PMCC PMCC

Search tips
Search criteria

Advanced
Results 1-8 (8)
 

Clipboard (0)
None

Select a Filter Below

Journals
Year of Publication
Document Types
1.  Challenges Perceived by Primary Care Providers to Educating Patients About Chronic Kidney Disease 
Journal of renal care  2012;38(4):174-181.
Objective
To identify primary care providers’ (PCPs) perceived barriers to educating patients about chronic kidney disease (CKD) during routine clinical visits.
Methods
We conducted three focus groups of eighteen PCPs in Baltimore, Maryland (MD), USA. Focus groups began with the presentation of a hypothetical case of a patient with CKD, followed by open-ended questions to assess providers’ perceived barriers to delivering education about CKD. Groups were audiotaped, transcribed, and coded independently by two investigators who identified major themes.
Results
PCPs reported on several patient, provider and system level barriers contributing to poor education about CKD in primary care that were both common and unique to barriers previously reported in educating patients regarding other chronic diseases.
Conclusions
Interventions designed to address barriers to CKD education identified by PCPs could improve the delivery of education about CKD in primary care settings.
doi:10.1111/j.1755-6686.2012.00323.x
PMCID: PMC3508733  PMID: 23176576
chronic kidney disease; primary care providers; patient education; barriers
2.  Primary care physicians’ familiarity, beliefs, and perceived barriers to practice guidelines in non-diabetic CKD: a survey study 
BMC Nephrology  2014;15:64.
Background
Most non-dialysis dependent chronic kidney disease (CKD) patients are cared for by their primary care physicians (PCPs). Studies suggest many CKD patients receive suboptimal care. Recently, CKD clinical practice guidelines were updated with additional emphasis on albuminuria.
Methods
We performed an internet-based, cross-sectional survey of active PCPs in the United States using the American Medical Association Physician Masterfile. We explored CKD guideline familiarity, self-reported practice behaviors, and attitudinal and external barriers to implementing guideline recommendations, including albuminuria testing.
Results
Of 12,034 PCPs targeted, 848 opened a study email, 165 (19.5%) responded. Most respondents (88%) spent ≥50% of their time in clinical care. Respondents were generally in private practice (46%). Most PCPs (96%) felt that eGFR values were helpful. Approximately, 75% and 91% of PCPs reported testing for albuminuria in non-diabetic hypertensive patients with an eGFR > 60 ml/min/1.73 m2 and < 60 ml/min/1.73 m2, respectively. Barriers to albuminuria testing included a lack of effect on management, limited time, and the perceived absence of guidelines recommending testing. While PCPs expressed high levels of agreement with the definition of CKD, 30% were concerned with overdiagnosis in older adults with an eGFR in the CKD stage 3a range. Most PCPs felt that angiotensin converting enzyme inhibitor (ACEi)/ angiotensin II receptor blockers (ARBs) improved outcomes in CKD, though agreement was lower with severe vs. moderate albuminuria (78% vs. 85%, respectively, p = 0.03). Many PCPs (51%) reported being unfamiliar with CKD guidelines, but were receptive to systematic interventions to improve their CKD care.
Conclusions
PCPs generally agree with CKD clinical practice guidelines regarding CKD definition and albuminuria testing. However, future interventions are necessary to improve PCPs’ familiarity with CKD guidelines, overcome barriers to albuminuria testing and, assist PCPs in targeting ACEi/ARBs to the patients most likely to benefit.
doi:10.1186/1471-2369-15-64
PMCID: PMC4021215  PMID: 24755164
Chronic kidney disease; Primary care physicians; Survey; Estimate glomerular filtration rate; Albuminuria; Angiotensin converting enzyme inhibitors; Angiotensin II receptor blockers; Barriers
3.  African American and Non-African American Patients’ and Families’ Decision Making About Renal Replacement Therapies 
Qualitative health research  2012;22(7):997-1006.
We conducted focus group meetings of African American and non-African American patients with end-stage renal disease (six groups) and their family members (six groups), stratified by race/ethnicity and treatment. We elicited differences in participants’ experiences with shared decision making about initiating renal replacement therapy (RRT; that is, hemodialysis, peritoneal dialysis, or a kidney transplant). Patients were often very sick when initiating RRT, and had little, if any, time to make a decision about what type of RRT to initiate. They also lacked sufficient information about alternative treatment options prior to initiation. Family members played supportive roles and shared in decision making when possible. Reports were similar for African American and non-African American participants. Our findings suggest that a greater emphasis on the improved engagement of patients and their families in shared decision making about RRT initiation is needed for both ethnic/racial minorities and nonminorities.
doi:10.1177/1049732312443427
PMCID: PMC3927418  PMID: 22645225
African Americans; communication; medical; decision making; illness and disease; chronic; illness and disease; experiences; minorities; nephrology
4.  Selecting renal replacement therapies: what do African American and non-African American patients and their families think others should know? A mixed methods study 
BMC Nephrology  2013;14:9.
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.
doi:10.1186/1471-2369-14-9
PMCID: PMC3565884  PMID: 23317336
Decision-making; Renal replacement therapy; Family members; African American
5.  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.
doi:10.1186/1472-6947-12-140
PMCID: PMC3560257  PMID: 23198793
Kidney disease; Decision aid; Literacy; Numeracy; Cognitive function
6.  The providing resources to enhance African American patients’ readiness to make decisions about kidney disease (PREPARED) study: protocol of a randomized controlled trial 
BMC Nephrology  2012;13:135.
Background
Living related kidney transplantation (LRT) is underutilized, particularly among African Americans. The effectiveness of informational and financial interventions to enhance informed decision-making among African Americans with end stage renal disease (ESRD) and improve rates of LRT is unknown.
Methods/design
We report the protocol of the Providing Resources to Enhance African American Patients’ Readiness to Make Decisions about Kidney Disease (PREPARED) Study, a two-phase study utilizing qualitative and quantitative research methods to design and test the effectiveness of informational (focused on shared decision-making) and financial interventions to overcome barriers to pursuit of LRT among African American patients and their families. Study Phase I involved the evidence-based development of informational materials as well as a financial intervention to enhance African American patients’ and families’ proficiency in shared decision-making regarding LRT. In Study Phase 2, we are currently conducting a randomized controlled trial in which patients with new-onset ESRD receive 1) usual dialysis care by their nephrologists, 2) the informational intervention (educational video and handbook), or 3) the informational intervention in addition to the option of participating in a live kidney donor financial assistance program. The primary outcome of the randomized controlled trial will include patients’ self-reported rates of consideration of LRT (including family discussions of LRT, patient-physician discussions of LRT, and identification of a LRT donor).
Discussion
Results from the PREPARED study will provide needed evidence on ways to enhance the decision to pursue LRT among African American patients with ESRD.
Trial registration
ClinicalTrials.gov NCT01439516
doi:10.1186/1471-2369-13-135
PMCID: PMC3489555  PMID: 23057616
Shared decision-making; Live kidney transplantation; Live kidney donation; Chronic kidney disease; End stage renal disease
7.  Setting an agenda for comparative effectiveness systematic reviews in CKD care 
BMC Nephrology  2012;13:74.
Systematic reviews comparing the effectiveness of strategies to prevent, detect, and treat chronic kidney disease are needed to inform patient care. We engaged stakeholders in the chronic kidney disease community to prioritize topics for future comparative effectiveness research systematic reviews. We developed a preliminary list of suggested topics and stakeholders refined and ranked topics based on their importance. Among 46 topics identified, stakeholders nominated 18 as ‘high’ priority. Most pertained to strategies to slow disease progression, including: (a) treat proteinuria, (b) improve access to care, (c) treat hypertension, (d) use health information technology, and (e) implement dietary strategies. Most (15 of 18) topics had been previously studied with two or more randomized controlled trials, indicating feasibility of rigorous systematic reviews. Chronic kidney disease topics rated by stakeholders as ‘high priority’ are varied in scope and may lead to quality systematic reviews impacting practice and policy.
doi:10.1186/1471-2369-13-74
PMCID: PMC3472164  PMID: 22853705
Chronic kidney disease; Evidence-based practice; Health services research
8.  Effect of primary care physicians' use of estimated glomerular filtration rate on the timing of their subspecialty referral decisions 
BMC Nephrology  2011;12:1.
Background
Primary care providers' suboptimal recognition of the severity of chronic kidney disease (CKD) may contribute to untimely referrals of patients with CKD to subspecialty care. It is unknown whether U.S. primary care physicians' use of estimated glomerular filtration rate (eGFR) rather than serum creatinine to estimate CKD severity could improve the timeliness of their subspecialty referral decisions.
Methods
We conducted a cross-sectional study of 154 United States primary care physicians to assess the effect of use of eGFR (versus creatinine) on the timing of their subspecialty referrals. Primary care physicians completed a questionnaire featuring questions regarding a hypothetical White or African American patient with progressing CKD. We asked primary care physicians to identify the serum creatinine and eGFR levels at which they would recommend patients like the hypothetical patient be referred for subspecialty evaluation. We assessed significant improvement in the timing [from eGFR < 30 to ≥ 30 mL/min/1.73m2) of their recommended referrals based on their use of creatinine versus eGFR.
Results
Primary care physicians recommended subspecialty referrals later (CKD more advanced) when using creatinine versus eGFR to assess kidney function [median eGFR 32 versus 55 mL/min/1.73m2, p < 0.001]. Forty percent of primary care physicians significantly improved the timing of their referrals when basing their recommendations on eGFR. Improved timing occurred more frequently among primary care physicians practicing in academic (versus non-academic) practices or presented with White (versus African American) hypothetical patients [adjusted percentage(95% CI): 70% (45-87) versus 37% (reference) and 57% (39-73) versus 25% (reference), respectively, both p ≤ 0.01).
Conclusions
Primary care physicians recommended subspecialty referrals earlier when using eGFR (versus creatinine) to assess kidney function. Enhanced use of eGFR by primary care physicians' could lead to more timely subspecialty care and improved clinical outcomes for patients with CKD.
doi:10.1186/1471-2369-12-1
PMCID: PMC3033812  PMID: 21235763

Results 1-8 (8)