TY - JOUR
T1 - Evaluating shared decision making for dialysis initiation
T2 - A qualitative study on patient refusal of long-term dialysis in Taiwan
AU - Kuo, Yi Ting
AU - Jenq, Chang Chyi
AU - Li, Uen Shuen
AU - Lin, Ya Ping
N1 - Publisher Copyright:
© 2023 John Wiley & Sons Ltd.
PY - 2024/3
Y1 - 2024/3
N2 - Rationale: Previous studies have explored shared decision making (SDM) implementation to determine the renal replacement therapy modality; however, the SDM approach for dialysis initiation, especially when patients refuse physician suggestions for long-term dialysis, remains unclear. Aims and Objectives: This study aimed to explore physicians' responses towards patients' refusal of long-term dialysis during the SDM process and the thinking processes of both physicians and patients regarding dialysis refusal. Method: We conducted in-depth semi-structured interviews with 10 patients diagnosed with end-stage renal disease, each of whom refused long-term dialysis after physicians employed the SDM framework, and nine nephrologists at the Chang Gung Memorial Hospital, Taiwan, from March to May 2020. Interviews were audio-recorded, transcribed, and translated from Mandarin to English. They were then thematically analysed. Results: Three main themes on dialysis initiation SDM implementation and the differences between physician and patient perceptions on patient treatment refusal were yielded. While the SDM approach for dialysis initiation developed by nephrologists in Taiwan respects patient decisions, physicians often actively persuade patients to undergo dialysis in case of treatment refusal. The motivation behind this approach is to promote the patient's best medical interests, particularly post-dialysis life quality, and to ensure a ‘rational’ medical decision is made. However, patients' perceptions of treatment refusal differ significantly from those of physicians, and their decision-making process is often iterative and based on comprehensive evaluation of immediate concerns beyond biomedical factors. Conclusions: Findings suggest that the current physician-led SDM approach for dialysis initiation characterises active persuasion with physicians' perspectives predominating the clinical encounter. To improve SDM implementation, we propose that physicians should acknowledge and understand patients' reasoning for dialysis refusal and the distinction between objective health and subjective well-being during the decision-making process.
AB - Rationale: Previous studies have explored shared decision making (SDM) implementation to determine the renal replacement therapy modality; however, the SDM approach for dialysis initiation, especially when patients refuse physician suggestions for long-term dialysis, remains unclear. Aims and Objectives: This study aimed to explore physicians' responses towards patients' refusal of long-term dialysis during the SDM process and the thinking processes of both physicians and patients regarding dialysis refusal. Method: We conducted in-depth semi-structured interviews with 10 patients diagnosed with end-stage renal disease, each of whom refused long-term dialysis after physicians employed the SDM framework, and nine nephrologists at the Chang Gung Memorial Hospital, Taiwan, from March to May 2020. Interviews were audio-recorded, transcribed, and translated from Mandarin to English. They were then thematically analysed. Results: Three main themes on dialysis initiation SDM implementation and the differences between physician and patient perceptions on patient treatment refusal were yielded. While the SDM approach for dialysis initiation developed by nephrologists in Taiwan respects patient decisions, physicians often actively persuade patients to undergo dialysis in case of treatment refusal. The motivation behind this approach is to promote the patient's best medical interests, particularly post-dialysis life quality, and to ensure a ‘rational’ medical decision is made. However, patients' perceptions of treatment refusal differ significantly from those of physicians, and their decision-making process is often iterative and based on comprehensive evaluation of immediate concerns beyond biomedical factors. Conclusions: Findings suggest that the current physician-led SDM approach for dialysis initiation characterises active persuasion with physicians' perspectives predominating the clinical encounter. To improve SDM implementation, we propose that physicians should acknowledge and understand patients' reasoning for dialysis refusal and the distinction between objective health and subjective well-being during the decision-making process.
KW - dialysis initiation discussion
KW - long-term dialysis
KW - physician-patient communication
KW - renal replacement therapy
KW - shared decision making
UR - http://www.scopus.com/inward/record.url?scp=85171445231&partnerID=8YFLogxK
U2 - 10.1111/jep.13922
DO - 10.1111/jep.13922
M3 - Article
C2 - 37723854
AN - SCOPUS:85171445231
SN - 1356-1294
VL - 30
SP - 174
EP - 183
JO - Journal of Evaluation in Clinical Practice
JF - Journal of Evaluation in Clinical Practice
IS - 2
ER -