CONTEXT: Advance care planning is not included in regular clinical care for patients on dialysis. Insight into life-sustaining treatment preferences and communication about end-of-life care is necessary to develop interventions to improve advance care planning for patients on dialysis. OBJECTIVES: This cross-sectional observational study aimed to understand the preferences for life-sustaining treatments of outpatients on dialysis and to study the quality of patient-physician communication about end-of-life care and barriers and facilitators to this communication. METHODS: The following outcomes were assessed in 80 clinically stable dialysis patients: demographics, clinical characteristics, life-sustaining treatment preferences (cardiopulmonary resuscitation and mechanical ventilation, and Willingness to Accept Life-Sustaining Treatment instrument), preference for site of death, quality of communication (Quality of Communication Questionnaire), and barriers and facilitators to communication about end-of-life care (Barriers and Facilitators Questionnaire). RESULTS: Patients were able to indicate their preferences for life-sustaining treatments and site of death. Preferences for life-sustaining treatments depend on the specific treatment, the expected outcome of treatment, and likelihood of an adverse outcome. Life-sustaining preferences were discussed with the nephrologist by 30.3% of the patients. Quality of the patient-physician communication about end-of-life care was rated poor. This study identified several barriers and facilitators to end-of-life care communication. CONCLUSION: Patients should receive information about treatment burden, expected outcome, and the likelihood of an adverse outcome when discussing life-sustaining treatments. Quality of patient-physician communication about end-of-life care needs to improve. Barriers and facilitators to communication about end-of-life care provide direction for future interventions to facilitate advance care planning for patients on dialysis.
CONTEXT: Advance care planning is not included in regular clinical care for patients on dialysis. Insight into life-sustaining treatment preferences and communication about end-of-life care is necessary to develop interventions to improve advance care planning for patients on dialysis. OBJECTIVES: This cross-sectional observational study aimed to understand the preferences for life-sustaining treatments of outpatients on dialysis and to study the quality of patient-physician communication about end-of-life care and barriers and facilitators to this communication. METHODS: The following outcomes were assessed in 80 clinically stable dialysis patients: demographics, clinical characteristics, life-sustaining treatment preferences (cardiopulmonary resuscitation and mechanical ventilation, and Willingness to Accept Life-Sustaining Treatment instrument), preference for site of death, quality of communication (Quality of Communication Questionnaire), and barriers and facilitators to communication about end-of-life care (Barriers and Facilitators Questionnaire). RESULTS:Patients were able to indicate their preferences for life-sustaining treatments and site of death. Preferences for life-sustaining treatments depend on the specific treatment, the expected outcome of treatment, and likelihood of an adverse outcome. Life-sustaining preferences were discussed with the nephrologist by 30.3% of the patients. Quality of the patient-physician communication about end-of-life care was rated poor. This study identified several barriers and facilitators to end-of-life care communication. CONCLUSION:Patients should receive information about treatment burden, expected outcome, and the likelihood of an adverse outcome when discussing life-sustaining treatments. Quality of patient-physician communication about end-of-life care needs to improve. Barriers and facilitators to communication about end-of-life care provide direction for future interventions to facilitate advance care planning for patients on dialysis.
Authors: Katharine L Cheung; Maria E Montez-Rath; Glenn M Chertow; Wolfgang C Winkelmayer; Vyjeyanthi S Periyakoil; Manjula Kurella Tamura Journal: J Gerontol A Biol Sci Med Sci Date: 2014-01-30 Impact factor: 6.053
Authors: Ann M O'Hare; Jackie Szarka; Lynne V McFarland; Janelle S Taylor; Rebecca L Sudore; Ranak Trivedi; Lynn F Reinke; Elizabeth K Vig Journal: Clin J Am Soc Nephrol Date: 2016-04-15 Impact factor: 8.237
Authors: Lee A Jennings; Neil S Wenger; Li-Jung Liang; Punam Parikh; David Powell; Jose J Escarce; David Zingmond Journal: J Am Geriatr Soc Date: 2022-03-11 Impact factor: 7.538
Authors: Sophia Lazenby; Adrian Edwards; Raymond Samuriwo; Stephen Riley; Mary Ann Murray; Andrew Carson-Stevens Journal: Health Expect Date: 2016-03-10 Impact factor: 3.377