Search

Rationale & Objective: Older adults in the United States often receive kidney therapies that do not align with their goals. Palliative care (PC) specialists are experts in assisting patients with the goals of care discussions and decision support, yet views and experiences of older patients who have received PC while contemplating kidney therapy decisions and their nephrologists remain unexplored. We evaluated the acceptability of CKD-EDU, a PC-based kidney therapy decision support intervention for adults ≥75 years of age. Study Design: Qualitative study. Setting & Participants: Two trained research coordinators interviewed patients and nephrologists participating in the CKD-EDU study. Analytical Approach: Three coders analyzed the qualitative data using a thematic analysis approach to identify salient themes pertaining to intervention acceptability. Results: Patients (n = 19; mean age: 80 years) viewed the PC intervention favorably, noting PC physicians' excellent communication skills, whole-person care, and decision-making support, including comprehension of prognostic information. Nephrologists (n = 24; mean age) welcomed PC assistance in decision making, support for conservative kidney management, and symptom management; a minority voiced concerns about third-party involvement in their practice. Limitations: Single-center study. Conclusions: Overall, patients and nephrologists generally found the PC intervention to be acceptable. Future testing of the current PC-based decision support intervention in a larger randomized controlled trial for older people navigating kidney therapy decisions is needed. Plain-Language Summary: Literature on the acceptability of palliative care for kidney therapy decision making for older adults is scarce. This qualitative study establishes the acceptability of a palliative care (PC)-based kidney therapy decision support pilot intervention among older adults with advanced chronic kidney disease (CKD). Both patients and nephrologists found the intervention acceptable. Future testing of this PC-based intervention in an adequately powered randomized controlled trial for older individuals navigating kidney therapy decisions is needed.

Context: Previous studies from the U.S. and Canada report deficiencies in informed decision making and a need to improve end-of-life (EoL) care in patients undergoing dialysis. However, there is a paucity of literature on these issues in Pakistani dialysis patients, who differ from Western patients in culture, religion, and available health care services.Objectives: To study informed dialysis decision-making and EoL attitudes and beliefs in Pakistani patients receiving dialysis.Methods: We used convenience sampling to collect 522 surveys (90% response rate) from patients in seven different dialysis units in Pakistan. We used an existing dialysis survey tool, translated into Urdu, and backtranslated to English. A facilitator distributed the survey, explained questions, and orally administered it to patients unable to read.Results: Less than one-fourth of the respondents (23%) felt informed about their medical condition, and 45% were hopeful that their condition would improve in the future. More than half (54%) wished to know their prognosis, and 80% reported having no prognostic discussion. Almost 63% deemed EoL planning important, but only 5% recalled discussing EoL decisions with a doctor during the last 12 months. Nearly 62% of the patients regretted their decision to start dialysis. Patients' self-reported knowledge of hospice (5%) and palliative care (7.9%) services was very limited, yet 46% preferred a treatment plan focused on comfort and symptom management rather than life extension.Conclusion: Pakistani patients reported a need for better informed dialysis decision making and EoL care and better access to palliative care services. These findings underscore the need for palliative care training of Pakistani physicians and in other developing countries to help address communication and EoL needs of their dialysis patients. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Rationale & Objective: The incidence and prevalence of patients with kidney failure requiring dialysis are increasing in Pakistan. However, in-depth perspectives on kidney care from Pakistani people requiring maintenance dialysis are lacking., Study Design: Qualitative interview study., Setting & Participants: Between September 2020 and January 2021, we interviewed 20 adults receiving maintenance hemodialysis in 2 outpatient dialysis units in Pakistan. We asked open-ended questions to explore their experiences with various aspects of kidney care., Analytical Approach: We recorded, transcribed, and then, using a phenomenological approach, thematically analyzed interviews., Results: We observed the following 6 main themes: (1) Patients perceived various supernatural phenomena as causes of their illness and chose traditional medicine for chronic kidney disease (CKD) treatment. (2) Patients expressed dissatisfaction with their physicians' communication. They felt poorly informed and resented their decision to initiate dialysis. (3) Family members tried to dissuade patients away from dialysis but also provided support once dialysis was initiated. (4) Patients and families found it challenging to afford dialysis and transplantation and also to arrange for transportation. (5) Women found it challenging to fulfill their obligations as wives and mothers while receiving maintenance dialysis. (6) Patients seemed reluctant to discuss end-of-life care., Limitations: We collected data from only 2 hospitals in neighboring cities. Additionally, patients on peritoneal dialysis were not included., Conclusions: Our findings shed light on patients' perspectives on kidney care in Pakistan and call for financially feasible solutions to raise kidney disease awareness and improve patients' experiences with dialysis. Physician training in communication and shared dialysis decision making along with the development of culturally adapted decision aids are needed to improve CKD knowledge and shared decision making. Although financial challenges preclude many from receiving long-term dialysis, cost-effective strategies to improve the availability of other options (eg, supportive kidney care, peritoneal dialysis, and transplantation) are still warranted.