TY - JOUR
T1 - Nephrologists’ Perspectives on Defining and Applying Patient-Centered Outcomes in Hemodialysis
AU - Tong, Allison
AU - Winkelmayer, Wolfgang
AU - Wheeler, David
AU - van Biesen, Wim
AU - Tugwell, Peter
AU - Manns, Braden
AU - Hemmelgarn, Brenda
AU - Harris, Tess
AU - Crowe, Sally
AU - Ju, Angela
AU - O'Lone, Emma
AU - Evangelidis, Nicole
AU - Craig, Jonathan
PY - 2017
Y1 - 2017
N2 - Background and objectives Patient centeredness is widely advocated as a cornerstone of health care, but it is yet to be fully realized, including in nephrology. Our study aims to describe nephrologists’ perspectives on defining and implementing patient-centered outcomes in hemodialysis. Design, setting, participants, & measurements Face-to-face, semistructured interviews were conducted with 58 nephrologists from 27 dialysis units across nine countries, including the United States, the United Kingdom, Australia, Austria, Belgium, Canada, Germany, Singapore, and New Zealand. Transcripts were thematically analyzed. Results We identified five themes on defining and implementing patient-centered outcomes in hemodialysis: explicitly prioritized by patients (articulated preferences and goals, ascertaining treatment burden, defining hemodialysis success, distinguishing a physician-patient dichotomy, and supporting shared decision making), optimizing wellbeing (respecting patient choice, focusing on symptomology, perceptible and tangible, and judging relevance and consequence), comprehending extensive heterogeneity of clinical and quality of life outcomes (distilling diverse priorities, highly individualized, attempting to specify outcomes, and broadening context), clinically hamstrung (professional deficiency, uncertainty and complexity in measurement, beyond medical purview, specificity of care, mechanistic mindset [focused on biochemical targets and comorbidities], avoiding alarm, and paradoxical dilemma), and undermined by system pressures (adhering to overarching policies, misalignment with mandates, and resource constraints). Conclusions Improving patient-centered outcomes is regarded by nephrologists to encompass strategies that address patient goals and improve wellbeing and treatment burden in patients on hemodialysis. However, efforts are hampered by ambiguities about how to prioritize, measure, and manage the plethora of critical comorbidities and broader quality of life outcomes in a care setting that is technically demanding and driven by biochemical targets. Identifying critical patient–important outcomes and mechanisms for integrating them into practice may help to deliver patient-centered care in hemodialysis and other chronic disease settings.
AB - Background and objectives Patient centeredness is widely advocated as a cornerstone of health care, but it is yet to be fully realized, including in nephrology. Our study aims to describe nephrologists’ perspectives on defining and implementing patient-centered outcomes in hemodialysis. Design, setting, participants, & measurements Face-to-face, semistructured interviews were conducted with 58 nephrologists from 27 dialysis units across nine countries, including the United States, the United Kingdom, Australia, Austria, Belgium, Canada, Germany, Singapore, and New Zealand. Transcripts were thematically analyzed. Results We identified five themes on defining and implementing patient-centered outcomes in hemodialysis: explicitly prioritized by patients (articulated preferences and goals, ascertaining treatment burden, defining hemodialysis success, distinguishing a physician-patient dichotomy, and supporting shared decision making), optimizing wellbeing (respecting patient choice, focusing on symptomology, perceptible and tangible, and judging relevance and consequence), comprehending extensive heterogeneity of clinical and quality of life outcomes (distilling diverse priorities, highly individualized, attempting to specify outcomes, and broadening context), clinically hamstrung (professional deficiency, uncertainty and complexity in measurement, beyond medical purview, specificity of care, mechanistic mindset [focused on biochemical targets and comorbidities], avoiding alarm, and paradoxical dilemma), and undermined by system pressures (adhering to overarching policies, misalignment with mandates, and resource constraints). Conclusions Improving patient-centered outcomes is regarded by nephrologists to encompass strategies that address patient goals and improve wellbeing and treatment burden in patients on hemodialysis. However, efforts are hampered by ambiguities about how to prioritize, measure, and manage the plethora of critical comorbidities and broader quality of life outcomes in a care setting that is technically demanding and driven by biochemical targets. Identifying critical patient–important outcomes and mechanisms for integrating them into practice may help to deliver patient-centered care in hemodialysis and other chronic disease settings.
KW - Australia
KW - Austria
KW - Belgium
KW - Canada
KW - Chronic Disease
KW - Comorbidity
KW - Decision Making
KW - Germany
KW - Goals
KW - Great Britain
KW - Hemodialysis
KW - Humans
KW - Nephrology
KW - New Zealand
KW - Patient Selection
KW - Patient-Centered Care
KW - Physician-Patient Relations
KW - Qualitative research
KW - Quality of life
KW - Renal dialysis
KW - Singapore
KW - Uncertainty
KW - United States
UR - http://www.scopus.com/inward/record.url?scp=85021709067&partnerID=8YFLogxK
U2 - 10.2215/CJN.08370816
DO - 10.2215/CJN.08370816
M3 - Article
SN - 1555-905X
VL - 12
SP - 454
EP - 466
JO - Clinical Journal of the American Society of Nephrology
JF - Clinical Journal of the American Society of Nephrology
IS - 3
ER -