首页> 外文期刊>Kidney and blood pressure research >Conservative Care, Dialysis Withdrawal, and Palliative Care: Results from a Survey of a Non-Profit Dialysis Provider in Germany
【24h】

Conservative Care, Dialysis Withdrawal, and Palliative Care: Results from a Survey of a Non-Profit Dialysis Provider in Germany

机译:保守治疗,透析退出和姑息治疗:来自德国一家非盈利性透析服务提供商的调查结果

获取原文
           

摘要

Background: In Germany, practice patterns of conservative renal care (CRC), dialysis withdrawal (DW), and concomitant palliative care in patients who choose these options are unknown. Method: A survey was designed including 13 structured and one open questions on the management and frequency of CRC and DW, local palliative care structure, and fundamentals of the decision-making process, and addressed to the head physicians of all renal centers ( n = 193) of a non-profit renal care provider (KfH – Kuratorium für Dialyse und Nierentransplantation, Neu-Isenburg, Germany). Results: Response rate was 62.2% ( n = 122 centers) comprising 14,197 prevalent dialysis patients and 159,652 renal outpatients. Two-thirds of the respondents were men (85% in the age group between 45 and 64 years). Mean time of experience in renal medicine was 22.2 years in men, 20.8 years in women. 94% of all centers provided CRC with a different frequency and proportion of patients (mean 8.4% of the center population, median 5%, range 0–50%). Mean proportion of DW was 2.85% per year (median 2%, range 1–15%). Physicians and center features were not significantly associated with utilization of CRC or DW. Palliative care management varied including local palliative teams, support by general physicians, or by the renal team itself. Hospice care was only established in patients undergoing CRC. Fundamentals of the decision-making process were the desire of the patient (90% in CRC, 67% in DW). Patients undergoing CRC changed their opinion towards treatment modality “frequently” in 18% of the cases, “occasionally” in 73%. Physicians’ decisions were mostly driven by presumed fatal prognosis and poor physical or mental conditions of the individual patient. Different barriers to provide palliative care for the renal population like lack of education in palliative medicine, shortness of staff, lack of financial resources, and local palliative care structures were reported. Conclusion: Compared to international numbers, in Germany, proportion of CRC and DW reported by non-profit renal centers is in the lower range. Center practice of palliative care management varies and is driven by availability of local palliative care resources and presumably by attitudes of the renal teams. Quality of palliative care and the decision-making process need further evaluation.
机译:背景:在德国,选择这些选项的患者的保守肾脏护理(CRC),透析停药(DW)和伴随姑息护理的实践模式尚不清楚。方法:设计了一项调查,包括关于CRC和DW的管理和频率,局部姑息治疗结构以及决策过程的基本原则的13个结构化和开放性问题,并针对所有肾脏中心的主治医生(n = 193)是一家非营利性肾脏护理服务提供者(KfH –德国新伊森堡的KuratoriumfürDialyse und Nierentransplantation)。结果:14,197名透析患者和159,652名肾脏门诊患者的缓解率为62.2%(n = 122个中心)。三分之二的受访者是男性(年龄在45至64岁之间的人群为85%)。男性在肾脏医学方面的平均经历时间为22.2年,女性为20.8年。 94%的中心为CRC患者提供了不同的频率和比例(平均占中心人口的8.4%,中位数为5%,范围为0-50%)。 DW的平均比例为每年2.85%(中位数2%,范围1-15%)。医师和中心特征与CRC或DW的利用没有显着相关。姑息治疗管理各不相同,包括当地姑息治疗小组,全科医生的支持或肾脏小组本身的支持。临终关怀仅在接受CRC的患者中建立。决策过程的基础是患者的需求(CRC患者中90%,DW患者中67%)。接受CRC的患者在18%的病例中“频繁”改变了对治疗方式的看法,在“偶尔”的73%中改变了看法。医师的决定主要是由假定的致命预后以及患者的身体或精神状况不佳所致。据报道,为肾病人群提供姑息治疗的各种障碍包括对姑息医学缺乏教育,人员短缺,财力不足以及当地姑息治疗结构。结论:与国际数字相比,在德国,非营利性肾脏中心报告的CRC和DW比例较低。姑息治疗管理的中心实践各不相同,并由当地姑息治疗资源的可用性以及肾小组的态度所驱动。姑息治疗的质量和决策过程需要进一步评估。

著录项

相似文献

  • 外文文献
  • 中文文献
  • 专利
获取原文

客服邮箱:kefu@zhangqiaokeyan.com

京公网安备:11010802029741号 ICP备案号:京ICP备15016152号-6 六维联合信息科技 (北京) 有限公司©版权所有
  • 客服微信

  • 服务号