Cargando…
Can we routinely measure patient involvement in treatment decision-making in chronic kidney care? A service evaluation in 27 renal units in the UK
BACKGROUND: Shared decision making is considered an important aspect of chronic disease management. We explored the feasibility of routinely measuring kidney patients' involvement in making decisions about renal replacement therapy (RRT) in National Health Service settings. METHODS: We dissemin...
Autores principales: | , , , , , , , , , , |
---|---|
Formato: | Online Artículo Texto |
Lenguaje: | English |
Publicado: |
Oxford University Press
2016
|
Materias: | |
Acceso en línea: | https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC4792631/ https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/26985377 http://dx.doi.org/10.1093/ckj/sfw003 |
_version_ | 1782421279782993920 |
---|---|
author | Durand, Marie-Anne Bekker, Hilary L. Casula, Anna Elias, Robert Ferraro, Alastair Lloyd, Amy van der Veer, Sabine N. Metcalfe, Wendy Mooney, Andrew Thomson, Richard G. Tomson, Charles R.V. |
author_facet | Durand, Marie-Anne Bekker, Hilary L. Casula, Anna Elias, Robert Ferraro, Alastair Lloyd, Amy van der Veer, Sabine N. Metcalfe, Wendy Mooney, Andrew Thomson, Richard G. Tomson, Charles R.V. |
author_sort | Durand, Marie-Anne |
collection | PubMed |
description | BACKGROUND: Shared decision making is considered an important aspect of chronic disease management. We explored the feasibility of routinely measuring kidney patients' involvement in making decisions about renal replacement therapy (RRT) in National Health Service settings. METHODS: We disseminated a 17-item paper questionnaire on involvement in decision-making among adult patients with established kidney failure who made a decision about RRT in the previous 90 days (Phase 1) and patients who had been receiving RRT for 90–180 days (Phase 2). Recruitment rates were calculated as the ratio between the number of included and expected eligible patients (I : E ratio). We assessed our sample's representativeness by comparing demographics between participants and incident patients in the UK Renal Registry. RESULTS: Three hundred and five (Phase 1) and 187 (Phase 2) patients were included. For Phase 1, the I : E ratio was 0.44 (range, 0.08–2.80) compared with 0.27 (range, 0.04–1.05) in Phase 2. Study participants were more likely to be white compared with incident RRT patients (88 versus 77%; P < 0.0001). We found no difference in age, gender or social deprivation. In Phases 1 and 2, the majority reported a collaborative decision-making style (73 and 69%), and had no decisional conflict (85 and 76%); the median score for shared decision-making experience was 12.5 (Phase 1) and 10 (Phase 2) out of 20. CONCLUSION: Our study shows the importance of assessing the feasibility of data collection in a chronic disease context prior to implementation in routine practice. Routine measurement of patient involvement in established kidney disease treatment decisions is feasible, but there are challenges in selecting the measure needed to capture experience of involvement, reducing variation in response rate by service and identifying when to capture experience in a service managing people's chronic disease over time. |
format | Online Article Text |
id | pubmed-4792631 |
institution | National Center for Biotechnology Information |
language | English |
publishDate | 2016 |
publisher | Oxford University Press |
record_format | MEDLINE/PubMed |
spelling | pubmed-47926312016-03-16 Can we routinely measure patient involvement in treatment decision-making in chronic kidney care? A service evaluation in 27 renal units in the UK Durand, Marie-Anne Bekker, Hilary L. Casula, Anna Elias, Robert Ferraro, Alastair Lloyd, Amy van der Veer, Sabine N. Metcalfe, Wendy Mooney, Andrew Thomson, Richard G. Tomson, Charles R.V. Clin Kidney J Chronic Kidney Disease BACKGROUND: Shared decision making is considered an important aspect of chronic disease management. We explored the feasibility of routinely measuring kidney patients' involvement in making decisions about renal replacement therapy (RRT) in National Health Service settings. METHODS: We disseminated a 17-item paper questionnaire on involvement in decision-making among adult patients with established kidney failure who made a decision about RRT in the previous 90 days (Phase 1) and patients who had been receiving RRT for 90–180 days (Phase 2). Recruitment rates were calculated as the ratio between the number of included and expected eligible patients (I : E ratio). We assessed our sample's representativeness by comparing demographics between participants and incident patients in the UK Renal Registry. RESULTS: Three hundred and five (Phase 1) and 187 (Phase 2) patients were included. For Phase 1, the I : E ratio was 0.44 (range, 0.08–2.80) compared with 0.27 (range, 0.04–1.05) in Phase 2. Study participants were more likely to be white compared with incident RRT patients (88 versus 77%; P < 0.0001). We found no difference in age, gender or social deprivation. In Phases 1 and 2, the majority reported a collaborative decision-making style (73 and 69%), and had no decisional conflict (85 and 76%); the median score for shared decision-making experience was 12.5 (Phase 1) and 10 (Phase 2) out of 20. CONCLUSION: Our study shows the importance of assessing the feasibility of data collection in a chronic disease context prior to implementation in routine practice. Routine measurement of patient involvement in established kidney disease treatment decisions is feasible, but there are challenges in selecting the measure needed to capture experience of involvement, reducing variation in response rate by service and identifying when to capture experience in a service managing people's chronic disease over time. Oxford University Press 2016-04 2016-03-05 /pmc/articles/PMC4792631/ /pubmed/26985377 http://dx.doi.org/10.1093/ckj/sfw003 Text en © The Author 2016. Published by Oxford University Press on behalf of ERA-EDTA. http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc/4.0/ This is an Open Access article distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution Non-Commercial License (http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc/4.0/), which permits non-commercial re-use, distribution, and reproduction in any medium, provided the original work is properly cited. For commercial re-use, please contact journals.permissions@oup.com |
spellingShingle | Chronic Kidney Disease Durand, Marie-Anne Bekker, Hilary L. Casula, Anna Elias, Robert Ferraro, Alastair Lloyd, Amy van der Veer, Sabine N. Metcalfe, Wendy Mooney, Andrew Thomson, Richard G. Tomson, Charles R.V. Can we routinely measure patient involvement in treatment decision-making in chronic kidney care? A service evaluation in 27 renal units in the UK |
title | Can we routinely measure patient involvement in treatment decision-making in chronic kidney care? A service evaluation in 27 renal units in the UK |
title_full | Can we routinely measure patient involvement in treatment decision-making in chronic kidney care? A service evaluation in 27 renal units in the UK |
title_fullStr | Can we routinely measure patient involvement in treatment decision-making in chronic kidney care? A service evaluation in 27 renal units in the UK |
title_full_unstemmed | Can we routinely measure patient involvement in treatment decision-making in chronic kidney care? A service evaluation in 27 renal units in the UK |
title_short | Can we routinely measure patient involvement in treatment decision-making in chronic kidney care? A service evaluation in 27 renal units in the UK |
title_sort | can we routinely measure patient involvement in treatment decision-making in chronic kidney care? a service evaluation in 27 renal units in the uk |
topic | Chronic Kidney Disease |
url | https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC4792631/ https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/26985377 http://dx.doi.org/10.1093/ckj/sfw003 |
work_keys_str_mv | AT durandmarieanne canweroutinelymeasurepatientinvolvementintreatmentdecisionmakinginchronickidneycareaserviceevaluationin27renalunitsintheuk AT bekkerhilaryl canweroutinelymeasurepatientinvolvementintreatmentdecisionmakinginchronickidneycareaserviceevaluationin27renalunitsintheuk AT casulaanna canweroutinelymeasurepatientinvolvementintreatmentdecisionmakinginchronickidneycareaserviceevaluationin27renalunitsintheuk AT eliasrobert canweroutinelymeasurepatientinvolvementintreatmentdecisionmakinginchronickidneycareaserviceevaluationin27renalunitsintheuk AT ferraroalastair canweroutinelymeasurepatientinvolvementintreatmentdecisionmakinginchronickidneycareaserviceevaluationin27renalunitsintheuk AT lloydamy canweroutinelymeasurepatientinvolvementintreatmentdecisionmakinginchronickidneycareaserviceevaluationin27renalunitsintheuk AT vanderveersabinen canweroutinelymeasurepatientinvolvementintreatmentdecisionmakinginchronickidneycareaserviceevaluationin27renalunitsintheuk AT metcalfewendy canweroutinelymeasurepatientinvolvementintreatmentdecisionmakinginchronickidneycareaserviceevaluationin27renalunitsintheuk AT mooneyandrew canweroutinelymeasurepatientinvolvementintreatmentdecisionmakinginchronickidneycareaserviceevaluationin27renalunitsintheuk AT thomsonrichardg canweroutinelymeasurepatientinvolvementintreatmentdecisionmakinginchronickidneycareaserviceevaluationin27renalunitsintheuk AT tomsoncharlesrv canweroutinelymeasurepatientinvolvementintreatmentdecisionmakinginchronickidneycareaserviceevaluationin27renalunitsintheuk |