Development of a decision aid to inform patients' and families' renal replacement therapy selection decisions.

BACKGROUND: Few educational resources have been developed to inform patients' renal replacement therapy (RRT) selection decisions. Patients progressing toward end stage renal disease (ESRD) must decide among multiple treatment options with varying characteristics. Complex information about treatments must be adequately conveyed to patients with different educational backgrounds and informational needs. Decisions about treatment options also require family input, as families often participate in patients' treatment and support patients' decisions. We describe the development, design, and preliminary evaluation of an informational, evidence-based, and patient-and family-centered decision aid for patients with ESRD and varying levels of health literacy, health numeracy, and cognitive function. METHODS: We designed a decision aid comprising a complementary video and informational handbook. We based our development process on data previously obtained from qualitative focus groups and systematic literature reviews. We simultaneously developed the video and handbook in "stages." For the video, stages included (1) directed interviews with culturally appropriate patients and families and preliminary script development, (2) video production, and (3) screening the video with patients and their families. For the handbook, stages comprised (1) preliminary content design, (2) a mixed-methods pilot study among diverse patients to assess comprehension of handbook material, and (3) screening the handbook with patients and their families. RESULTS: The video and handbook both addressed potential benefits and trade-offs of treatment selections. The 50-minute video consisted of demographically diverse patients and their families describing their positive and negative experiences with selecting a treatment option. The video also incorporated health professionals' testimonials regarding various considerations that might influence patients' and families' treatment selections. The handbook was comprised of written words, pictures of patients and health care providers, and diagrams describing the findings and quality of scientific studies comparing treatments. The handbook text was written at a 4th to 6th grade reading level. Pilot study results demonstrated that a majority of patients could understand information presented in the handbook. Patient and families screening the nearly completed video and handbook reviewed the materials favorably. CONCLUSIONS: This rigorously designed decision aid may help patients and families make informed decisions about their treatment options for RRT that are well aligned with their values.

Selecting renal replacement therapies: what do African American and non-African American patients and their families think others should know? A mixed methods study.

BACKGROUND: Little is known regarding the types of information African American and non-African American patients with chronic kidney disease (CKD) and their families need to inform renal replacement therapy (RRT) decisions. METHODS: In 20 structured group interviews, we elicited views of African American and non-African American patients with CKD and their families about factors that should be addressed in educational materials informing patients' RRT selection decisions. We asked participants to select factors from a list and obtained their open-ended feedback. RESULTS: Ten groups of patients (5 African American, 5 non-African American; total 68 individuals) and ten groups of family members (5 African American, 5 non-African American; total 62 individuals) participated. Patients and families had a range (none to extensive) of experiences with various RRTs. Patients identified morbidity or mortality, autonomy, treatment delivery, and symptoms as important factors to address. Family members identified similar factors but also cited the effects of RRT decisions on patients' psychological well-being and finances. Views of African American and non-African American participants were largely similar. CONCLUSIONS: Educational resources addressing the influence of RRT selection on patients' morbidity and mortality, autonomy, treatment delivery, and symptoms could help patients and their families select RRT options closely aligned with their values. Including information about the influence of RRT selection on patients' personal relationships and finances could enhance resources' cultural relevance for African Americans.

Outcomes After Total Ankle Replacement in Association With Ipsilateral Hindfoot Arthrodesis.

BACKGROUND: Ipsilateral hindfoot arthrodesis in combination with total ankle replacement (TAR) may diminish functional outcome and prosthesis survivorship compared to isolated TAR. We compared the outcome of isolated TAR to outcomes of TAR with ipsilateral hindfoot arthrodesis. METHODS: In a consecutive series of 404 primary TARs in 396 patients, 70 patients (17.3%) had a hindfoot fusion before, after, or at the time of TAR; the majority had either an isolated subtalar arthrodesis (n = 43, 62%) or triple arthrodesis (n = 15, 21%). The remaining 334 isolated TARs served as the control group. Mean patient follow-up was 3.2 years (range, 24-72 months). RESULTS: The SF-36 total, AOFAS Hindfoot-Ankle pain subscale, Foot and Ankle Disability Index, and Short Musculoskeletal Function Assessment scores were significantly improved from preoperative measures, with no significant differences between the hindfoot arthrodesis and control groups. The AOFAS Hindfoot-Ankle total, function, and alignment scores were significantly improved for both groups, albeit the control group demonstrated significantly higher scores in all 3 scales. Furthermore, the control group demonstrated a significantly greater improvement in VAS pain score compared to the hindfoot arthrodesis group. Walking speed, sit-to-stand time, and 4-square step test time were significantly improved for both groups at each postoperative time point; however, the hindfoot arthrodesis group completed these tests significantly slower than the control group. There was no significant difference in terms of talar component subsidence between the fusion (2.6 mm) and control groups (2.0 mm). The failure rate in the hindfoot fusion group (10.0%) was significantly higher than that in the control group (2.4%; p < 0.05). CONCLUSION: To our knowledge, this study represents the first series evaluating the clinical outcome of TARs performed with and without hindfoot fusion using implants available in the United States. At follow-up of 3.2 years, TAR performed with ipsilateral hindfoot arthrodesis resulted in significant improvements in pain and functional outcome; in contrast to prior studies, however, overall outcome was inferior to that of isolated TAR. LEVEL OF EVIDENCE: Level II, prospective comparative series.

Specialist and primary care physicians' views on barriers to adequate preparation of patients for renal replacement therapy: a qualitative study.

BACKGROUND: Early preparation for renal replacement therapy (RRT) is recommended for patients with advanced chronic kidney disease (CKD), yet many patients initiate RRT urgently and/or are inadequately prepared. METHODS: We conducted audio-recorded, qualitative, directed telephone interviews of nephrology health care providers (n = 10, nephrologists, physician assistants, and nurses) and primary care physicians (PCPs, n = 4) to identify modifiable challenges to optimal RRT preparation to inform future interventions. We recruited providers from public safety-net hospital-based and community-based nephrology and primary care practices. We asked providers open-ended questions to assess their perceived challenges and their views on the role of PCPs and nephrologist-PCP collaboration in patients' RRT preparation. Two independent and trained abstractors coded transcribed audio-recorded interviews and identified major themes. RESULTS: Nephrology providers identified several factors contributing to patients' suboptimal RRT preparation, including health system resources (e.g., limited time for preparation, referral process delays, and poorly integrated nephrology and primary care), provider skills (e.g., their difficulty explaining CKD to patients), and patient attitudes and cultural differences (e.g., their poor understanding and acceptance of their CKD and its treatment options, their low perceived urgency for RRT preparation; their negative perceptions about RRT, lack of trust, or language differences). PCPs desired more involvement in preparation to ensure RRT transitions could be as "smooth as possible", including providing patients with emotional support, helping patients weigh RRT options, and affirming nephrologist recommendations. Both nephrology providers and PCPs desired improved collaboration, including better information exchange and delineation of roles during the RRT preparation process. CONCLUSIONS: Nephrology and primary care providers identified health system resources, provider skills, and patient attitudes and cultural differences as challenges to patients' optimal RRT preparation. Interventions to improve these factors may improve patients' preparation and initiation of optimal RRTs.

Adjunctive albuterol enhances the response to enzyme replacement therapy in late-onset Pompe disease.

Effective dosages for enzyme replacement therapy (ERT) in Pompe disease are much higher than for other lysosomal storage disorders, which has been attributed to low cation-independent mannose-6-phosphate receptor (CI-MPR) in skeletal muscle. We have previously demonstrated the benefit of increased CI-MPR-mediated uptake of recombinant human acid-α-glucosidase during ERT in mice with Pompe disease following addition of albuterol therapy. Currently we have completed a pilot study of albuterol in patients with late-onset Pompe disease already on ERT for >2 yr, who were not improving further. The 6-min walk test (6MWT) distance increased in all 7 subjects at wk 6 (30±13 m; P=0.002), wk 12 (34±14 m; P=0.004), and wk 24 (42±37 m; P=0.02), in comparison with baseline. Grip strength was improved significantly for both hands at wk 12. Furthermore, individual subjects reported benefits; e.g., a female patient could stand up from sitting on the floor much more easily (time for supine to standing position decreased from 30 to 11 s), and a male patient could readily swing his legs out of his van seat (hip abduction increased from 1 to 2+ on manual muscle testing). Finally, analysis of the quadriceps biopsies suggested increased CI-MPR at wk 12 (P=0.08), compared with baseline. With the exception of 1 patient who succumbed to respiratory complications of Pompe disease in the first week, only mild adverse events have been reported, including tremor, transient difficulty falling asleep, and mild urinary retention (requiring early morning voiding). Therefore, this pilot study revealed initial safety and efficacy in an open label study of adjunctive albuterol therapy in patients with late-onset Pompe disease who had been stable on ERT with no improvements noted over the previous several years.

Safety and Use of Anticoagulation After Aortic Valve Replacement With Bioprostheses: A Meta-Analysis.

BACKGROUND: The American College of Cardiology guidelines recommend 3 months of anticoagulation after replacement of the aortic valve with a bioprosthesis. However, there remains great variability in the current clinical practice and conflicting results from clinical studies. To assist clinical decision making, we pooled the existing evidence to assess whether anticoagulation in the setting of a new bioprosthesis was associated with improved outcomes or greater risk of bleeding. METHODS AND RESULTS: We searched the PubMed database from the inception of these databases until April 2015 to identify original studies (observational studies or clinical trials) that assessed anticoagulation with warfarin in comparison with either aspirin or no antiplatelet or anticoagulant therapy. We included the studies if their outcomes included thromboembolism or stroke/transient ischemic attacks and bleeding events. Quality assessment was performed in accordance with the Newland Ottawa Scale, and random effects analysis was used to pool the data from the available studies. I(2) testing was done to assess the heterogeneity of the included studies. After screening through 170 articles, a total of 13 studies (cases=6431; controls=18210) were included in the final analyses. The use of warfarin was associated with a significantly increased risk of overall bleeding (odds ratio, 1.96; 95% confidence interval, 1.25-3.08; P<0.0001) or bleeding risk at 3 months (odds ratio, 1.92; 95% confidence interval, 1.10-3.34; P<0.0001) compared with aspirin or placebo. With regard to composite primary outcome variables (risk of venous thromboembolism, stroke, or transient ischemic attack) at 3 months, no significant difference was seen with warfarin (odds ratio, 1.13; 95% confidence interval, 0.82-1.56; P=0.67). Moreover, anticoagulation was also not shown to improve outcomes at time interval >3 months (odds ratio, 1.12; 95% confidence interval, 0.80-1.58; P=0.79). CONCLUSIONS: Contrary to the current guidelines, a meta-analysis of previous studies suggests that anticoagulation in the setting of an aortic bioprosthesis significantly increases bleeding risk without a favorable effect on thromboembolic events. Larger, randomized controlled studies should be performed to further guide this clinical practice.