Sanah Parvez1, Khaled Abdel-Kader2, V Shane Pankratz1, Mi-Kyung Song3, Mark Unruh4. 1. Division of Nephrology, Department of Internal Medicine, University of New Mexico School of Medicine, Albuquerque, New Mexico; 2. Division of Nephrology and Hypertension, Vanderbilt University Medical Center, Nashville, Tennessee; Vanderbilt Center for Kidney Disease, Nashville, Tennessee; and. 3. Nell Hodgson Woodruff School of Nursing, Emory University, Atlanta, Georgia. 4. Division of Nephrology, Department of Internal Medicine, University of New Mexico School of Medicine, Albuquerque, New Mexico; mlunruh@salud.unm.edu.
Abstract
BACKGROUND AND OBJECTIVES: Despite the potential benefits of conservative management, providers rarely discuss it as a viable treatment option for patients with advanced CKD. This survey was to describe the knowledge, attitudes, and practices of nephrologists and primary care providers regarding conservative management for patients with advanced CKD in the United States. DESIGN, SETTING, PARTICIPANTS, & MEASUREMENTS: We developed a questionnaire on the basis of a literature review to include items assessing knowledge, attitudes, and self-reported practices of conservative management for patients with advanced CKD. Potential participants were identified using the American Medical Association Physician Masterfile. We then conducted a web-based survey between April and May of 2015. RESULTS: In total, 431 (67.6% nephrologists and 32.4% primary care providers) providers completed the survey for a crude response rate of 2.7%. The respondents were generally white, men, and in their 30s and 40s. Most primary care provider (83.5%) and nephrology (78.2%) respondents reported that they were likely to discuss conservative management with their older patients with advanced CKD. Self-reported number of patients managed conservatively was >11 patients for 30.6% of nephrologists and 49.2% of primary care providers. Nephrologists were more likely to endorse difficulty determining whether a patient with CKD would benefit from conservative management (52.8% versus 36.2% of primary care providers), whereas primary care providers were more likely to endorse limited information on effectiveness (49.6% versus 24.5% of nephrologists) and difficulty determining eligibility for conservative management (42.5% versus 14.3% of nephrologists). There were also significant differences in knowledge between the groups, with primary care providers reporting more uncertainty about relative survival rates with conservative management compared with different patient groups. CONCLUSIONS: Both nephrologists and primary care providers reported being comfortable with discussing conservative management with their patients. However, both provider groups identified lack of United States data on outcomes of conservative management and characteristics of patients who would benefit from conservative management as barriers to recommending conservative management in practice.
BACKGROUND AND OBJECTIVES: Despite the potential benefits of conservative management, providers rarely discuss it as a viable treatment option for patients with advanced CKD. This survey was to describe the knowledge, attitudes, and practices of nephrologists and primary care providers regarding conservative management for patients with advanced CKD in the United States. DESIGN, SETTING, PARTICIPANTS, & MEASUREMENTS: We developed a questionnaire on the basis of a literature review to include items assessing knowledge, attitudes, and self-reported practices of conservative management for patients with advanced CKD. Potential participants were identified using the American Medical Association Physician Masterfile. We then conducted a web-based survey between April and May of 2015. RESULTS: In total, 431 (67.6% nephrologists and 32.4% primary care providers) providers completed the survey for a crude response rate of 2.7%. The respondents were generally white, men, and in their 30s and 40s. Most primary care provider (83.5%) and nephrology (78.2%) respondents reported that they were likely to discuss conservative management with their older patients with advanced CKD. Self-reported number of patients managed conservatively was >11 patients for 30.6% of nephrologists and 49.2% of primary care providers. Nephrologists were more likely to endorse difficulty determining whether a patient with CKD would benefit from conservative management (52.8% versus 36.2% of primary care providers), whereas primary care providers were more likely to endorse limited information on effectiveness (49.6% versus 24.5% of nephrologists) and difficulty determining eligibility for conservative management (42.5% versus 14.3% of nephrologists). There were also significant differences in knowledge between the groups, with primary care providers reporting more uncertainty about relative survival rates with conservative management compared with different patient groups. CONCLUSIONS: Both nephrologists and primary care providers reported being comfortable with discussing conservative management with their patients. However, both provider groups identified lack of United States data on outcomes of conservative management and characteristics of patients who would benefit from conservative management as barriers to recommending conservative management in practice.
Authors: Rachael L Morton; Paul Snelling; Angela C Webster; John Rose; Rosemary Masterson; David W Johnson; Kirsten Howard Journal: CMAJ Date: 2012-02-06 Impact factor: 8.262
Authors: Nick Richards; Kevin Harris; Malcolm Whitfield; Donal O'Donoghue; Robert Lewis; Martin Mansell; Stephen Thomas; John Townend; Mick Eames; Daniele Marcelli Journal: Nephrol Dial Transplant Date: 2007-12-08 Impact factor: 5.992
Authors: Sara N Davison; Adeera Levin; Alvin H Moss; Vivekanand Jha; Edwina A Brown; Frank Brennan; Fliss E M Murtagh; Saraladevi Naicker; Michael J Germain; Donal J O'Donoghue; Rachael L Morton; Gregorio T Obrador Journal: Kidney Int Date: 2015-04-29 Impact factor: 10.612
Authors: Shahid M Chandna; Maria Da Silva-Gane; Catherine Marshall; Paul Warwicker; Roger N Greenwood; Ken Farrington Journal: Nephrol Dial Transplant Date: 2010-11-22 Impact factor: 5.992
Authors: Maria E Montez-Rath; Yuanchao Zheng; Manjula Kurella Tamura; Vanessa Grubbs; Wolfgang C Winkelmayer; Tara I Chang Journal: J Gen Intern Med Date: 2017-08-14 Impact factor: 5.128
Authors: Manjula Kurella Tamura; Ann M O'Hare; Eugene Lin; Laura M Holdsworth; Elizabeth Malcolm; Alvin H Moss Journal: Am J Kidney Dis Date: 2018-03-03 Impact factor: 8.860
Authors: Susan P Y Wong; Saritha Boyapati; Ruth A Engelberg; Bjorg Thorsteinsdottir; Janelle S Taylor; Ann M O'Hare Journal: Am J Kidney Dis Date: 2019-09-27 Impact factor: 8.860
Authors: Huzaifah Salat; Andrei Javier; Edward D Siew; Rocio Figueroa; Loren Lipworth; Edmond Kabagambe; Aihua Bian; Thomas G Stewart; Maie H El-Sourady; Mohana Karlekar; Cesar Y Cardona; T Alp Ikizler; Khaled Abdel-Kader Journal: Clin J Am Soc Nephrol Date: 2017-09-18 Impact factor: 8.237
Authors: Keren Ladin; Renuka Pandya; Allison Kannam; Rohini Loke; Tira Oskoui; Ronald D Perrone; Klemens B Meyer; Daniel E Weiner; John B Wong Journal: Am J Kidney Dis Date: 2018-02-01 Impact factor: 8.860
Authors: Susan P Y Wong; Paul L Hebert; Ryan J Laundry; Kenric W Hammond; Chuan-Fen Liu; Nilka R Burrows; Ann M O'Hare Journal: Clin J Am Soc Nephrol Date: 2016-09-22 Impact factor: 8.237
Authors: Keren Ladin; Renuka Pandya; Ronald D Perrone; Klemens B Meyer; Allison Kannam; Rohini Loke; Tira Oskoui; Daniel E Weiner; John B Wong Journal: Clin J Am Soc Nephrol Date: 2018-07-26 Impact factor: 8.237
Authors: Susan P Y Wong; Lynne V McFarland; Chuan-Fen Liu; Ryan J Laundry; Paul L Hebert; Ann M O'Hare Journal: JAMA Intern Med Date: 2019-03-01 Impact factor: 21.873