"You can't put your luck on people": a qualitative study of family views on the best interests decision-making process concerning adult kidney care in England.

IF 2.2 4区 医学 Q2 UROLOGY & NEPHROLOGY
Jordan A Parsons, Fergus J Caskey, Jonathan Ives
{"title":"\"You can't put your luck on people\": a qualitative study of family views on the best interests decision-making process concerning adult kidney care in England.","authors":"Jordan A Parsons, Fergus J Caskey, Jonathan Ives","doi":"10.1186/s12882-025-04147-7","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><strong>Background: </strong>When an adult patient lacks decision-making capacity, care decisions must be made on their behalf in their \"best interests\". We know little about the experiences of the family members of adult kidney patients with cognitive impairments, particularly in relation to best interests decisions. It is anticipated that they have varied experiences, with many feeling excluded from the most complex care decisions.</p><p><strong>Methods: </strong>This study aimed to understand the views and experiences of family members of adult kidney patients who had undergone a best interests decision in England. Semi-structured interviews (n = 6) were conducted with family members to explore their experiences and their views of the best interests process. Interview transcripts were then thematically analysed.</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>A range of experiences were reported, with four themes developed: prioritising patient preferences; family involvement; opposition to the best interests approach; and the importance of communication amongst all involved. Our findings suggest inconsistencies in how best interests decisions are approached in England, which can affect the nature and extent of family involvement. Participants highlighted the value of clear communication on all aspects of the decision-making process, including clarity on the roles of different stakeholders.</p><p><strong>Conclusions: </strong>When caring for adults who lack decision-making capacity, improvements in communication amongst all involved may minimise disagreements that escalate to legal proceedings.</p>","PeriodicalId":9089,"journal":{"name":"BMC Nephrology","volume":"26 1","pages":"220"},"PeriodicalIF":2.2000,"publicationDate":"2025-05-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC12046694/pdf/","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"BMC Nephrology","FirstCategoryId":"3","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1186/s12882-025-04147-7","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: When an adult patient lacks decision-making capacity, care decisions must be made on their behalf in their "best interests". We know little about the experiences of the family members of adult kidney patients with cognitive impairments, particularly in relation to best interests decisions. It is anticipated that they have varied experiences, with many feeling excluded from the most complex care decisions.

Methods: This study aimed to understand the views and experiences of family members of adult kidney patients who had undergone a best interests decision in England. Semi-structured interviews (n = 6) were conducted with family members to explore their experiences and their views of the best interests process. Interview transcripts were then thematically analysed.

Results: A range of experiences were reported, with four themes developed: prioritising patient preferences; family involvement; opposition to the best interests approach; and the importance of communication amongst all involved. Our findings suggest inconsistencies in how best interests decisions are approached in England, which can affect the nature and extent of family involvement. Participants highlighted the value of clear communication on all aspects of the decision-making process, including clarity on the roles of different stakeholders.

Conclusions: When caring for adults who lack decision-making capacity, improvements in communication amongst all involved may minimise disagreements that escalate to legal proceedings.

“你不能把你的运气放在人身上”:一项关于英国成人肾脏护理的最佳利益决策过程的家庭观点的定性研究。
背景:当成年患者缺乏决策能力时,必须以他们的“最佳利益”代表他们做出护理决策。我们对患有认知障碍的成年肾病患者的家庭成员的经历知之甚少,特别是在最佳利益决策方面。预计他们有不同的经历,许多人感觉被排除在最复杂的护理决定之外。方法:本研究旨在了解在英国接受最佳利益决策的成年肾脏患者家属的观点和经验。对家庭成员进行了半结构化访谈(n = 6),以探讨他们的经历和他们对最佳利益过程的看法。然后对访谈记录进行主题分析。结果:报告了一系列经验,其中发展了四个主题:优先考虑患者的偏好;家庭参与;反对最佳利益方法;以及所有相关人员之间沟通的重要性。我们的研究结果表明,在英国,最佳利益决策的处理方式不一致,这可能会影响家庭参与的性质和程度。与会者强调了就决策过程的所有方面进行明确沟通的价值,包括明确不同利益攸关方的作用。结论:在照顾缺乏决策能力的成年人时,改善所有相关人员之间的沟通可以最大限度地减少升级为法律诉讼的分歧。
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