Marcus Sellars1, Josephine M Clayton2, Rachael L Morton3, Tim Luckett4, William Silvester5, Lucy Spencer6, Carol A Pollock5, Rowan G Walker7, Peter G Kerr8, Allison Tong9. 1. Kolling Institute, Northern Clinical School, Faculty of Medicine, The University of Sydney, Sydney, Australia; Advance Care Planning Australia, Austin Health, Melbourne, Australia. Electronic address: marcus.sellars@austin.org.au. 2. Kolling Institute, Northern Clinical School, Faculty of Medicine, The University of Sydney, Sydney, Australia; HammondCare Palliative & Supportive Care Service, Greenwich Hospital, Sydney, Australia; Improving Palliative Care through Clinical Trials (ImPaCCT), New South Wales, Australia. 3. NHMRC Clinical Trials Centre, The University of Sydney, Sydney, Australia. 4. Improving Palliative Care through Clinical Trials (ImPaCCT), New South Wales, Australia; Faculty of Health, University of Technology Sydney (UTS), Sydney, Australia. 5. Kolling Institute, Northern Clinical School, Faculty of Medicine, The University of Sydney, Sydney, Australia. 6. Department of Renal Medicine, Royal North Shore Hospital, Sydney, Australia. 7. Department of Renal Medicine, Alfred Hospital, Melbourne, Australia. 8. Department of Nephrology, Monash Medical Centre, Melbourne, Australia. 9. Sydney School of Public Health, The University of Sydney, Sydney, Australia; Centre for Kidney Research, The Children's Hospital at Westmead, NSW, Australia.
Abstract
BACKGROUND: Advance care planning (ACP) empowers patients to consider and communicate their current and future treatment goals. However, it can be an emotionally charged process for patients with kidney disease and their caregivers. This study aimed to describe the perspectives and attitudes of patients with end-stage renal disease (ESRD) and their caregivers toward ACP. STUDY DESIGN: Qualitative study. SETTING & PARTICIPANTS: Patients with ESRD (n=24) and their caregivers (n=15) aged 36 to 91 years at various stages of ACP ("not commenced," "in progress," or "completed") from 3 renal services. METHODOLOGY: Semistructured interviews. ANALYTICAL APPROACH: Transcripts were analyzed using thematic analysis. RESULTS: 5 major themes were identified: articulating core values (avoiding futile and undignified treatment, reevaluating terms of dialysis, framing a life worth living, and refusing to be a burden), confronting conversations (signifying death and defeat, accepting inevitable death, and alleviating existential tension), negotiating mutual understanding (broaching taboos and assisting conflicted caregivers), challenging patient autonomy (family pressures to continue dialysis, grief diminishing caregivers' capacity, and leveraging support), and decisional disempowerment (lacking medical transparency and disappointment with clinical disinterest). LIMITATIONS: Only English-speaking patients/caregivers participated in the interview. CONCLUSIONS: ACP provides patients with ESRD and their caregivers a conduit for accepting and planning for impending death and to express treatment preferences based on self-dignity and value of living. However, ACP can be considered taboo, may require caregivers to overcome personal and decisional conflict, and may be complex if patients and caregivers are unable to accept the reality of the patient's illness. We suggest that ACP facilitators and clinicians make ACP more acceptable and less confrontational to patients and caregivers and that strategies be put in place to support caregivers who may be experiencing overwhelming grief or who have conflicting goals, particularly when they are called on to make end-of-life decisions.
BACKGROUND: Advance care planning (ACP) empowers patients to consider and communicate their current and future treatment goals. However, it can be an emotionally charged process for patients with kidney disease and their caregivers. This study aimed to describe the perspectives and attitudes of patients with end-stage renal disease (ESRD) and their caregivers toward ACP. STUDY DESIGN: Qualitative study. SETTING & PARTICIPANTS: Patients with ESRD (n=24) and their caregivers (n=15) aged 36 to 91 years at various stages of ACP ("not commenced," "in progress," or "completed") from 3 renal services. METHODOLOGY: Semistructured interviews. ANALYTICAL APPROACH: Transcripts were analyzed using thematic analysis. RESULTS: 5 major themes were identified: articulating core values (avoiding futile and undignified treatment, reevaluating terms of dialysis, framing a life worth living, and refusing to be a burden), confronting conversations (signifying death and defeat, accepting inevitable death, and alleviating existential tension), negotiating mutual understanding (broaching taboos and assisting conflicted caregivers), challenging patient autonomy (family pressures to continue dialysis, grief diminishing caregivers' capacity, and leveraging support), and decisional disempowerment (lacking medical transparency and disappointment with clinical disinterest). LIMITATIONS: Only English-speaking patients/caregivers participated in the interview. CONCLUSIONS: ACP provides patients with ESRD and their caregivers a conduit for accepting and planning for impending death and to express treatment preferences based on self-dignity and value of living. However, ACP can be considered taboo, may require caregivers to overcome personal and decisional conflict, and may be complex if patients and caregivers are unable to accept the reality of the patient's illness. We suggest that ACP facilitators and clinicians make ACP more acceptable and less confrontational to patients and caregivers and that strategies be put in place to support caregivers who may be experiencing overwhelming grief or who have conflicting goals, particularly when they are called on to make end-of-life decisions.
Authors: Alycia A Bristol; Sobaata Chaudhry; Dana Assis; Rebecca Wright; Derek Moriyama; Katherine Harwood; Abraham A Brody; David M Charytan; Joshua Chodosh; Jennifer S Scherer Journal: Am J Hosp Palliat Care Date: 2021-01-13 Impact factor: 2.500
Authors: Marcus Sellars; Josephine M Clayton; Karen M Detering; Allison Tong; David Power; Rachael L Morton Journal: PLoS One Date: 2019-05-31 Impact factor: 3.240
Authors: Karan K Shah; Fliss E M Murtagh; Kevin McGeechan; Su Crail; Aine Burns; Anh D Tran; Rachael L Morton Journal: BMJ Open Date: 2019-05-19 Impact factor: 2.692
Authors: Danielle Moorman; Ranjeeta Mallick; Emily Rhodes; Brian Bieber; Gihad Nesrallah; Jan Davis; Rita Suri; Jeffery Perl; Peter Tanuseputro; Ronald Pisoni; Bruce Robinson; Manish M Sood Journal: Can J Kidney Health Dis Date: 2019-10-04
Authors: Nienke Fleuren; Marja F I A Depla; Daisy J A Janssen; Martijn Huisman; Cees M P M Hertogh Journal: BMC Palliat Care Date: 2020-03-06 Impact factor: 3.234