ABSTRACT
Home dialysis modalities (home hemodialysis [HD] and peritoneal dialysis [PD]) are associated with greater patient autonomy and treatment satisfaction compared with in-center modalities, yet the level of home-dialysis use worldwide is low. Reasons for limited utilization are context-dependent, informed by local resources, dialysis costs, access to healthcare, health system policies, provider bias or preferences, cultural beliefs, individual lifestyle concerns, potential care-partner time, and financial burdens. In May 2021, KDIGO (Kidney Disease: Improving Global Outcomes) convened a controversies conference on home dialysis, focusing on how modality choice and distribution are determined and strategies to expand home-dialysis use. Participants recognized that expanding use of home dialysis within a given health system requires alignment of policy, fiscal resources, organizational structure, provider incentives, and accountability. Clinical outcomes across all dialysis modalities are largely similar, but for specific clinical measures, one modality may have advantages over another. Therefore, choice among available modalities is preference-sensitive, with consideration of quality of life, life goals, clinical characteristics, family or care-partner support, and living environment. Ideally, individuals, their care-partners, and their healthcare teams will employ shared decision-making in assessing initial and subsequent kidney failure treatment options. To meet this goal, iterative, high-quality education and support for healthcare professionals, patients, and care-partners are priorities. Everyone who faces dialysis should have access to home therapy. Facilitating universal access to home dialysis and expanding utilization requires alignment of policy considerations and resources at the dialysis-center level, with clear leadership from informed and motivated clinical teams.
Subject(s)
Kidney Failure, Chronic , Peritoneal Dialysis , Renal Insufficiency , Humans , Hemodialysis, Home , Quality of Life , Renal Dialysis , Kidney Failure, Chronic/therapyABSTRACT
BACKGROUND: The coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) pandemic resulted in a rapid and sometimes chaotic change in how clinical care was delivered for people living with kidney disease, with increased reliance on digital technologies and the introduction of remote services. OBJECTIVES: To conduct a scoping review of studies about patients' experiences and perspectives in receipt of remote consultations for kidney care. DESIGN: Using Arksey and O'Malley's framework, three databases were searched on EBSCO (CINAHL, MEDLINE and Psych INFO). The search included studies published in English from August 2010 to August 2021. RESULTS: Eight studies met the scoping review criteria (two cross-sectional, two mixed-method and four qualitative). Five themes were identified: overall satisfaction with remote services, benefits to patients (convenience, involvement in care and patient safety), barriers to remote consultations (technical difficulties, digital literacy and loss of interpersonal communication), patient concerns (need for physical examination, privacy and confidentiality) and prerequisites for successful remote care (existing patient-practitioner relationship, stable illness phase and access to technology). CONCLUSION: Remote consultations confer multiple advantages to patients; therefore, remote consultations should be offered as an option to patients living with kidney disease beyond the COVID-19 pandemic. However, there are several barriers to remote consultation that need to be addressed and understood before implementing remote care long-term. Future research should examine the impact of remote consultations on people living with kidney disease from under-served groups to identify barriers and ensure their suitability and accessibility to the wider population for a more patient-centred approach to kidney care.