Nephrologists' perspectives on communication and decision-making regarding technique survival in peritoneal dialysis: an international qualitative interview study.

OBJECTIVES: Peritoneal dialysis (PD) allows patients increased autonomy and flexibility; however, both infectious and non-infectious complications may lead to technique failure, which shortens treatment longevity. Maintaining patients on PD remains a major challenge for nephrologists. This study aims to describe nephrologists' perspectives on technique survival in PD. DESIGN: Qualitative semistructured interview study. Transcripts were thematically analysed. SETTING AND PARTICIPANTS: 30 nephrologists across 11 countries including Australia, the USA, the UK, Hong Kong, Canada, Singapore, Japan, New Zealand, Thailand, Colombia and Uruguay were interviewed from April 2017 to November 2019. RESULTS: We identified four themes: defining patient suitability (confidence in capacity for self-management, ensuring clinical stability and expected resilience), building endurance (facilitating access to practical support, improving mental well-being, optimising quality of care and training to reduce risk of complications), establishing rapport through effective communications (managing expectations to enhance trust, individualising care and harnessing a multidisciplinary approach) and confronting fear and acknowledging barriers to haemodialysis (preventing crash landing to haemodialysis, facing concerns of losing independence and positive framing of haemodialysis). CONCLUSION: Nephrologists reported that technique survival in PD is influenced by patients' medical circumstances, psychological motivation and positively influenced by the education and support provided by treating clinicians and families. Strategies to enhance patients' knowledge on PD and communication with patients about technique survival in PD are needed to build trust, set patient expectations of treatment and improve the process of transition off PD.

Delivering Person-Centered Peritoneal Dialysis.

Peritoneal dialysis (PD) enables people to have a home-based therapy, permitting greater autonomy for individuals along with enhanced treatment satisfaction compared with in-center dialysis care. The burden of treatment on PD, however, remains considerable and underpins the need for person-centered care. This reflects the need to address the patient as a person with needs and preferences beyond just the medical perspective. Shared decision making is central to the recent International Society for Peritoneal Dialysis recommendations for prescribing PD, balancing the potential benefits of PD on patient well-being with the burden associated with treatment. This review considers the role of high-quality goal-directed prescribing, incremental dialysis, and remote patient monitoring in reducing the burden of dialysis, including an approach to implementing incremental PD. Although patient-related outcomes are important in assessing the response to treatment and, particularly life participation, the corollary of dialysis burden, there are no clear routes to the clinical implementation of patient-related outcome measures. Delivering person-centered care is dependent on treating people both as individuals and as equal partners in their care.

Assisted PD throughout Europe: advantages, inequities, and solution proposals.

BACKGROUND: Peritoneal dialysis provides several benefits for patients and should be offered as first line kidney replacement therapy, particularly for fragile patients. Limitation to self-care drove assisted peritoneal dialysis to evolve from family-based care to institutional programs, with specialized care givers. Some European countries have mastered this, while others are still bound by the availability of a volunteer to become responsible for treatment. METHODS: A group of leading nephrologists from 13 European countries integrated real-life application of such therapy, highlighting barriers, lessons learned and practical solutions. The objective of this work is to share and summarize several different approaches, with their intrinsic difficulties and solutions, which might helpperitoneal dialysis units to develop and offer assisted peritoneal dialysis. RESULTS: Assisted peritoneal dialysis does not mean 4 continuous ambulatory peritoneal dialysis exchanges, 7 days/week, nor does it exclude cycler. Many different prescriptions might work for our patients. Tailoring PD prescription to residual kidney function, thereby maintaining small solute clearance, reduces dialysis burden and is associated with higher technique survival. Assisted peritoneal dialysis does not mean assistance will be needed permanently, it can be a transitional stage towards individual or caregiver autonomy. Private care agencies can be used to provide assistance; other options may involve implementing PD training programs for the staff of nursing homes or convalescence units. Social partners may be interested in participating in smaller initiatives or for limited time periods. CONCLUSION: Assisted peritoneal dialysis is a valid technique, which should be expanded. In countries without structural models of assisted peritoneal dialysis, active involvement by the nephrologist is needed in order for it to become a reality.

Inequities in kidney health and kidney care.

Health inequity refers to the existence of unnecessary and unfair differences in the ability of an individual or community to achieve optimal health and access appropriate care. Kidney diseases, including acute kidney injury and chronic kidney disease, are the epitome of health inequity. Kidney disease risk and outcomes are strongly associated with inequities that occur across the entire clinical course of disease. Insufficient investment across the spectrum of kidney health and kidney care is a fundamental source of inequity. In addition, social and structural inequities, including inequities in access to primary health care, education and preventative strategies, are major risk factors for, and contribute to, poorer outcomes for individuals living with kidney diseases. Access to affordable kidney care is also highly inequitable, resulting in financial hardship and catastrophic health expenditure for the most vulnerable. Solutions to these injustices require leadership and political will. The nephrology community has an important role in advocacy and in identifying and implementing solutions to dismantle inequities that affect kidney health.

Perceived Life Expectancy Among Dialysis Recipients: A Scoping Review.

Rationale & Objective: Greater prognostic understanding is associated with higher quality care at the end of life. We undertook a scoping review to explore how long dialysis recipients expect to live. Study Design: Scoping Review. Setting & Study Populations: People with kidney failure over 18 years old. Search Strategy & Sources: Studies were identified by searching Medline, Embase, APA PsycINFO, HMIC, and ProQuest database for terms related to "life expectancy", "self-estimated", and "end stage kidney disease". Data Extraction: Search strategies reported 349 unique, potentially eligible studies, with 8 studies meeting the inclusion criteria after screening. Results: Significant mismatches between dialysis recipients and their health care provider's estimations of prognosis were reported, with patients predicting significantly higher life expectancies than health care professionals and almost no agreement between patient and nephrologist's estimates of 1-year survival. Documented cognitive impairment did not affect 1-year or 5-year prognosis estimates, nor did gender, age, time on dialysis, or discussing perceived life expectancy. Dialysis recipients who thought they were on the transplant list or who self-identified as African American reported higher perceived life expectancy, whereas people who were 75 years or older, or with fair or poor self-reported health status reported a lower perceived life expectancy. Those with a lower perceived life expectancy preferred care focusing on relieving pain and discomfort, whereas people who thought they had a higher chance of survival were significantly more likely to prefer life-extending care. Limitations: There is a marked paucity of research in this area, with most studies conducted in North American cohorts. Conclusions: Optimistic patient prognostic expectations persist in dialysis recipients. Given the effects of perceived life expectancy on treatment choices and subsequent quality of life, it is important that transparent discussions regarding prognosis are conducted with people receiving dialysis and their families. Plain-Language Summary: Understanding illness severity and prognosis allows people to make decisions and prioritize areas of their lives that are important to them. We undertook a scoping review to explore how long dialysis recipients expect to live. We found significant mismatches between the perceived life expectancy of people treated with dialysis and their health care providers. Perceived life expectancy influenced treatment choices; thus, those who thought they would die sooner prioritized care focusing on relieving pain and discomfort. Those who thought they had a higher chance of survival were more likely to prefer life-extending care (with potential effects on quality of life). It is important to have frank discussions about prognosis with people receiving dialysis, to empower individuals and help them make informed decisions about their care.

Managing the symptom burden associated with maintenance dialysis: conclusions from a Kidney Disease: Improving Global Outcomes (KDIGO) Controversies Conference.

Individuals with kidney failure undergoing maintenance dialysis frequently report a high symptom burden that can interfere with functioning and diminish life satisfaction. Until recently, the focus of nephrology care for dialysis patients has been related primarily to numerical targets for laboratory measures, and outcomes such as cardiovascular disease and mortality. Routine symptom assessment is not universal or standardized in dialysis care. Even when symptoms are identified, treatment options are limited and are initiated infrequently, in part because of a paucity of evidence in the dialysis population and the complexities of medication interactions in kidney failure. In May of 2022, Kidney Disease: Improving Global Outcomes (KDIGO) held a Controversies Conference-Symptom-Based Complications in Dialysis-to identify the optimal means for diagnosing and managing symptom-based complications in patients undergoing maintenance dialysis. Participants included patients, physicians, behavioral therapists, nurses, pharmacists, and clinical researchers. They outlined foundational principles and consensus points related to identifying and addressing symptoms experienced by patients undergoing dialysis and described gaps in the knowledge base and priorities for research. Healthcare delivery and education systems have a responsibility to provide individualized symptom assessment and management. Nephrology teams should take the lead in symptom management, although this does not necessarily mean taking ownership of all aspects of care. Even when options for clinical response are limited, clinicians should focus on acknowledging, prioritizing, and managing symptoms that are most important to individual patients. A recognized factor in the initiation and implementation of improvements in symptom assessment and management is that they will be based on locally existing needs and resources.

ISPD Catheter-related Infection Recommendations: 2023 Update.

Peritoneal dialysis (PD) catheter-related infections are important risk factors for catheter loss and peritonitis. The 2023 updated recommendations have revised and clarified definitions and classifications of exit site infection and tunnel infection. A new target for the overall exit site infection rate should be no more than 0.40 episodes per year at risk. The recommendation about topical antibiotic cream or ointment to catheter exit site has been downgraded. New recommendations include clarified suggestion of exit site dressing cover and updated antibiotic treatment duration with emphasis on early clinical monitoring to ascertain duration of therapy. In addition to catheter removal and reinsertion, other catheter interventions including external cuff removal or shaving, and exit site relocation are suggested.

A review of supportive care for older people with advanced chronic kidney disease.

Supportive care (SC) is a multidimensional and person-centred approach to managing advanced CKD that engages the person and their caregivers in shared decision making from the outset. Rather than focusing on disease-specific therapies, SC is a collection of adjuvant interventions and adaptations to conventional treatments that can be used to improve the individual's quality of life. Recognizing that frailty, multi-morbidity and polypharmacy are more common among older people with advanced chronic kidney disease (CKD) and that people in this group tend to prioritize quality of life over survival as a goal of care, SC represents an important adjunct to disease-specific therapies in CKD management. This review provides an overview of SC in the older person with advanced CKD.

Home dialysis: conclusions from a Kidney Disease: Improving Global Outcomes (KDIGO) Controversies Conference.

Home dialysis modalities (home hemodialysis [HD] and peritoneal dialysis [PD]) are associated with greater patient autonomy and treatment satisfaction compared with in-center modalities, yet the level of home-dialysis use worldwide is low. Reasons for limited utilization are context-dependent, informed by local resources, dialysis costs, access to healthcare, health system policies, provider bias or preferences, cultural beliefs, individual lifestyle concerns, potential care-partner time, and financial burdens. In May 2021, KDIGO (Kidney Disease: Improving Global Outcomes) convened a controversies conference on home dialysis, focusing on how modality choice and distribution are determined and strategies to expand home-dialysis use. Participants recognized that expanding use of home dialysis within a given health system requires alignment of policy, fiscal resources, organizational structure, provider incentives, and accountability. Clinical outcomes across all dialysis modalities are largely similar, but for specific clinical measures, one modality may have advantages over another. Therefore, choice among available modalities is preference-sensitive, with consideration of quality of life, life goals, clinical characteristics, family or care-partner support, and living environment. Ideally, individuals, their care-partners, and their healthcare teams will employ shared decision-making in assessing initial and subsequent kidney failure treatment options. To meet this goal, iterative, high-quality education and support for healthcare professionals, patients, and care-partners are priorities. Everyone who faces dialysis should have access to home therapy. Facilitating universal access to home dialysis and expanding utilization requires alignment of policy considerations and resources at the dialysis-center level, with clear leadership from informed and motivated clinical teams.

A novel programme of supportive two-exchange assisted continuous ambulatory peritoneal dialysis for frail patients with end-stage kidney disease.

We have developed a supportive two-exchange assisted continuous ambulatory peritoneal dialysis (asCAPD) programme for the older frail person who cannot do autonomous PD and do not want or are considered to be too high risk for haemodialysis (HD). Evaluation of the programme was determined by data collected retrospectively from patient records. Primary outcome was comparison of symptoms at start of dialysis and 3 months following dialysis start. Secondary outcomes were survival and peritonitis rate. Over a 4-year period (2016-2020), 49 patients with mean age 79.6 years (range 47-90) enrolled in the programme with eGFR 7.7 ± 2.6 ml/min (mean ± SD) at dialysis start. Forty-one patients had been on asCAPD for >3 months. There was an improvement in all symptoms at 3 months compared to baseline: anorexia (46% to 15%), fatigue (46% to 15%), shortness of breath (27% to 2%) and oedema (51% to 32%). One-year survival was 55%. Peritonitis rate was 0.52 episodes per patient year. The novel supportive two-exchange asCAPD programme shows potential improvement of symptoms after 3 months and may provide an acceptable dialysis modality for the frail co-morbid person with established kidney failure. More detailed study and evaluation are needed.

Encapsulating peritoneal sclerosis: Your questions answered.

Encapsulating peritoneal sclerosis (EPS) is a clinical syndrome hallmarked by the formation of a fibrous cocoon encapsulating the bowel resulting in morbidity and mortality. EPS is most frequently associated with peritoneal dialysis (PD), particularly with its discontinuation. While EPS is one of the most feared complications of PD, the majority of patients receiving PD will not go on to develop EPS. Risk factors for development include time on PD, some types of peritonitis and discontinuation of PD. Owing to its rarity, much of the knowledge of EPS comes from case series and registries and treatments are extrapolated from low-quality evidence. Malnutrition is a significant driver of mortality, and nutritional support is critical in management. We present a case of EPS and frequently asked questions including the definition, diagnosis, epidemiology, pathophysiology, risk factors, role of infection, management and roles of nutrition and surgery.

Gender Differences in Experiences and Expectations of Hemodialysis in a Frail and Seriously Unwell Patient Population.

Introduction: Surprisingly few studies have explored the experiences of seriously unwell people with kidney disease on hemodialysis therapy: we conducted a mixed-methods study to investigate gender differences in illness experience, symptom burden, treatment considerations or expectations in this cohort. Methods: Seriously unwell people on hemodialysis (1-year mortality risk of >20%) at 3 hospital-based units were invited to take part in a structured interview or to complete the same questions independently via a questionnaire. A total of 54 people took part (36 males, 18 females); data analysis was undertaken using a thematic approach. Results: "Desire to keep living" is the most important and basic thought process when starting dialysis. Fear also predominates influencing risk assessment and decision-making. Once fear is managed, there are physical, social, practical and emotional issues to rationalize, but choice only seems possible if shared decision-making is part of the consultation.Gender differences were seen in perceived hopes and expectations of treatment. Males were more likely to prioritize achievement of physical goals, with females prioritizing a wish to feel well. Both genders reported significantly higher symptom scores than their health care provider perceived, however this difference was more marked in females. Dialysis regret existed in >50% of participants and 6 out of 54 (11%) stated that they would have chosen no dialysis at all. Females were more likely to report feeling depressed (P = 0.001). Conclusion: Different genders approach treatment decisions and prioritize treatment expectations differently. Recognizing this will allow personalized care plans to be developed and improve the experiences of seriously unwell people with kidney disease.

Peritoneal catheter insertion: combating barriers through policy change.

Barriers to accessing home dialysis became a matter of life and death for many patients with kidney failure during the coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) pandemic. Peritoneal dialysis (PD) is the more commonly used home therapy option. This article provides a comprehensive analysis of PD catheter insertion procedures as performed around the world today, barriers impacting timely access to the procedure, the impact of COVID-19 and a roadmap of potential policy solutions. To substantiate the analysis, the article includes a survey of institutions across the world, with questions designed to get a sense of the regulatory frameworks, barriers to conducting the procedure and impacts of the pandemic on capability and outcomes. Based on our research, we found that improving patient selection processes, determining and implementing correct insertion techniques, creating multidisciplinary teams, providing appropriate training and sharing decision making among stakeholders will improve access to PD catheter insertion and facilitate greater uptake of home dialysis. Additionally, on a policy level, we recommend efforts to improve the awareness and feasibility of PD among patients and the healthcare workforce, enhance and promulgate training for clinicians-both surgical and medical-to insert PD catheters and fund personnel, pathways and physical facilities for PD catheter insertion.

Cardiovascular Effects of Home Dialysis Therapies: A Scientific Statement From the American Heart Association.

Cardiovascular disease is the leading cause of morbidity and mortality in patients with end-stage kidney disease. Currently, thrice-weekly in-center hemodialysis for 3 to 5 hours per session is the most common therapy worldwide for patients with treated kidney failure. Outcomes with thrice-weekly in-center hemodialysis are poor. Emerging evidence supports the overarching hypothesis that a more physiological approach to administering dialysis therapy, including in the home through home hemodialysis or peritoneal dialysis, may lead to improvement in several cardiovascular risk factors and cardiovascular outcomes compared with thrice-weekly in-center hemodialysis. The Advancing American Kidney Health Initiative, which has a goal of increasing the use of home dialysis, is aligned with the American Heart Association's 2024 mission to champion a full and healthy life and health equity. We conclude that incorporation of interdisciplinary care models to increase the use of home dialysis therapies in an equitable manner will contribute to the ultimate goal of improving outcomes for patients with kidney failure and cardiovascular disease.

Prevalence of frailty and cognitive impairment in older transplant candidates - a preview to the Kidney Transplantation in Older People (KTOP): impact of frailty on outcomes study.

BACKGROUND: Kidney transplantation in older people has increased, however older transplant recipients experience mixed outcomes that invariably impacts on their quality of life. The increased vulnerability of older end stage kidney disease patients to frailty and cognitive impairment, may partially explain the differences in outcomes observed. The Kidney Transplantation in Older People (KTOP): impact of frailty on clinical outcomes study is an active clinical study aiming to explore the experience of older people waiting for and undergoing transplantation. In this manuscript we present the study protocol, the study cohort, and the prevalence of frailty and cognitive impairment identified at recruitment. METHODS: The KTOP study is a single centre, prospective, mixed methods, observational study. Recruitment began in October 2019. All patients aged 60 or above either active on the deceased donor waitlist or undergoing live donor transplantation were eligible for recruitment. Recruited participants completed a series of questionnaires assessing frailty, cognition, and quality of life, which are repeated at defined time points whilst on the waitlist and post-transplant. Clinical data was concurrently collected. Any participants identified as frail or vulnerable were also eligible for enrolment into the qualitative sub-study. RESULTS: Two hundred eight participants have been recruited (age 60-78). Baseline Montreal Cognitive Assessments were available for 173 participants, with 63 (36.4%) participants identified as having scores below normal (score < 26). Edmonton Frail Scale assessments were available for 184 participants, with 29 participants (15.8%) identified as frail (score ≥ 8), and a further 37 participants (20.1%) identified as being vulnerable (score 6-7). CONCLUSION: In the KTOP study cohort we have identified a prevalence of 36.4% of participants with MoCA scores suggestive of cognitive impairment, and a prevalence of frailty of 15.8% at recruitment. A further 20.1% were vulnerable. As formal testing for cognition and frailty is not routinely incorporated into the work up of older people across many units, the presence and significance of these conditions is likely not known. Ultimately the KTOP study will report on how these parameters evolve over time and following a transplant, and describe their impact on quality of life and clinical outcomes.