Communicating treatment options to older patients with advanced kidney disease: a conversation analysis study.

IF 2.2 4区 医学 Q2 UROLOGY & NEPHROLOGY
Lucy E Selman, Chloe B Shaw, Ryann Sowden, Fliss E M Murtagh, James A Tulsky, Ruth Parry, Fergus J Caskey, Rebecca K Barnes
{"title":"Communicating treatment options to older patients with advanced kidney disease: a conversation analysis study.","authors":"Lucy E Selman, Chloe B Shaw, Ryann Sowden, Fliss E M Murtagh, James A Tulsky, Ruth Parry, Fergus J Caskey, Rebecca K Barnes","doi":"10.1186/s12882-024-03855-w","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><strong>Background: </strong>Choosing to have dialysis or conservative kidney management is often challenging for older people with advanced kidney disease. While we know that clinical communication has a major impact on patients' treatment decision-making, little is known about how this occurs in practice. The OSCAR study (Optimising Staff-Patient Communication in Advanced Renal disease) aimed to identify how clinicians present kidney failure treatment options in consultations with older patients and the implications of this for patient engagement.</p><p><strong>Methods: </strong>An observational, multi-method study design was adopted. Outpatient consultations at four UK renal units were video-recorded, and patients completed a post-consultation measure of shared decision-making (SDM-Q-9). Units were sampled according to variable rates of conservative management. Eligible patients were ≥ 65 years old with an eGFR of ≤ 20 mls/min/1.73m<sup>2</sup> within the last 6 months. Video-recordings were screened to identify instances where clinicians presented both dialysis and conservative management. These instances were transcribed in fine-grained detail and recurrent practices identified using conversation-analytic methods, an empirical, observational approach to studying language and social interaction.</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>110 outpatient consultations were recorded (105 video, 5 audio only), involving 38 clinicians (doctors and nurses) and 94 patients: mean age 77 (65-97); 61 males/33 females; mean eGFR 15 (range 4-23). There were 21 instances where clinicians presented both dialysis and conservative management. Two main practices were identified: (1) Conservative management and dialysis both presented as the main treatment options; (2) Conservative management presented as a subordinate option to dialysis. The first practice was less commonly used (6 vs. 15 cases), but associated with more opportunities in the conversation for patients to ask questions and share their perspective, through which they tended to evaluate conservative management as an option that was potentially personally relevant. This practice was also associated with significantly higher post-consultation ratings of shared decision-making among patients (SDM-Q-9 median total score 24 vs. 37, p = 0.041).</p><p><strong>Conclusions: </strong>Presenting conservative management and dialysis as on an equal footing enables patient to take a more active role in decision-making. Findings should inform clinical communication skills training and education.</p><p><strong>Clinical trial number: </strong>No trial number as this is not a clinical trial.</p>","PeriodicalId":9089,"journal":{"name":"BMC Nephrology","volume":"25 1","pages":"417"},"PeriodicalIF":2.2000,"publicationDate":"2024-11-21","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC11580699/pdf/","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"BMC Nephrology","FirstCategoryId":"3","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1186/s12882-024-03855-w","RegionNum":4,"RegionCategory":"医学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q2","JCRName":"UROLOGY & NEPHROLOGY","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

Background: Choosing to have dialysis or conservative kidney management is often challenging for older people with advanced kidney disease. While we know that clinical communication has a major impact on patients' treatment decision-making, little is known about how this occurs in practice. The OSCAR study (Optimising Staff-Patient Communication in Advanced Renal disease) aimed to identify how clinicians present kidney failure treatment options in consultations with older patients and the implications of this for patient engagement.

Methods: An observational, multi-method study design was adopted. Outpatient consultations at four UK renal units were video-recorded, and patients completed a post-consultation measure of shared decision-making (SDM-Q-9). Units were sampled according to variable rates of conservative management. Eligible patients were ≥ 65 years old with an eGFR of ≤ 20 mls/min/1.73m2 within the last 6 months. Video-recordings were screened to identify instances where clinicians presented both dialysis and conservative management. These instances were transcribed in fine-grained detail and recurrent practices identified using conversation-analytic methods, an empirical, observational approach to studying language and social interaction.

Results: 110 outpatient consultations were recorded (105 video, 5 audio only), involving 38 clinicians (doctors and nurses) and 94 patients: mean age 77 (65-97); 61 males/33 females; mean eGFR 15 (range 4-23). There were 21 instances where clinicians presented both dialysis and conservative management. Two main practices were identified: (1) Conservative management and dialysis both presented as the main treatment options; (2) Conservative management presented as a subordinate option to dialysis. The first practice was less commonly used (6 vs. 15 cases), but associated with more opportunities in the conversation for patients to ask questions and share their perspective, through which they tended to evaluate conservative management as an option that was potentially personally relevant. This practice was also associated with significantly higher post-consultation ratings of shared decision-making among patients (SDM-Q-9 median total score 24 vs. 37, p = 0.041).

Conclusions: Presenting conservative management and dialysis as on an equal footing enables patient to take a more active role in decision-making. Findings should inform clinical communication skills training and education.

Clinical trial number: No trial number as this is not a clinical trial.

向老年晚期肾病患者宣传治疗方案:对话分析研究。
背景:对于患有晚期肾脏病的老年人来说,选择透析还是保守的肾脏治疗往往具有挑战性。虽然我们知道临床沟通对患者的治疗决策有重大影响,但对于在实践中如何进行临床沟通却知之甚少。OSCAR研究(优化晚期肾病患者与医护人员的沟通)旨在确定临床医生在与老年患者会诊时如何介绍肾衰竭治疗方案,以及这对患者参与的影响:方法:采用观察性多方法研究设计。对英国四家肾科医院的门诊咨询进行了视频录像,患者在咨询后完成了共同决策测量(SDM-Q-9)。根据保守治疗的不同比例对各单位进行抽样。符合条件的患者年龄≥ 65 岁,最近 6 个月内 eGFR ≤ 20 毫升/分钟/1.73 平方米。对视频录像进行筛选,以确定临床医生同时介绍透析和保守治疗的情况。采用会话分析方法(一种研究语言和社会互动的经验性观察方法)对这些实例进行了详细转录,并确定了重复出现的做法:共记录了 110 次门诊咨询(105 次视频,5 次音频),涉及 38 名临床医生(医生和护士)和 94 名患者:平均年龄 77 岁(65-97 岁);61 名男性/33 名女性;平均 eGFR 15(范围 4-23)。临床医生同时介绍透析和保守治疗的情况有 21 例。确定了两种主要做法:(1) 保守治疗和透析均作为主要治疗方案;(2) 保守治疗作为透析的从属方案。第一种做法的使用率较低(6 例与 15 例),但患者有更多机会在谈话中提出问题并分享自己的观点,从而倾向于将保守治疗作为一种可能与个人相关的选择。这种做法还与患者在会诊后对共同决策的评分明显提高有关(SDM-Q-9 中位总分 24 分 vs. 37 分,p = 0.041):结论:将保守治疗和透析同等对待可使患者在决策中发挥更积极的作用。临床试验编号:没有试验编号,因为这不是临床试验。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 求助全文
来源期刊
BMC Nephrology
BMC Nephrology UROLOGY & NEPHROLOGY-
CiteScore
4.30
自引率
0.00%
发文量
375
审稿时长
3-8 weeks
期刊介绍: BMC Nephrology is an open access journal publishing original peer-reviewed research articles in all aspects of the prevention, diagnosis and management of kidney and associated disorders, as well as related molecular genetics, pathophysiology, and epidemiology.
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
确定
请完成安全验证×
copy
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
右上角分享
点击右上角分享
0
联系我们:info@booksci.cn Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。 Copyright © 2023 布克学术 All rights reserved.
京ICP备2023020795号-1
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术官方微信