Literature DB >> 36130746

Shared decision-making in advanced kidney disease: a scoping review.

Noel Engels1,2,3, Gretchen N de Graav3, Paul van der Nat4, Marinus van den Dorpel3, Anne M Stiggelbout5, Willem Jan Bos2,4.   

Abstract

OBJECTIVES: To provide a comprehensive overview of interventions that support shared decision-making (SDM) for treatment modality decisions in advanced kidney disease (AKD). To provide summarised information on their content, use and reported results. To provide an overview of interventions currently under development or investigation.
DESIGN: The JBI methodology for scoping reviews was followed. This review conforms to the Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses Extension for Scoping Reviews (PRISMA-ScR) checklist. DATA SOURCES: MEDLINE, Embase, Web of Science, Cochrane Library, Emcare, PsycINFO, PROSPERO and Academic Search Premier for peer-reviewed literature. Other online databases (eg, clinicaltrials.gov, OpenGrey) for grey literature. ELIGIBILITY FOR INCLUSION: Records in English with a study population of patients >18 years of age with an estimated glomerular filtration rate <30 mL/min/1.73 m2. Records had to be on the subject of SDM, or explicitly mention that the intervention reported on could be used to support SDM for treatment modality decisions in AKD. DATA EXTRACTION AND SYNTHESIS: Two reviewers independently screened and selected records for data extraction. Interventions were categorised as prognostic tools (PTs), educational programmes (EPs), patient decision aids (PtDAs) or multicomponent initiatives (MIs). Interventions were subsequently categorised based on the decisions they were developed to support.
RESULTS: One hundred forty-five interventions were identified in a total of 158 included records: 52 PTs, 51 EPs, 29 PtDAs and 13 MIs. Sixteen (n=16, 11%) were novel interventions currently under investigation. Forty-six (n=46, 35.7%) were reported to have been implemented in clinical practice. Sixty-seven (n=67, 51.9%) were evaluated for their effects on outcomes in the intended users.
CONCLUSION: There is no conclusive evidence on which intervention is the most efficacious in supporting SDM for treatment modality decisions in AKD. There is a lot of variation in selected outcomes, and the body of evidence is largely based on observational research. In addition, the effects of these interventions on SDM are under-reported. © Author(s) (or their employer(s)) 2022. Re-use permitted under CC BY-NC. No commercial re-use. See rights and permissions. Published by BMJ.

Entities:  

Keywords:  end stage renal failure; internal medicine; nephrology

Mesh:

Year:  2022        PMID: 36130746      PMCID: PMC9494569          DOI: 10.1136/bmjopen-2021-055248

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  BMJ Open        ISSN: 2044-6055            Impact factor:   3.006


  139 in total

1.  Developing and pilot testing a shared decision-making intervention for dialysis choice.

Authors:  Jeanette Finderup; Jens K D Jensen; Kirsten Lomborg
Journal:  J Ren Care       Date:  2018-04-17

2.  Effect of an in-hospital chronic kidney disease education program among patients with unplanned urgent-start dialysis.

Authors:  Jean-Philippe Rioux; Harpaul Cheema; Joanne M Bargman; Diane Watson; Christopher T Chan
Journal:  Clin J Am Soc Nephrol       Date:  2011-01-06       Impact factor: 8.237

3.  Low performance of prognostic tools for predicting dialysis in elderly people with advanced CKD.

Authors:  Julien Prouvot; Emilie Pambrun; Cecile Couchoud; Cecile Vigneau; Sophie Roche; Vincent Allot; Jerome Potier; Maud Francois; Daniela Babici; Camelia Prelipcean; Olivier Moranne
Journal:  J Nephrol       Date:  2021-01-04       Impact factor: 3.902

4.  Living donor transplant education for African American patients with end-stage renal disease.

Authors:  Kimberly R Jacob Arriola; C Lamonte Powell; Nancy J Thompson; Jennie P Perryman; Mohua Basu
Journal:  Prog Transplant       Date:  2014-12       Impact factor: 1.187

5.  Advance prediction of early death in patients starting maintenance dialysis.

Authors:  R N Foley; P S Parfrey; D Hefferton; I Singh; A Simms; B J Barrett
Journal:  Am J Kidney Dis       Date:  1994-06       Impact factor: 8.860

6.  Culturally competent transplant program improves Hispanics' knowledge and attitudes about live kidney donation and transplant.

Authors:  Elisa J Gordon; Elizabeth Reddy; Sorelly Gil; Joseph Feinglass; Jillian Rodde; Michael M Abecassis; Juan Carlos Caicedo
Journal:  Prog Transplant       Date:  2014-03       Impact factor: 1.187

7.  A randomized trial of a home-based educational approach to increase live donor kidney transplantation: effects in blacks and whites.

Authors:  James R Rodrigue; Danielle L Cornell; Bruce Kaplan; Richard J Howard
Journal:  Am J Kidney Dis       Date:  2008-03-04       Impact factor: 8.860

8.  External Validation of a risk stratification model to assist shared decision making for patients starting renal replacement therapy.

Authors:  Patrick Peeters; Wim Van Biesen; Nic Veys; Wim Lemahieu; Bart De Moor; Johan De Meester
Journal:  BMC Nephrol       Date:  2016-04-07       Impact factor: 2.388

9.  Evaluation of a shared decision-making intervention for dialysis choice at four Danish hospitals: a qualitative study of patient perspective.

Authors:  Jeanette Finderup; Jens Dam Jensen; Kirsten Lomborg
Journal:  BMJ Open       Date:  2019-10-18       Impact factor: 2.692

10.  Standards for UNiversal reporting of patient Decision Aid Evaluation studies: the development of SUNDAE Checklist.

Authors:  Karen R Sepucha; Purva Abhyankar; Aubri S Hoffman; Hilary L Bekker; Annie LeBlanc; Carrie A Levin; Mary Ropka; Victoria A Shaffer; Stacey L Sheridan; Dawn Stacey; Peep Stalmeier; Ha Vo; Celia E Wills; Richard Thomson
Journal:  BMJ Qual Saf       Date:  2017-12-21       Impact factor: 7.418

View more

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.