终末期肾病患者临终关怀的共同决策:肾科医师的观点和态度。

IF 3.5 4区 医学 Q1 HEALTH POLICY & SERVICES Israel Journal of Health Policy Research Pub Date : 2024-09-10 DOI:10.1186/s13584-024-00632-w
Wassiem Bassam Abu Hatoum, Daniel Sperling
{"title":"终末期肾病患者临终关怀的共同决策:肾科医师的观点和态度。","authors":"Wassiem Bassam Abu Hatoum, Daniel Sperling","doi":"10.1186/s13584-024-00632-w","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><strong>Background: </strong>The term end-stage renal disease (ESRD) refers to the final stage of chronic kidney disease. Not all ESRD patients are suitable for dialysis treatment, which despite its advantages, is not without risks. Shared nephrologist-patient decision-making could be beneficial at this stage, yet little is known about such practices in Israel. This study aimed at examining the practice of shared decision-making (SDM) between nephrologists and ESRD patients in Israel, while exploring related conflicts, ethical dilemmas, and considerations.</p><p><strong>Methods: </strong>The descriptive-quantitative approach applied in this study included a validated questionnaire for nephrologists, based on Emanual and Emanual (1992). The survey, which was distributed via social-media platforms and snowball sampling, was completed by 169 nephrologists. Data analysis included t-tests for independent samples, f-tests for analysis of variance, and t-tests and f-tests for independence. Descriptive analysis examined attitudes towards SDM in end-of-life care for ESRD patients.</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>The findings show that the research sample did not include nephrologists who typically act according to the paternalistic decision-making style. Rather, 53% of the respondents were found to act in line with the informative decision-making style, while 47% act according to the interpretive decision-making style. Almost 70% of all respondents reported their discussing quality-of-life with patients; 63.4% provide prognostic assessments; 61.5% inquire about the patient's desired place of death; 58.6% ask about advance directives or power-of-attorney; and 57.4% inquire about cultural and religious beliefs in end-of-life treatment. Additionally, informative nephrologists tend to promote the patients' autonomy over their health (P < 0.001); they are also in favor of conservative treatment, compared to paternalistic and interpretive nephrologists, and use less invasive methods than other nephrologists (P = 0.02).</p><p><strong>Conclusions: </strong>Nephrologists in Israel only partially pursue an SDM model, which has the potential to improve quality-of-care for ESRD patients and their families. SDM programs should be developed and implemented for increasing such practices among nephrologists, thereby expanding the possibilities for providing conservative care at end-of-life.</p>","PeriodicalId":46694,"journal":{"name":"Israel Journal of Health Policy Research","volume":"13 1","pages":"45"},"PeriodicalIF":3.5000,"publicationDate":"2024-09-10","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC11385125/pdf/","citationCount":"0","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"Shared decision-making in end-of-life care for end-stage renal disease patients: nephrologists' views and attitudes.\",\"authors\":\"Wassiem Bassam Abu Hatoum, Daniel Sperling\",\"doi\":\"10.1186/s13584-024-00632-w\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"<p><strong>Background: </strong>The term end-stage renal disease (ESRD) refers to the final stage of chronic kidney disease. Not all ESRD patients are suitable for dialysis treatment, which despite its advantages, is not without risks. Shared nephrologist-patient decision-making could be beneficial at this stage, yet little is known about such practices in Israel. This study aimed at examining the practice of shared decision-making (SDM) between nephrologists and ESRD patients in Israel, while exploring related conflicts, ethical dilemmas, and considerations.</p><p><strong>Methods: </strong>The descriptive-quantitative approach applied in this study included a validated questionnaire for nephrologists, based on Emanual and Emanual (1992). The survey, which was distributed via social-media platforms and snowball sampling, was completed by 169 nephrologists. Data analysis included t-tests for independent samples, f-tests for analysis of variance, and t-tests and f-tests for independence. Descriptive analysis examined attitudes towards SDM in end-of-life care for ESRD patients.</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>The findings show that the research sample did not include nephrologists who typically act according to the paternalistic decision-making style. Rather, 53% of the respondents were found to act in line with the informative decision-making style, while 47% act according to the interpretive decision-making style. Almost 70% of all respondents reported their discussing quality-of-life with patients; 63.4% provide prognostic assessments; 61.5% inquire about the patient's desired place of death; 58.6% ask about advance directives or power-of-attorney; and 57.4% inquire about cultural and religious beliefs in end-of-life treatment. Additionally, informative nephrologists tend to promote the patients' autonomy over their health (P < 0.001); they are also in favor of conservative treatment, compared to paternalistic and interpretive nephrologists, and use less invasive methods than other nephrologists (P = 0.02).</p><p><strong>Conclusions: </strong>Nephrologists in Israel only partially pursue an SDM model, which has the potential to improve quality-of-care for ESRD patients and their families. SDM programs should be developed and implemented for increasing such practices among nephrologists, thereby expanding the possibilities for providing conservative care at end-of-life.</p>\",\"PeriodicalId\":46694,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"Israel Journal of Health Policy Research\",\"volume\":\"13 1\",\"pages\":\"45\"},\"PeriodicalIF\":3.5000,\"publicationDate\":\"2024-09-10\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC11385125/pdf/\",\"citationCount\":\"0\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"Israel Journal of Health Policy Research\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"3\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.1186/s13584-024-00632-w\",\"RegionNum\":4,\"RegionCategory\":\"医学\",\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"Q1\",\"JCRName\":\"HEALTH POLICY & SERVICES\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Israel Journal of Health Policy Research","FirstCategoryId":"3","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1186/s13584-024-00632-w","RegionNum":4,"RegionCategory":"医学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q1","JCRName":"HEALTH POLICY & SERVICES","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

摘要

背景:终末期肾病(ESRD)是指慢性肾病的最后阶段。并非所有 ESRD 患者都适合透析治疗,尽管透析治疗有其优势,但并非没有风险。在这一阶段,肾病专家与患者共同决策可能会带来益处,但以色列对这种做法知之甚少。本研究旨在考察以色列肾科医生与 ESRD 患者共同决策 (SDM) 的实践情况,同时探讨相关冲突、伦理困境和注意事项:本研究采用的描述性定量方法包括根据 Emanual 和 Emanual(1992 年)为肾病学家设计的有效问卷。该调查通过社交媒体平台和滚雪球式抽样进行分发,共有 169 名肾科医生完成了调查。数据分析包括独立样本 t 检验、方差分析 f 检验、独立性 t 检验和 f 检验。描述性分析考察了ESRD患者临终关怀中对SDM的态度:研究结果表明,研究样本中并不包括通常以家长式决策风格行事的肾病专家。相反,53% 的受访者符合信息型决策风格,47% 的受访者符合解释型决策风格。在所有受访者中,近 70% 的人表示曾与患者讨论过生命质量问题;63.4% 的人提供预后评估;61.5% 的人询问患者希望的死亡地点;58.6% 的人询问预先指示或授权书;57.4% 的人询问生命末期治疗的文化和宗教信仰。此外,信息丰富的肾科医生倾向于促进患者对自身健康的自主权(P 结论):以色列的肾病专家仅部分采用了 SDM 模式,而这种模式有可能提高 ESRD 患者及其家属的护理质量。应制定和实施 SDM 计划,在肾科医生中推广这种做法,从而扩大在生命末期提供保守治疗的可能性。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
查看原文
分享 分享
微信好友 朋友圈 QQ好友 复制链接
本刊更多论文
Shared decision-making in end-of-life care for end-stage renal disease patients: nephrologists' views and attitudes.

Background: The term end-stage renal disease (ESRD) refers to the final stage of chronic kidney disease. Not all ESRD patients are suitable for dialysis treatment, which despite its advantages, is not without risks. Shared nephrologist-patient decision-making could be beneficial at this stage, yet little is known about such practices in Israel. This study aimed at examining the practice of shared decision-making (SDM) between nephrologists and ESRD patients in Israel, while exploring related conflicts, ethical dilemmas, and considerations.

Methods: The descriptive-quantitative approach applied in this study included a validated questionnaire for nephrologists, based on Emanual and Emanual (1992). The survey, which was distributed via social-media platforms and snowball sampling, was completed by 169 nephrologists. Data analysis included t-tests for independent samples, f-tests for analysis of variance, and t-tests and f-tests for independence. Descriptive analysis examined attitudes towards SDM in end-of-life care for ESRD patients.

Results: The findings show that the research sample did not include nephrologists who typically act according to the paternalistic decision-making style. Rather, 53% of the respondents were found to act in line with the informative decision-making style, while 47% act according to the interpretive decision-making style. Almost 70% of all respondents reported their discussing quality-of-life with patients; 63.4% provide prognostic assessments; 61.5% inquire about the patient's desired place of death; 58.6% ask about advance directives or power-of-attorney; and 57.4% inquire about cultural and religious beliefs in end-of-life treatment. Additionally, informative nephrologists tend to promote the patients' autonomy over their health (P < 0.001); they are also in favor of conservative treatment, compared to paternalistic and interpretive nephrologists, and use less invasive methods than other nephrologists (P = 0.02).

Conclusions: Nephrologists in Israel only partially pursue an SDM model, which has the potential to improve quality-of-care for ESRD patients and their families. SDM programs should be developed and implemented for increasing such practices among nephrologists, thereby expanding the possibilities for providing conservative care at end-of-life.

求助全文
通过发布文献求助,成功后即可免费获取论文全文。 去求助
来源期刊
CiteScore
6.20
自引率
4.40%
发文量
38
审稿时长
28 weeks
期刊最新文献
Navigating crisis: exploring the links between threat perceptions, well-being, individual and workplace resilience among general hospital staff. Emotional resilience and sense of danger among doctors in hospitals during periods of heightened tensions and warfare in Israel. Israeli dentists' knowledge, attitudes, and practices regarding smoking cessation care. October 7th 2023 mass casualty incident in southern Israel: lessons for emergency preparedness and management. Motivations of Israeli physicians to return, or not, to Israel after their fellowship abroad.
×
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
现在去查看 取消
×
提示
确定
0
微信
客服QQ
Book学术公众号 扫码关注我们
反馈
×
意见反馈
请填写您的意见或建议
请填写您的手机或邮箱
已复制链接
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
×
扫码分享
扫码分享
Book学术官方微信
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术
文献互助 智能选刊 最新文献 互助须知 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 Book学术 All rights reserved.
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号 京ICP备2023020795号-1