appraisal focused coping strategies, more difficulty maintaining social networks, and more negatively portrayed experiences early in their dialysis journey. CONCLUSIONS AND RELEVANCE: Patients on dialysis reporting the greatest illness and treatment burden have difficulties that their low-burden counterparts do not report, which may be amenable to intervention.

Paths of Emergency Department Care: Development of a Decision Aid to Facilitate Shared Decision Making in Goals of Care Discussions in the Acute Setting.

BACKGROUND: Goals of care (GOC) conversations in the emergency department (ED) are often a brief discussion of code status rather than a patient-oriented dialogue. We aimed to develop a guide to facilitate conversations between ED clinicians and patients to elicit patient values and establish goals for end-of-life care, while maintaining ED efficiency. Paths of ED Care, a conversation guide, is the product of this work. DESIGN: A multidisciplinary/multispecialty group used recommended practices to adapt a GOC conversation guide for ED patients. ED clinicians used the guide and provided feedback on content, design, and usability. Patient-clinician interactions were recorded for discussion analysis, and both were surveyed to inform iterative refinement. A series of discussions with patient representatives, multidisciplinary clinicians, bioethicists, and health care designers yielded feedback. We used a process similar to the International Patient Decision Aid Standards and provide comparison to these. RESULTS: A conversation guide, eight pages with each page 6 by 6 inches in dimension, uses patient-oriented prompts and includes seven sections: 1) evaluation of patient/family understanding of disease, 2) explanation of possible trajectories, 3) introduction to different pathways of care, 4) explanation of pathways, 5) assessment of understanding and concerns, 6) code status, and 7) personalized summary. LIMITATIONS: Recruitment of sufficient number of patients/providers to the project was the primary limitation. Methods are limited to qualitative analysis of guide creation and feasibility without quantitative analysis. CONCLUSIONS: Paths of ED Care is a guide to facilitate patient-centered shared decision making for ED patients, families, and clinicians regarding GOC. This may ensure care concordant with patients' values and preferences. Use of the guide was well-received and facilitated meaningful conversations between patients and providers.

Prioritizing health care workers and first responders for access to the COVID19 vaccine is not unethical, but both fair and effective - an ethical analysis.

The Nordic countries have differed in their approach as to how much priority for COVID19 vaccine access should be given to health care workers. Two countries decided not to give health care workers highest priority, raising some controversy. The rationale was that those at highest risk of dying needed to come first. However, when it comes to protecting those at the highest risk of dying from COVID19, their needs and vulnerabilities need to be considered more broadly than just in terms of the individual protection that vaccination will afford them. Likewise, when considering whether to prioritize health care workers for the vaccine, their crucial role in keeping the health care system operational, and right to a safe work environment need to be factored in. Below we review several ethical arguments for why frontline health care workers and first responders should receive priority access to the COVID19 vaccine.

A systematic review and meta-analysis of cell-based interventions in experimental diabetic kidney disease.

Regenerative, cell-based therapy is a promising treatment option for diabetic kidney disease (DKD), which has no cure. To prepare for clinical translation, this systematic review and meta-analysis summarized the effect of cell-based interventions in DKD animal models and treatment-related factors modifying outcomes. Electronic databases were searched for original investigations applying cell-based therapy in diabetic animals with kidney endpoints (January 1998-May 2019). Weighted or standardized mean differences were estimated for kidney outcomes and pooled using random-effects models. Subgroup analyses tested treatment-related factor effects for outcomes (creatinine, urea, urine protein, fibrosis, and inflammation). In 40 studies (992 diabetic rodents), therapy included mesenchymal stem/stromal cells (MSC; 61%), umbilical cord/amniotic fluid cells (UC/AF; 15%), non-MSC (15%), and cell-derived products (13%). Tissue sources included bone marrow (BM; 65%), UC/AF (15%), adipose (9%), and others (11%). Cell-based therapy significantly improved kidney function while reducing injury markers (proteinuria, histology, fibrosis, inflammation, apoptosis, epithelial-mesenchymal-transition, oxidative stress). Preconditioning, xenotransplantation, and disease-source approaches were effective. MSC and UC/AF cells had greater effect on kidney function while cell products improved fibrosis. BM and UC/AF tissue sources more effectively improved kidney function and proteinuria vs adipose or other tissues. Cell dose, frequency, and administration route also imparted different benefits. In conclusion, cell-based interventions in diabetic animals improved kidney function and reduced injury with treatment-related factors modifying these effects. These findings may aid in development of optimal repair strategies through selective use of cells/products, tissue sources, and dose administrations to allow for successful adaptation of this novel therapeutic in human DKD.

Spheres of Influence and Strategic Advocacy for Equity in Medicine.

As the extent of health disparities in the USA has been revealed, particularly during the COVID-19 pandemic, physicians have increasingly attended to their roles as advocates for their patients and communities. This article presents "spheres of influence" as a concept that can help physicians think strategically about how to build upon their clinical work and expertise to promote equity in medicine. The physician's primary sphere of influence is in direct patient care. However, physicians today often have many other roles, especially within larger health care institutions in which physicians often occupy positions of authority. Physicians are therefore well-positioned to act within these spheres in ways that draw upon the ethical principles that guide patient care and contribute materially to the cause of equity for colleagues and patients alike. By making changes to the ways they already work within their clinical spaces, institutional leadership roles, and wider communities, physicians can counteract the structural problems that undermine the health of the patients they serve.

Combined Oral Contraceptive Pill-Induced Hypertension and Hypertensive Disorders of Pregnancy: Shared Mechanisms and Clinical Similarities.

PURPOSE OF REVIEW: Oral contraceptive pill-induced hypertension (OCPIH) and hypertensive disorders in pregnancy (HDP) share common risk factors and pathophysiological mechanisms, yet the bidirectional relationship between these two conditions is not well-established. We review and describe OCPIH and HDP to better understand how hormonal and metabolic imbalances affect hypertension. RECENT FINDINGS: Oral contraceptive pills continue to be a popular method of contraception, with an incidence of OCPIH ranging from 1-8.5% among OCP users. HDP have an incidence of 5-10% of all pregnancies in the USA and have been shown to be a powerful predictor of lifetime adverse cardiovascular outcomes, including future hypertension. OCPIH and HDP share common risk factors such as age, BMI, past personal and family history of hypertension, as well as pathogenic mechanisms, including alterations in hormonal metabolism and the renin angiotensin aldosterone system; imbalance of vasodilator-vasoconstrictor compounds; and changes in the cardiovascular system. Future research should address additional potential mechanisms that underlie hypertension in these two conditions where endocrine changes, either physiological (pregnancy) or iatrogenic (use of OCP), play a role. This may lead to novel, targeted treatment options to improve hypertension management and overall cardiovascular risk profile management in this subset of young female patients.

Outcomes of a Nursing Home-to-Community Care Transition Program.

OBJECTIVES: Most transitional care initiatives to reduce rehospitalization have focused on the transition that occurs between a patient's hospital discharge and return home. However, many patients are discharged from a skilled nursing facility (SNF) to their homes. The goal was to evaluate the effectiveness of the Mayo Clinic Care Transitions (MCCT) program (hereafter called program) among patients discharged from SNFs to their homes. DESIGN: Propensity-matched control-intervention trial. INTERVENTION: Patients in the intervention group received care management following nursing stay (a home visit and nursing phone calls). SETTING AND PARTICIPANTS: Patients enrolled after discharge from an SNF to home were matched to patients who did not receive intervention because of refusal, program capacity, or distance. Patients were aged ≥60 years, at high risk for hospitalization, and discharged from an SNF. METHODS: Program enrollees were matched through propensity score to nonenrollees on the basis of age, sex, comorbid health burden, and mortality risk score. Conditional logistic regression analysis examined 30-day hospitalization and emergency department (ED) use; Cox proportional hazards analyses examined 180-day hospital stay and ED use. RESULTS: Each group comprised 160 patients [mean (standard deviation) age, 85.4 (7.4) years]. Thirty-day hospitalization and ED rates were 4.4% and 10.0% in the program group and 3.8% and 10.0% in the group with usual care (P = .76 for hospitalization; P > .99 for ED). At 180 days, hospitalization and ED rates were 30.6% and 46.3% for program patients compared with 11.3% and 25.0% in the comparison group (P < .001). CONCLUSIONS AND IMPLICATIONS: We found no evidence of reduced hospitalization or ED visits by program patients vs the comparison group. Such findings are crucial because they illustrate how aggressive stabilization care within the SNF may mitigate the program role. Furthermore, we found higher ED and hospitalization rates at 180 days in program patients than the comparison group.

Dysphagia in Older Adults.

Dysphagia, which is a geriatric syndrome affecting 10% to 33% of older adults, is commonly seen in older adults who have experienced a stroke or neurodegenerative diseases such as Alzheimer or Parkinson disease. Patients diagnosed as having dysphagia can experience malnutrition, pneumonia, and dehydration. Patients can also experience increased rates of mortality and long-term care admission. Providers can identify the specific type of dysphagia for treatment in approximately 80% of patients by asking 5 questions in the patient's history: What happens when you try to swallow? Do you have trouble chewing? Do you have difficulty swallowing solids, liquids, or both? Describe the symptom onset, duration, and frequency? What are the associated symptoms? Providers can then request a videofluoroscopic swallow study or a fiberoptic endoscopic evaluation of swallowing for further evaluation of oropharyngeal dysphagia. If providers are diagnosing esophageal dysphagia, barium esophagraphy or esophagogastroduodenoscopy (EGD) can be used as part of the assessment. Patients can be treated for oropharyngeal dysphagia by using compensatory interventions, including behavioral changes, oral care, dietary modification, or rehabilitative interventions such as exercises and therapeutic oral trials. Providers often address treatment of esophageal dysphagia by managing the underlying etiology, which could include removal of caustic medications or using EGD as a therapeutic modality for esophageal rings. High-quality, large research studies are necessary to further manage the diagnosis and appropriate treatment of this growing geriatric syndrome.

Validation of prognostic indices for short term mortality in an incident dialysis population of older adults >75.

RATIONAL AND OBJECTIVE: Prognosis provides critical knowledge for shared decision making between patients and clinicians. While several prognostic indices for mortality in dialysis patients have been developed, their performance among elderly patients initiating dialysis is unknown, despite great need for reliable prognostication in that context. To assess the performance of 6 previously validated prognostic indices to predict 3 and/or 6 months mortality in a cohort of elderly incident dialysis patients. STUDY DESIGN: Validation study of prognostic indices using retrospective cohort data. Indices were compared using the concordance ("c")-statistic, i.e. area under the receiver operating characteristic curve (ROC). Calibration, sensitivity, specificity, positive and negative predictive values were also calculated. SETTING & PARTICIPANTS: Incident elderly (age ≥75 years; n = 349) dialysis patients at a tertiary referral center. ESTABLISHED PREDICTORS: Variables for six validated prognostic indices for short term (3 and 6 month) mortality prediction (Foley, NCI, REIN, updated REIN, Thamer, and Wick) were extracted from the electronic medical record. The indices were individually applied as per each index specifications to predict 3- and/or 6-month mortality. RESULTS: In our cohort of 349 patients, mean age was 81.5±4.4 years, 66% were male, and median survival was 351 days. The c-statistic for the risk prediction indices ranged from 0.57 to 0.73. Wick ROC 0.73 (0.68, 0.78) and Foley 0.67 (0.61, 0.73) indices performed best. The Foley index was weakly calibrated with poor overall model fit (p <0.01) and overestimated mortality risk, while the Wick index was relatively well-calibrated but underestimated mortality risk. LIMITATIONS: Small sample size, use of secondary data, need for imputation, homogeneous population. CONCLUSION: Most predictive indices for mortality performed moderately in our incident dialysis population. The Wick and Foley indices were the best performing, but had issues with under and over calibration. More accurate indices for predicting survival in older patients with kidney failure are needed.

Consequences of suboptimal communication for patients with limited English proficiency in the intensive care unit and suggestions for a way forward: A qualitative study of healthcare team perceptions.

PURPOSE: To understand the healthcare team's perceptions of the negative consequences of suboptimal communication and their recommendations to improve communication with patients and families who have Limited English Proficiency (LEP) in the Intensive Care Unit (ICU). MATERIALS AND METHODS: We performed a qualitative study using semi-structured interviews of physicians, nurses, and interpreters from 3 ICUs at Mayo Clinic Rochester, between November 2017 and April 2018. RESULTS: We identified 5 consequences of suboptimal communication: 1) Suboptimal assessment and treatment of patient symptoms, 2) Unmet patient and family expectations, 3) Decreased patient autonomy, 4) Unmet end of life wishes and 5) Clinician Distress. Recommendations to improve communication include: 1) Education and training for patients,families, clinicians and interpreters, 4) Greater integration of interpreters into the ICU team 5) Standardized timeline for goals of care conversations with patients and families with LEP. CONCLUSIONS: Patients with LEP are at risk of experiencing suboptimal communication with the healthcare team in the ICU. There are several educational and quality improvement strategies that ICUs and institutions can take to mitigate these issues.

Improving Blood Pressure Management in Primary Care Patients with Chronic Kidney Disease: a Systematic Review of Interventions and Implementation Strategies.

INTRODUCTION: Chronic kidney disease (CKD) is widely prevalent, associated with morbidity and mortality, but may be lessened with timely implementation of evidence-based strategies including blood pressure (BP) control. Nonetheless, an evidence-practice gap persists. We synthesize the evidence for clinician-facing interventions to improve hypertension management in CKD patients in primary care. METHODS: Electronic databases and related publications were queried for relevant studies. We used a conceptual model to address heterogeneity of interventions. We conducted a quantitative synthesis of interventions on blood pressure (BP) outcomes and a narrative synthesis of other CKD relevant clinical outcomes. Planned subgroup analyses were performed by (1) study design (randomized controlled trials (RCTs) or nonrandomized studies (NRS)); (2) intervention type (guideline-concordant decision support, shared care, pharmacist-facing); and (3) use of behavioral/implementation theory. RESULTS: Of 2704 manuscripts screened, 73 underwent full-text review; 22 met inclusion criteria. BP target achievement was reported in 15 and systolic BP reduction in 6 studies. Among RCTs, all interventions had a significant effect on BP control, (pooled OR 1.21; 95% CI 1.07 to 1.38). Subgroup analysis by intervention type showed significant effects for guideline-concordant decision support (pooled OR 1.19; 95% CI 1.12 to 1.27) but not shared care (pooled OR 1.71; 95% CI 0.96 to 3.03) or pharmacist-facing interventions (pooled OR 1.04; 95% CI 0.82 to 1.34). Subgroup analysis finding was replicated with pooling of RCTs and NRS. The five contributing studies showed large and significant reduction in systolic BP (pooled WMD - 3.86; 95% CI - 7.2 to - 0.55). Use of a behavioral/implementation theory had no impact, while RCTs showed smaller effect sizes than NRS. DISCUSSION: Process-oriented implementation strategies used with guideline-concordant decision support was a promising implementation approach. Better reporting guidelines on implementation would enable more useful synthesis of the efficacy of CKD clinical interventions integrated into primary care. PROSPERO REGISTRATION NUMBER: CRD42018102441.

Responsibilities, Strategies, and Practice Factors in Clinical Cost Conversations: a US Physician Survey.

BACKGROUND: Physicians play a key role in mitigating and managing costs in healthcare which are rising. OBJECTIVE: Conduct a cross-sectional survey in 2017, comparing results to a 2012 survey to understand US physicians' evolving attitudes and strategies concerning healthcare costs. PARTICIPANTS: Random sample of 1200 US physicians from the AMA Masterfile. MEASURES: Physician views on responsibility for costs of care, enthusiasm for cost-saving strategies, cost-consciousness scale, and practice strategies on addressing cost. KEY RESULTS: Among 1200 physicians surveyed in 2017, 489 responded (41%). In 2017, slightly more physicians reported that physicians have a major responsibility for addressing healthcare costs (32% vs. 27%, p = 0.03). In 2017, more physicians attributed "major responsibility" for addressing healthcare costs to pharmaceutical companies (68% vs. 56%, p < 0.001) and hospital and health systems (63% vs. 56%%, p = 0.008) in contrast to 2012. Fewer respondents in 2017 attributed major responsibility for addressing costs to trial lawyers (53% vs. 59%, p = 0.007) and patients (42% vs. 52%, p < 0.0001) as compared to 2012. Physician enthusiasm for patient-focused cost-containment strategies like high deductible health plans and higher co-pays (62% vs. 42%, p < 0.0001 and 62% vs. 39%, p < 0.0001, not enthusiastic, respectively) declined. Physicians reported that when they discussed cost, it resulted in a change in disease management 56% of the time. Cost-consciousness within surveyed physicians had not changed meaningfully in 2017 since 2012 (31.7 vs. 31.2). Most physicians continued to agree that decision support tools showing costs would be helpful in their practice (> 70%). After adjusting for specialty, political affiliation, practice setting, age, and gender, only democratic/independent affiliation remained a significant predictor of cost-consciousness. CONCLUSIONS AND RELEVANCE: US physicians increasingly attribute responsibility for rising healthcare costs to organizations and express less enthusiasm for strategies that increase patient out-of-pocket cost. Interventions that focus on physician knowledge and communication strategies regarding cost of care may be helpful.

Experiences of US Nephrologists in the Delivery of Conservative Care to Patients With Advanced Kidney Disease: A National Qualitative Study.

RATIONALE & OBJECTIVE: It is relatively unusual for US patients with advanced chronic kidney disease (CKD) to forgo initiation of maintenance dialysis. Our objective was to describe practice approaches of US nephrologists who have provided conservative care for members of this population. STUDY DESIGN: Qualitative study using semi-structured interviews. SETTING & PARTICIPANTS: A national sample of 21 nephrologists experienced in caring for patients with advanced CKD who decided not to start dialysis. ANALYTICAL APPROACH: Grounded theory methods to identify dominant themes reflecting nephrologists' experiences with and approaches to conservative care for patients with advanced CKD. RESULTS: Nephrologists who participated in this study were primarily from academic practices (n=14) and urban areas (n=15). Two prominent themes emerged from qualitative analysis reflecting nephrologists' experiences with and approaches to conservative care: (1) person-centered practices, which described a holistic approach to care that included basing treatment decisions on what mattered most to individual patients, framing dialysis as an explicit choice, being mindful of sources of bias in medical decision making, and being flexible to the changing needs, values, and preferences of patients; and (2) improvising a care infrastructure, which described the challenges of managing patients conservatively within health systems that are not optimally configured to support their needs. Participating nephrologists described cobbling together resources, assuming a range of different health care roles, preparing patients to navigate health systems in which initiation of dialysis served as a powerful default, and championing the principles of conservative care among their colleagues. LIMITATIONS: The themes identified likely are not generalizable to most US nephrologists. CONCLUSIONS: Insights from a select group of US nephrologists who are early adopters of conservative care signal the need for a stronger cultural and health system commitment to building care models capable of supporting patients who choose to forgo dialysis.

Use of Potentially Nephrotoxic Medications by U.S. Adults with Chronic Kidney Disease: NHANES, 2011-2016.

BACKGROUND: People with chronic kidney disease (CKD) are at risk for adverse events and/or CKD progression with use of renally eliminated or nephrotoxic medications. OBJECTIVE: To examine the prevalence of potentially inappropriate medication (PIM) use by U.S. adults by CKD stage and self-reported CKD awareness. DESIGN: Cross-sectional analysis of National Health and Nutrition Examination Surveys, 2011-2016 PARTICIPANTS: Non-pregnant adults with stages 3a (eGFR 45-59 mL/min/1.73 m2), 3b (eGFR 30-44), or 4-5 (eGFR < 30) CKD, stratified as CKD-aware/unaware. MAIN MEASURES: PIMs were identified on the basis of KDIGO guidelines, label information, and literature review. We calculated proportions using any and individual PIMs, assessing for differences over CKD awareness within each CKD stage. Analyses were adjusted for age, sex, race/ethnicity, education, comorbidities, and insurance type. KEY RESULTS: Adjusted proportions of U.S. adults taking any PIM(s) exceeded 50% for all CKD stages and awareness categories, and were highest among CKD-unaware patients with stages 4-5 CKD: 66.6% (95% CI, 55.5-77.8). Proton pump inhibitors, opioids, metformin, sulfonylureas, and non-steroidal anti-inflammatory drugs (NSAIDs) were all used frequently across CKD stages. NSAIDs were used less frequently when CKD-aware by patients with stage 3a CKD (2.2% [95% CI, - 0.3 to 4.7] vs. 10.7% [95% CI, 7.6 to 13.8]) and stages 4-5 CKD (0.8% [95% CI, - 0.9 to 2.5] vs. 16.5% [95% CI, 4.0 to 29.0]). Metformin was used less frequently when CKD-aware by patients with stage 3b CKD (8.1% [95% CI, 0.3-15.9] vs. 26.5% [95% CI, 17.4-35.7]) and stages 4-5 CKD (none vs. 20.8% [95% CI, 1.8-39.8]). The impact of CKD awareness was statistically significant after correction for multiple comparisons only for NSAIDs in stage 3a CKD. CONCLUSIONS: PIMs are frequently used by people with CKD, with some impact of CKD awareness on NSAID and metformin use. This may lead to adverse outcomes or hasten CKD progression, reinforcing the need for improved medication management among people with CKD.