Advance care planning with patients on hemodialysis: an implementation study.
Advance care planning
End-of-life
Hemodialysis
Implementation
Intervention
Shared decision-making
Journal
BMC palliative care
ISSN: 1472-684X
Titre abrégé: BMC Palliat Care
Pays: England
ID NLM: 101088685
Informations de publication
Date de publication:
26 Jul 2019
26 Jul 2019
Historique:
received:
19
12
2018
accepted:
21
06
2019
entrez:
28
7
2019
pubmed:
28
7
2019
medline:
25
2
2020
Statut:
epublish
Résumé
Patients with end-stage kidney disease (ESKD) on hemodialysis have limited life expectancy, yet their palliative care needs often go unmet. The aim of this study was to identify barriers and facilitators for implementation of "Shared Decision Making and Renal Supportive Care" (SDM-RSC), an intervention to improve advance care planning (ACP) for patients with ESKD on hemodialysis. The Consolidated Framework for Implementation Research (CFIR) was the organizing framework for this study. CFIR is a theory-based implementation framework consisting of five domains (Intervention Characteristics, Inner Setting, Outer Setting, Characteristics of Individuals, and Process), each of which has associated constructs. Potential barriers and facilitators to implementation of the SDM-RSC intervention were identified through observation of study procedures, surveys of social workers nephrologists, study participants, and family members, and assessment of intervention fidelity. Twenty-nine nephrologists and 24 social workers, representing 18 outpatient dialysis units in Massachusetts (n = 10) and New Mexico (n = 8), were trained to conduct SDM-RSC intervention sessions. A total of 102 of 125 patient enrolled in the study received the intervention; 40 had family members present. Potential barriers and facilitators to implementation of the SDM-RSC intervention were identified in each of the five CFIR domains. Barriers included complexity of the intervention; challenges to meeting with patients on non-dialysis days; difficulties scheduling intervention sessions due to nephrologists' and social workers' caseloads; perceived need for local policy change regarding ACP; perceived need for additional ACP training for social workers and nephrologists; and lack of endorsement of the intervention by some staff members. Facilitators included: training for social workers, national dialysis chain leadership engagement and the institution of social worker/nephrologist clinic champions. ACP for patients on hemodialysis can have a positive impact on end-of-life outcomes for patients and their families but does not take place routinely. The barriers to effective implementation of interventions to improve ACP identified in this study might be addressed by: adapting the intervention for local contexts with input from clinicians, dialysis staff, patients and families; providing nephrologists and social workers additional training prior to delivering the intervention; and developing policy that routinizes ACP for hemodialysis patients. Clinicaltrials.gov NCT02405312. Registered 04/01/2015.
Sections du résumé
BACKGROUND
BACKGROUND
Patients with end-stage kidney disease (ESKD) on hemodialysis have limited life expectancy, yet their palliative care needs often go unmet. The aim of this study was to identify barriers and facilitators for implementation of "Shared Decision Making and Renal Supportive Care" (SDM-RSC), an intervention to improve advance care planning (ACP) for patients with ESKD on hemodialysis.
METHODS
METHODS
The Consolidated Framework for Implementation Research (CFIR) was the organizing framework for this study. CFIR is a theory-based implementation framework consisting of five domains (Intervention Characteristics, Inner Setting, Outer Setting, Characteristics of Individuals, and Process), each of which has associated constructs. Potential barriers and facilitators to implementation of the SDM-RSC intervention were identified through observation of study procedures, surveys of social workers nephrologists, study participants, and family members, and assessment of intervention fidelity.
RESULTS
RESULTS
Twenty-nine nephrologists and 24 social workers, representing 18 outpatient dialysis units in Massachusetts (n = 10) and New Mexico (n = 8), were trained to conduct SDM-RSC intervention sessions. A total of 102 of 125 patient enrolled in the study received the intervention; 40 had family members present. Potential barriers and facilitators to implementation of the SDM-RSC intervention were identified in each of the five CFIR domains. Barriers included complexity of the intervention; challenges to meeting with patients on non-dialysis days; difficulties scheduling intervention sessions due to nephrologists' and social workers' caseloads; perceived need for local policy change regarding ACP; perceived need for additional ACP training for social workers and nephrologists; and lack of endorsement of the intervention by some staff members. Facilitators included: training for social workers, national dialysis chain leadership engagement and the institution of social worker/nephrologist clinic champions.
CONCLUSIONS
CONCLUSIONS
ACP for patients on hemodialysis can have a positive impact on end-of-life outcomes for patients and their families but does not take place routinely. The barriers to effective implementation of interventions to improve ACP identified in this study might be addressed by: adapting the intervention for local contexts with input from clinicians, dialysis staff, patients and families; providing nephrologists and social workers additional training prior to delivering the intervention; and developing policy that routinizes ACP for hemodialysis patients.
TRIAL REGISTRATION
BACKGROUND
Clinicaltrials.gov NCT02405312. Registered 04/01/2015.
Identifiants
pubmed: 31349844
doi: 10.1186/s12904-019-0437-2
pii: 10.1186/s12904-019-0437-2
pmc: PMC6659207
doi:
Banques de données
ClinicalTrials.gov
['NCT02405312']
Types de publication
Journal Article
Langues
eng
Sous-ensembles de citation
IM
Pagination
64Subventions
Organisme : Patient-Centered Outcomes Research Institute
ID : CD CD-1304-7360
Organisme : National Institute of Child Health and Human Development
ID : K23HD080870
Organisme : National Institutes of Health
ID : K23DK114526
Références
Am J Kidney Dis. 2007 Jan;49(1):27-36
pubmed: 17185143
Clin J Am Soc Nephrol. 2006 Sep;1(5):1023-8
pubmed: 17699322
J Adv Nurs. 2007 Sep;59(6):644-53
pubmed: 17727406
Res Nurs Health. 2009 Jun;32(3):260-73
pubmed: 19205027
Clin Med (Lond). 2009 Feb;9(1):76-9
pubmed: 19271609
Implement Sci. 2009 Aug 07;4:50
pubmed: 19664226
Clin J Am Soc Nephrol. 2010 Jan;5(1):72-9
pubmed: 19965531
Clin J Am Soc Nephrol. 2010 Feb;5(2):195-204
pubmed: 20089488
Qual Life Res. 2011 Apr;20(3):383-9
pubmed: 20972630
Psychol Addict Behav. 2011 Jun;25(2):194-205
pubmed: 21443291
Age Ageing. 2012 Mar;41(2):263-9
pubmed: 22156555
Clin J Am Soc Nephrol. 2013 Dec;8(12):2028-30
pubmed: 24202131
Clin J Am Soc Nephrol. 2013 Dec;8(12):2117-22
pubmed: 24202133
Palliat Med. 2014 Sep;28(8):1000-25
pubmed: 24651708
Clin J Am Soc Nephrol. 2014 Dec 5;9(12):2189-94
pubmed: 25035275
JAMA Intern Med. 2014 Dec;174(12):1994-2003
pubmed: 25330167
PLoS One. 2015 Feb 13;10(2):e0116629
pubmed: 25679395
Clin J Am Soc Nephrol. 2015 Mar 6;10(3):390-400
pubmed: 25680737
BMC Palliat Care. 2015 Jun 12;14:30
pubmed: 26066323
Am J Kidney Dis. 2015 Nov;66(5):813-22
pubmed: 26141307
J Pain Symptom Manage. 2016 Apr;51(4):756-761.e2
pubmed: 26706629
Am J Kidney Dis. 2016 Jul;68(1):103-9
pubmed: 26806003
Clin J Am Soc Nephrol. 2017 May 8;12(5):854-863
pubmed: 28031417
Clin J Am Soc Nephrol. 2016 Oct 7;11(10):1879-1880
pubmed: 28394760
Curr Opin Nephrol Hypertens. 2017 Nov;26(6):530-536
pubmed: 28985192
Health Educ Q. 1988 Winter;15(4):351-77
pubmed: 3068205