Peritoneal dialysis: Status report in South and South East Asia.

BACKGROUND: Peritoneal dialysis (PD) as a modality of kidney replacement therapy (KRT) is largely underutilized globally. We analyzed PD utilization, impact of economic status, projected growth and impact of state policy(s) on PD growth in South Asia and Southeast Asia (SA&SEA) region. METHODS: The National Nephrology Societies of the region responded to a questionnaire on KRT practices. The responses were based on the latest registry data, acceptable community-based studies and societal perceptions. The representative countries were divided into high income and higher-middle income (HI & HMI) and low income and lower-middle income (LI & LMI) groups. RESULTS: Data provided by 15 countries showed almost similar percentage of GDP as health expenditure (4%-7%). But there was a significant difference in per capita income (HI & HMI -US$ 28 129 vs. LI & LMI - US$ 1710.2) between the groups. Even after having no significant difference in monthly cost of haemodialysis (HD) and PD in LI & LMI countries, they have poorer PD utilization as compared to HI & HMI countries (3.4% vs. 10.1%); the reason being lack of formal training/incentives and time constraints for the nephrologist while lack of reimbursement and poor general awareness of modalities has been a snag for the patients. The region expects ≥10% PD growth in the near future. Hong Kong and Thailand with 'PD first' policy have the highest PD utilization. CONCLUSION: Important deterrents to PD underutilization were lack of PD centric policies, lackadaisical patient/physician's attitude, lack of structured patient awareness programs, formal training programs and affordability.

Qualitative research methods and its application in nephrology.

Chronic kidney disease is associated with an increased risk of mortality, comorbidities and life-threatening complications. Invasive treatments including dialysis or transplantation, complex pharmacological therapies, dietary restrictions and the ongoing need to attend follow-up appointments can place a substantial treatment burden on patients and carers and impair quality of life. This highlights the need for care that is responsive to the needs of patients and involves them in decision-making to achieve the most appropriate healthcare outcomes. Shared decision-making and collaborative approaches to care require a deep awareness of the lived experiences and goals of patients. Qualitative research methods can provide insights into patients' experiences, values and priorities and inform practice and policy by uncovering their preferences for care. Qualitative methods are increasingly being used in standalone projects or in mixed methods studies (complementing quantitative studies) to make valuable contributions to patient-centred research. Patient-centred care, collaborations between patient and care provider, and shared decision-making that integrates with the patient's goals are central to quality healthcare. The efficacy of qualitative research lies in its ability to elicit patients' perspectives, values, priorities and goals that underpin shared decision making and care. This article discusses examples of how qualitative research has informed practice and policy in nephrology, provides a summary of qualitative research methods and outlines a guide on how to appraise, interpret and apply qualitative data.

[Methodology for determining workforce in health nephrologic unit in ITALY. Update of lows].

Nephrology continues to be in transition. While rates of kidney diseases and injury continue to rise, changes in the general health care system and the delivery of kidney care make it unclear how increases in need will be translated into demand for nephrologists. The changes in the delivery system also raise questions as to the future roles and career paths for nephrologists. There a major interrelated workforce issues to be watched closely : how many nephrologists are needed ? The supply of nephrologists does not reflect the distribution of patients with kidney diseases or the activity and job description related to end stage renal disease (ESRD) patients. Looking forward, more needs to be done to systematically measure need and access, and to identify clinical areas and activity of high need for nephrologists. This review examines the laws that govern the measure of work and the needs of personnel of the Italian state and in particular in health care. Therefore, once the method is accepted and established, it will be possible communicate those findings to policy makers and fellows and to involve the politicians.

International Medical Graduates in Nephrology: Roles, Rules, and Future Risks.

International medical graduates (IMGs) have become an increasingly essential part of many residency and fellowship programs in the United States. IMGs, who may be of either US or non-US citizenship, contribute significantly to the physician workforce across this country, particularly in underserved areas, as well as in their home countries on their return after training. Approximately 65% of nephrology fellows are IMGs, with most of these being non-US citizens. Non-US IMG applications for nephrology fellowship have been declining, exacerbating an ongoing shortage of nephrology trainees. IMGs face visa status restrictions and immigration policy concerns, limitations on federally funded research support, and difficulty finding desirable jobs in both private practices and academia after fellowship. We review training, examination, and licensure requirements, as well as visa status rules for IMGs. We also discuss the potential negative impact of recent immigration policies limiting the entry of non-US IMGs on the medical community in general and in nephrology in particular.

Time to Improve Informed Consent for Dialysis: An International Perspective.

The literature reveals that current nephrology practice in obtaining informed consent for dialysis falls short of ethical and legal requirements. Meeting these requirements represents a significant challenge, especially because the benefits and risks of dialysis have shifted significantly with the growing number of older, comorbid patients. The importance of informed consent for dialysis is heightened by several concerns, including: (1) the proportion of predialysis patients and patients on dialysis who lack capacity in decision making and (2) whether older, comorbid, and frail patients understand their poor prognosis and the full implications to their independence and functional status of being on dialysis. This article outlines the ethical and legal requirements for a valid informed consent to dialysis: (1) the patient was competent, (2) the consent was made voluntarily, and (3) the patient was given sufficient information in an understandable manner to make the decision. It then considers the application of these requirements to practice across different countries. In the process of informed consent, the law requires a discussion by the physician of the material risks associated with dialysis and alternative options. We argue that, legally and ethically, this discussion should include both the anticipated trajectory of the illness and the effect on the life of the patient with particular regard to the outcomes most important to the individual. In addition, a discussion should occur about the option of a conservative, nondialysis pathway. These requirements ensure that the ethical principle of respect for patient autonomy is honored in the context of dialysis. Nephrologists need to be open to, comfortable with, and skillful in communicating this information. From these clear, open, ethically, and legally valid consent discussions, a significant dividend will hopefully flow for patients, families, and nephrologists alike.

[Participation of hospital nephrology departments in outpatient dialysis care. Joint Statement of the ¼Deutsche Gesellschaft für Nephrologie (DGfN)«, ¼Verband leitender Klinikärzte in der Nephrologie (VLKN)«, ¼Verband Deutsche Nierenzentren (DN) e.†V.« , ¼KfH Kuratorium für Dialyse und Nierentransplantation e.†V.« and ¼PHV - Der Dialysepartner Patienten-Heimversorgung«]. / Ambulante Dialyse an nephrologischen Krankenhausabteilungen. Gemeinsame Stellungnahme der Deutschen Gesellschaft für Nephrologie, des Verbandes leitender Klinikärzte in der Nephrologie, des Verbandes Deutsche Nierenzentren e.†V., des KfH Kuratorium für Dialyse und Nierentransplantation e.†V. und der PHV ­ Der Dialysepartner Patienten-Heimversorgung.

The proposals by health care providers to impose drastic limits on chronic dialysis in hospitals to the extent that it can only be provided on loss-making terms, will jeopardize the cost efficiency of nephrological departments in hospitals and hence their continued existence. Such departments play a key role within the discipline, however, as the training of nephrologists is tied to them by further training regulations. The authors take the view that the proposals by health care providers are short-sighted with regard to the quality of care and the safeguarding of care in the future, and that they counteract the goals of quality assurance currently dominating the health policy agenda.

Integrated renal care: are nephrologists ready for change in renal care delivery models?

The Affordable Care Act is the most visible element of health care reform. However, both before the Affordable Care Act and now with the acceleration since its passage, the Centers for Medicare and Medicaid have been and are testing integrated care models in medicine in general as well as nephrology. The pressures to do so come from the well known increasing costs of health care in the face of a number of clear gaps in quality. The future will likely be more and more integrated care with less and less fee for service. More measurement of quality and the linking of quality measures to payments are also all but certain future elements of the health care economy. Nephrologists need to educate themselves on these trends and be prepared to engage them for the good of the profession and the improvement in care for patients.

Legal Issues for the Medical Director.

The nephrologist serving as medical director of a dialysis clinic must understand that the role of director is not simply an extension of being a good nephrologist. The two roles-nephrology practice and the leadership of a dialysis clinic-may be filled by a single person. However, each role contains unique tasks, requiring specific skill sets, and each role comes with inherent, associated legal risks. The medical director assumes a new level of responsibility and accountability defined by contractual obligations to the dialysis provider and by state and federal regulations. Hence, a medical director is accountable not only for providing standard-of-care treatment to his or her private practice patients dialyzed at the clinic but also for maintaining the safety of the dialysis clinic patient population and staff. Accordingly, a nephrologist serving in the role of medical director faces distinct legal risks beyond typical professional liability concerns. The medical director must also be mindful of regulatory compliance, unique avenues to licensure board complaints, and implications of careless communication habits. A thoughtful and prepared medical director can mitigate these risk exposures by understanding the sources of these challenges: contractual obligations, pertinent regulatory responsibilities, and the modern electronic communications environment.

The medical-legal responsibilities of a dialysis unit medical director.

The specialty of Nephrology, by virtue of its relationship with the dialysis procedure, is highly vulnerable to litigation. As is the case with all nephrologists, a dialysis unit medical director is not immune to medical malpractice suits, and can be held liable for any act of perceived or potential harm to any dialysis patient, regardless of the director's level of involvement. The medical director, per the Centers for Medicare and Medicaid Services (CMS) Conditions of Participation, accepts the responsibilities, accountability, and consequent legal liabilities of the quality of the medical care provided to every dialysis patient in the unit. This review is a synopsis of lawsuits filed against medical directors of dialysis units in the past forty years. Six categories of legal actions were noted; medical malpractice, fraudulent claims, self-referral and Stark Law, discrimination, negligence, and violation of patient autonomy and dignity.

The coming fiscal crisis: nephrology in the line of fire.

Nephrologists in the United States face a very uncertain economic future. The astronomical federal debt and unfunded liability burden of Medicare combined with the aging population will place unprecedented strain on the health care sector. To address these fundamental problems, it is conceivable that the federal government will ultimately institute rationing and other budget-cutting measures to rein in costs of ESRD care, which is generously funded relative to other chronic illnesses. Therefore, nephrologists should expect implementation of cost-cutting measures, such age-based rationing, mandated delayed dialysis and home therapies, compensated organ donation, and a shift in research priorities from the dialysis to the predialysis patient population. Nephrologists also need to recognize that these changes, which are geared toward the population level, may make it more difficult to advocate effectively for the needs of individual patients.