Tag: end-of-life

Reconsidering Dialysis for Chronic Kidney Failure in the Elderly

Chronic kidney disease (CKD). Credit: Scientific Animations CC4.0

Whether dialysis is the best option for kidney failure and, if so, when to start, may deserve more careful consideration, according to a new study published in Annals of Internal Medicine.

For older adults who were not healthy enough for a kidney transplant, starting dialysis when their kidney function fell below a certain threshold, rather than waiting, afforded them roughly one more week of life, Stanford Medicine researchers and their colleagues found.

More critically, perhaps, they spent an average of two more weeks in hospitals or care facilities, in addition to the time spent undergoing dialysis.

“Is that really what a 75- or 80-year-old patient wants to be doing?” asked lead author Maria Montez Rath, PhD, a senior research engineer. Manjula Tamura, MD, a professor of nephrology, is the senior author.

“For all patients, but particularly for older adults, understanding the trade-offs is really essential,” Tamura said. “They and their physicians should carefully consider whether and when to proceed with dialysis.”

Patients with kidney failure who are healthy enough for transplantation may receive a donated kidney, which will rid their blood of toxins and excess fluid. But that option is unavailable to many older adults who have additional health conditions such as heart or lung disease or cancer.

For those patients, physicians often recommend dialysis when patients progress to kidney failure – when estimated glomerular filtration rate (eGFR), a measure of renal function, falls below 15.

Patients and their family members sometimes assume that dialysis is their only option, or that it will prolong life significantly, Montez Rath said. “They often say yes to dialysis, without really understanding what that means.”

But patients can take medications in lieu of dialysis to manage symptoms of kidney failure such as fluid retention, itchiness and nausea, Tamura said. She added that dialysis has side effects, such as cramping and fatigue, and typically requires a three- to four-hour visit to a clinic three times a week.

“It’s a pretty intensive therapy that entails a major lifestyle change,” she said.

Lifespan and time at home

The researchers conducted the study to quantify what dialysis entails for older adults who are ineligible for a transplant: whether and how much it prolongs life, along with the relative number of days spent in an inpatient facility such as a hospital, nursing home or rehabilitation center.

The team evaluated the health records, from 2010 to 2018, of 20 440 patients (98% of them men) from the U.S. Department of Veterans Affairs. The patients were 65 and older, had chronic kidney failure, were not undergoing evaluation for transplant and had an eGFR below 12.

Simulating a randomised clinical trial with electronic health records, they divided patients into groups: those who started dialysis immediately, and those who waited at least a month. Over three years, about half of the patients in the group who waited never started dialysis.

Patients who started dialysis immediately lived on average nine days longer than those who waited, but they spent 13 more in an inpatient facility. Age made a difference: Patients 65 to 79 who started dialysis immediately on average lived 17 fewer days while spending 14 more days in an inpatient facility; patients 80 and older who started dialysis immediately on average lived 60 more days but spent 13 more days in an inpatient facility.

Patients who never underwent dialysis on average died 77 days earlier than those who started dialysis immediately, but they spent 14 more days at home.

“The study shows us that if you start dialysis right away, you might survive longer, but you’re going to be spending a lot of time on dialysis, and you’re more likely to need hospitalization,” Montez Rath said.

Tamura noted that physicians sometimes recommend dialysis because they want to offer patients hope or because the downsides of the treatment haven’t always been clear. But the study indicates physicians and patients may want to wait until the eGFR drops further, Tamura said, and should consider symptoms along with personal preferences before starting dialysis.

“Different patients will have different goals,” she said. “For some it’s a blessing to have this option of dialysis, and for others it might be a burden.”

It may be helpful, she added, if clinicians portray dialysis for frail, older adults as a palliative treatment – primarily intended to alleviate symptoms.

“Currently, dialysis is often framed to patients as a choice between life and death,” she said. “When it’s presented in this way, patients don’t have room to consider whether the treatment aligns with their goals, and they tend to overestimate the benefits and well-being they might experience. But when treatment is framed as symptom-alleviating, patients can more readily understand that there are trade-offs.”

Source: Stanford Medicine

Terminally Ill Patients Need More than Prayer from Spiritual Leaders

Photo by Rodnae Productions on Pexels

A study conducted among advanced cancer patients in Soweto has found that most patients who received palliative care and are at the end of life, have spiritual needs beyond regular prayers from spiritual leaders. Furthermore, patients who received religious or spiritual care had less physical pain, used less morphine and had higher odds of dying where they wish than those who did not.

The study involving 233 participants was conducted by a team of local and international experts led by Wits researchers.

Lead researcher Dr Mpho Ratshikana-Moloko from the Centre for Palliative Care in the Faculty of Health Sciences at Wits University says that previous research has shown that religion and spirituality are important to most patients facing life-threatening illnesses. However, this study probed further.

Using the African Palliative Care Association Palliative Outcome Scale, the research confirmed previous international findings that nearly 98% of the participants had a religious or spiritual need.

The most common spiritual need expressed by patients in Soweto was “seeking a closer connection with their God” and “forgiveness for sins”, says Ratshikana-Moloko. This finding is of significance because it calls on faith leaders to provide relevant support that responds to the needs of patients. This research-led intervention empowers leaders to move beyond prayer, explains Ratshikana-Moloko.

“This is the first study to assess the spiritual and religious needs, and religious and spirituality care provided to advanced cancer patients who received palliative care in Soweto,” says Ratshikana-Moloko.

Since the study was concluded in 2018, Wits University has developed a course in Spiritual and Chaplaincy in Palliative Care. The first cohort of faith leaders from all religious backgrounds completed in September 2023.

Palliative care to increase

Palliative care is one of the key pillars in illness management among terminally ill patients who are judged by a specialist physician as unlikely to benefit from curative-intent therapy. Often, patients are unlikely to survive beyond six months.

The South African National Policy Framework and Strategy for Palliative Care (2017–2022) incorporates spirituality into health care. However, palliative care services in South and southern Africa and elsewhere, rarely address these needs, despite available policies, guidelines and evidence.

“We have to implement what we know. The integration of spiritual care within the clinical care setting is recommended,” Ratshikana-Moloko.

South Africa faces a heavy burden of communicable and non-communicable diseases. One in six deaths globally is due to cancer, and cancer diagnoses are expected to increase by 70% in the next two decades, especially in low- and middle-income countries.

“Failure to identify and address the religious and spiritual needs of terminally-ill patients may increase distress and suffering,” Ratshikana-Moloko.

COVID Experience may Have Changed Doctors’ Willingness to Resuscitate

Source: Martha Dominguez de Gouveia on Unsplash

The pandemic may have changed doctors’ end of life decision-making, making them more willing to not resuscitate very sick and/or frail patients and raising the ICU transfer threshold, suggest the results of a snapshot survey of UK doctors published in the Journal of Medical Ethics.

Views on euthanasia and physician-assisted dying remain unchanged however, with around a third of respondents still strongly opposed to these policies.

The COVID pandemic transformed many aspects of clinical medicine, including end-of-life care, prompted by thousands more patients than usual requiring it, the researchers said. 

Because of this, they wanted to find out if the pandemic significantly changed the way in which doctors make end-of-life decisions, specifically in respect of ‘Do Not Attempt Cardio-Pulmonary Resuscitation’ (DNACPR) and treatment escalation to ICU.

These aspects of end-of-life care were chosen because of the controversy surrounding DNACPR decisions, in part prompted by an increase in cardiac arrests associated with COVID infections, and concerns about ICU capacity strained by the pandemic. 

The researchers also wanted to know if the pandemic had changed doctors’ views on euthanasia and physician assisted suicide as surveys on these issues by the British Medical Association (BMA) and the Royal Colleges of Physicians and General Practitioners had been carried out before it started.

The online survey was open to doctors of all grades and specialties between May and August 2021, when hospital admissions for COVID in the UK were relatively low.

In all, 231 responses were received: 15 from foundation year 1 junior doctors (6.5%); 146 from senior junior doctors (SHOs) (63%); 42 from hospital specialty trainees or equivalent (18%); 24 from consultants or GPs (10.5%); and 4 others (2%).

In respect of DNACPR, which refers to the decision not to attempt to restart a patient’s heart when it or breathing stops, over half the respondents were more willing to do this than they had been previously.

When the responses were weighted to represent the different medical grades in the NHS national workforce, the results were: ‘significantly less’ 0%; ‘somewhat less’ 2%; ‘same or unsure’ 35%; ‘somewhat more’ 41.5%; ‘significantly more’ 13%; and ‘not applicable’ 8.5%.

When asked about the contributory factors, the most frequently cited were: ‘likely futility of CPR’ (88% pre-pandemic, 91% now): co-existing conditions (89% both pre-pandemic and now): and patient wishes (83.5% pre-pandemic, 80.5% now). Advance care plans and ‘quality of life’ after resuscitation also received large vote-share.

The number of respondents who stated that ‘patient age’ was a major factor informing their decision increased from 50.5% pre-pandemic to around 60%. And the proportion who cited a patient’s frailty rose by 15% from 58% pre-pandemic to 73%. 

But the biggest change in vote-share was ‘resource limitation’, which increased by 20%, from 2.5% to 22.5%. 

When asked whether the thresholds for escalating patients to intensive care or providing palliative care had changed, the largest vote-share was the ‘same or unsure’: 46% (weighted) for referral; 64.5% (weighted) for palliative care.

But a substantial minority said that now they had a higher threshold for referral to intensive care (22.5% weighted) and a lower threshold for palliation (18.5% weighted).

When it came to the legalisation of euthanasia and physician assisted suicide, the responses showed that the pandemic has led to marginal, but not statistically significant, changes of opinion.

Nearly half (48%) were strongly or somewhat opposed to the legalisation of euthanasia, 20% were neutral or unsure, and around a third were somewhat or strongly in favour before the pandemic. These proportions changed to 47%, 18%, and 35%, respectively. 

But a substantial minority said that now they had a higher threshold for referral to intensive care (22.5% weighted) and a lower threshold for palliation (18.5% weighted).

When it came to the legalisation of euthanasia and physician-assisted suicide, there was no statistically significant change in opinion.

Nearly half (48%) were strongly or somewhat opposed to the legalisation of euthanasia, 20% were neutral or unsure, and around a third were somewhat or strongly in favour before the pandemic. These proportions changed to 47%, 18%, and 35%, respectively. 

Similarly, just over half (51%) said they had strongly or somewhat opposed the legalisation of physician assisted suicide, 24% had been neutral or unsure, and 25% had been somewhat or strongly in favour.  These proportions changed to 52%, 22%, and 26%, respectively. 

The impetus to make more patients DNACPR, prompted by pressures of the pandemic, persisted among many clinicians even when COVID hospital cases returned to low levels, the researchers noted. The factors informing it were compatible with regulatory (GMC) ethical guidance, with the exception of limited resources.

“At the start of the pandemic, the BMA advised clinicians that in the event of NHS resources becoming unable to meet demand, resource allocation decisions should follow a utilitarian ethic.

“However, what is clear from our results is that for a significant proportion of clinicians, resource limitation continued to factor into clinical decision making even when pressures on NHS resources had returned to near-normal levels,” they wrote.

The survey results also suggest that the pandemic has helped clinicians gain a greater understanding of the risks, burdens, and limitations of intensive care and had further educated them in the early recognition of dying patients, and the value of early palliative care, they added. 

“What is yet to be determined is whether these changes will now stay the same indefinitely, revert back to pre-pandemic practices, or evolve even further,” they conclude.

Source: EurekAlert!