P1847IMPROVING SHARED DECISION MAKING FOR END-STAGE RENAL DISEASE PATIENTS IN THE NETHERLANDS

Abstract Background and Aims Annually, more than 2.000 end-stage renal disease (ESRD) patients in the Netherlands receive education regarding renal replacement therapies (RRT). The choice for RRT has major impact on a patient’s life. Ideally, this choice is made during a process of Shared Decision Making (SDM), since this improves satisfaction of patients and quality of care. Since 2017, three decision aids for SDM are available in the Netherlands: the 3 Good Questions, Option Grids and Dutch Kidney Guide (www.nierwijzer.nl). However, it is unknown whether these decision aids are sufficiently... Mehr ...

Verfasser: Van Eck van der Sluijs, Anita
Riemann, Aase
Prantl, Karen
Bonenkamp, Anna
Van Jaarsveld, Brigit
Abrahams, A
Dokumenttyp: Artikel
Erscheinungsdatum: 2020
Reihe/Periodikum: Nephrology Dialysis Transplantation ; volume 35, issue Supplement_3 ; ISSN 0931-0509 1460-2385
Verlag/Hrsg.: Oxford University Press (OUP)
Schlagwörter: Transplantation / Nephrology
Sprache: Englisch
Permalink: https://search.fid-benelux.de/Record/base-28795819
Datenquelle: BASE; Originalkatalog
Powered By: BASE
Link(s) : http://dx.doi.org/10.1093/ndt/gfaa142.p1847

Abstract Background and Aims Annually, more than 2.000 end-stage renal disease (ESRD) patients in the Netherlands receive education regarding renal replacement therapies (RRT). The choice for RRT has major impact on a patient’s life. Ideally, this choice is made during a process of Shared Decision Making (SDM), since this improves satisfaction of patients and quality of care. Since 2017, three decision aids for SDM are available in the Netherlands: the 3 Good Questions, Option Grids and Dutch Kidney Guide (www.nierwijzer.nl). However, it is unknown whether these decision aids are sufficiently implemented in daily practice. Therefore, we evaluated SDM and developed an SDM workshop to train centres how to implement these decision aids. Method Twelve centres in the Netherlands were randomly selected and invited to participate. In these centres, the degree of SDM experienced by patients, who recently received RRT information, was measured using the SDM-Q-9 and collaboRATE questionnaires. Furthermore, SDM awareness and use of the decision aids by health care professionals was explored. Finally, we provided a 2-hour workshop for professionals with information regarding SDM and the three decision aids. Results In the twelve participating centres (two academic, ten non-academic), 176 patients completed the questionnaires; 73% found the general impression of the received information (very) good, 84% found the total number of consults good, and 86% found the received amount of information good. On a scale from 0 – 100, with a higher score indicating better SDM, the mean SDM-Q-9 score was 75±22 and the collaboRATE score 86±14. Overall, no significant difference between centres in the SDM-Q-9 and collaboRATE scores was found. When centres with the worst SDM-Q-9 score (< 70) were compared to centres with the best score (> 77), a difference was noticed in the use of kidney-specific decision aids, i.e. Option Grids and Dutch Kidney Guide, and the eGFR level at which the information was given. Only 50% of the ...