Factors influencing patients with stage 5 chronic kidney disease to opt for conservative management: a practitioner research study

Aims and objectives. This study explored decision-making experiences of patients with stage 5 chronic kidney disease when opting for conservative management of their renal failure.

Background. Dialysis is an invasive treatment, and for some older patients, there is an associated treatment burden of dialysis-related symptoms. An alternative choice is conservative management, but little is known about those who make this decision and how they are supported through the process.

Design. Qualitative practitioner research study.

Method. Data were generated from nine patients' naturally occurring clinic consultations with a renal clinical nurse specialist between May 2010 - July 2010. Interviews were transcribed verbatim and findings fed back at three multi-disciplinary meetings to check for relevance and resonance. Common themes were identified and codes applied.

Results. Patients reported age and having to travel three times a week to hospital for dialysis as reasons not to opt for treatment. Others felt well without dialysis not wanting to upset the 'status quo' or to burden loved ones. Most felt equipped to make the decision following explanation and discussion with the clinical nurse specialist in the renal clinic.

Conclusions. Patients opting for conservative management give numerous reasons for this including old age, travel limitations, feeling well without dialysis and not wanting to be a burden, but appear content with their decision. One-to-one discussions with the clinical nurse specialist appear helpful during the decision-making process presenting an opportunity for advancing nursing roles in the chronic kidney disease service.

Relevance to clinical practice. Understanding patients' reasons for refusing dialysis assists in supporting until death. There is an opportunity for developing nursing practice to meet the multi-faceted needs of this group.

A concept analysis of renal supportive care: the changing world of nephrology

Title. A concept analysis of renal supportive care: the changing world of nephrology

Aim. This paper is a report of a concept analysis of renal supportive care.

Background. Approximately 1.5 million people worldwide are kept alive by renal dialysis. As services are required to support patients who decide not to start or to withdraw from dialysis, the term renal supportive care is emerging. Being similar to the terms palliative care, end-of-life care, terminal care and conservative management, there is a need for conceptual clarity.

Method. Rodgers' evolutionary method was used as the organizing framework for this concept analysis. Data were collected from a review of CINAHL, Medline, PsycINFO, British Nursing Index, International Bibliography of the Social Sciences and ASSIA (1806-2006) using, 'renal' and 'supportive care' as keywords. All articles with an abstract were considered. The World Wide Web was also searched in English utilizing the phrase 'renal supportive care'.

Results. Five attributes of renal supportive care were identified: available from diagnosis to death with an emphasis on honesty regarding prognosis and impact of disease; interdisciplinary approach to care; restorative care; family and carer support and effective, lucid communication to ensure informed choice and clear lines of decision-making.

Conclusion. Renal supportive care is a dynamic and emerging concept relevant, but not limited to, the end phase of life. It suggests a central philosophy underpinning renal service development that allows patients, carers and the multidisciplinary team time to work together to realize complex goals. It has relevance for the renal community and is likely to be integrated increasingly into everyday nephrology practice.

Skin-reducing mastectomy and one-stage implant reconstruction with a myodermal flap: A safe and effective technique in risk-reducing and therapeutic mastectomy

Introduction: Immediate reconstruction following mastectomy for breast cancer has been shown to be oncologically safe and associated with improved psychosocial outcomes for patients. Bostwick described a technique for one-stage implant based reconstruction, combining skin-sparing mastectomy with concurrent reduction of the skin envelope. This report reviews the experience of a single centre using skin-reducing mastectomy and one-stage implant reconstruction in both early stage breast cancer and risk-reducing mastectomy, with specific reference to frequency of complications, implant loss and oncological outcomes.

Methods and results: A retrospective review was undertaken to identify women who had undergone skin-reducing mastectomy and one-stage implant reconstruction using a de-epithelialised dermal flap, between October 2008 and October 2012. One hundred and four consecutive mastectomies, with reconstruction, were performed by two surgeons on 64 patients. No complications were seen in 43.8% of patients. At three months, four implants were lost (3.8% of breast reconstructions, 6.3% of patients), due to either peri-implant infection or mastectomy skin flap necrosis. One patient required unplanned return to theatre for evacuation of a haematoma. Minor mastectomy skin flap necrosis was seen in 10 breasts (9.6% of reconstructed breasts) and superficial wound infection in 8 breasts (7.7% of reconstructed breasts). All of these complications were managed conservatively and none required operative intervention. At a median follow up of 35 months (4-53 months) there had been one episode of ipsilateral axillary nodal recurrence.

Conclusion: One-stage implant reconstruction using a myo-dermal flap technique following skin-reducing mastectomy is safe and should be considered in selected patients. Most complications are minor and will resolve with conservative management. Major complications such as implant failure or immediate reoperation, were relatively uncommon (6.3% patients, 3.8% of reconstructed breasts). Early follow-up suggests that oncological outcomes are satisfactory, but longer follow-up is required to substantiate this. (C) 2013 British Association of Plastic, Reconstructive and Aesthetic Surgeons. Published by Elsevier Ltd. All rights reserved.

PAlliative Care in chronic Kidney diSease: the PACKS study—quality of life, decision making, costs and impact on carers in people managed without dialysis

BACKGROUND: The number of patients with advanced chronic kidney disease opting for conservative management rather than dialysis is unknown but likely to be growing as increasingly frail patients with advanced renal disease present to renal services. Conservative kidney management includes ongoing medical input and support from a multidisciplinary team. There is limited evidence concerning patient and carer experience of this choice. This study will explore quality of life, symptoms, cognition, frailty, performance decision making, costs and impact on carers in people with advanced chronic kidney disease managed without dialysis and is funded by the National Institute of Health Research in the UK.

METHODS: In this prospective, multicentre, longitudinal study, patients will be recruited in the UK, by renal research nurses, once they have made the decision not to embark on dialysis. Carers will be asked to 'opt-in' with consent from patients. The approach includes longitudinal quantitative surveys of quality of life, symptoms, decision making and costs for patients and quality of life and costs for carers, with questionnaires administered quarterly over 12 months. Additionally, the decision making process will be explored via qualitative interviews with renal physicians/clinical nurse specialists.

DISCUSSION: The study is designed to capture patient and carer profiles when conservative kidney management is implemented, and understand trajectories of care-receiving and care-giving with the aim of optimising palliative care for this population. It will explore the interactions that lead to clinical care decisions and the impact of these decisions on informal carers with the intention of improving clinical outcomes for patients and the experiences of care givers.

Renal palliative care – where to after the PACKS study?

The PAlliative Care in chronic Kidney diSease study (PACKS study) is examining quality of life, decision making and decisional conflict, costs and mortality in patients with advanced chronic kidney disease who have opted for palliative care. It is also exploring the impact of the decision on the quality of life of carers. The study includes adult patients with end stage (stage 5) chronic kidney disease who have opted for palliative care, adult carers of these patients and renal physicians/clinical nurse specialists who have experience of treating patients with end stage chronic kidney disease who have opted for palliative care.
Early initial findings relate to clinician perspectives on patient decisional conflict, in making complex decisions between dialysis and conservative management. Interviews were conducted with nephrologists and clinical nurse specialists across 10 renal centres in the UK. Themes with associated subthemes include “Frequent changing of mind regarding treatment options,” “A paternalistic approach to decision-making and “Intricacy of the decision”. These findings will be presented and recommendations for future research and education made. Clinicians need to take a more patient centered approach to decision-making. Interventions aimed at increasing understanding of renal disease and its treatments may reduce decisional conflict and raise decisional quality but require testing in the renal specialty.

Conservative fluid management or deresuscitation for patients with sepsis or acute respiratory distress syndrome following the resuscitation phase of critical illness: a systematic review and meta-analysis

Background

It is unknown whether a conservative approach to fluid administration or deresuscitation (active removal of fluid using diuretics or renal replacement therapy) is beneficial following haemodynamic stabilisation of critically ill patients.

Purpose

To evaluate the efficacy and safety of conservative or deresuscitative fluid strategies in adults and children with acute respiratory distress syndrome (ARDS), sepsis or systemic inflammatory response syndrome (SIRS) in the post-resuscitation phase of critical illness.

Methods

We searched Medline, EMBASE and the Cochrane central register of controlled trials from 1980 to June 2016, and manually reviewed relevant conference proceedings from 2009 to the present. Two reviewers independently assessed search results for inclusion and undertook data extraction and quality appraisal. We included randomised trials comparing fluid regimens with differing fluid balances between groups, and observational studies investigating the relationship between fluid balance and clinical outcomes.

Results

Forty-nine studies met the inclusion criteria. Marked clinical heterogeneity was evident. In a meta-analysis of 11 randomised trials (2051 patients) using a random-effects model, we found no significant difference in mortality with conservative or deresuscitative strategies compared with a liberal strategy or usual care [pooled risk ratio (RR) 0.92, 95 % confidence interval (CI) 0.82–1.02, I2 = 0 %]. A conservative or deresuscitative strategy resulted in increased ventilator-free days (mean difference 1.82 days, 95 % CI 0.53–3.10, I2 = 9 %) and reduced length of ICU stay (mean difference −1.88 days, 95 % CI −0.12 to −3.64, I2 = 75 %) compared with a liberal strategy or standard care.

Conclusions

In adults and children with ARDS, sepsis or SIRS, a conservative or deresuscitative fluid strategy results in an increased number of ventilator-free days and a decreased length of ICU stay compared with a liberal strategy or standard care. The effect on mortality remains uncertain. Large randomised trials are needed to determine optimal fluid strategies in critical illness.