Weisbord Steven D, Carmody Sharon S, Bruns Frank J, Rotondi Armando J, Cohen Lewis M, Zeidel Mark L, Arnold Robert M
Department of Medicine, Renal-Electrolyte Division, University of Pittsburgh School of Medicine, PA, USA.
Nephrol Dial Transplant. 2003 Jul;18(7):1345-52. doi: 10.1093/ndt/gfg105.
There has been little research on the potential value of palliative care for dialysis patients. In this pilot study, we sought (i) to identify symptom burden, health-related quality of life (HRQoL) and advance directives in extremely ill haemodialysis patients to determine their suitability for palliative care and (ii) to determine the acceptability of palliative care to patients and nephrologists.
Nineteen haemodialysis patients with modified Charlson co-morbidity scores of > or =8 were recruited. Each completed surveys to assess symptom burden, HRQoL and prior advance care planning. Palliative care specialists then visited patients twice and generated recommendations. Patients again completed the surveys, and dialysis charts were reviewed to assess nephrologists' (i) compliance with recommendations and (ii) documentation of symptoms reported by patients on the symptom assessment survey. Patients and nephrologists then completed surveys assessing their satisfaction with palliative care.
Patients reported 10.5 symptoms, 40% of which were noted by nephrologists in patients' charts. HRQoL was significantly impaired. Thirty-two percent of patients had living wills. No differences were observed in symptoms, HRQoL or number of patients establishing advance directives as a result of the intervention. Sixty-eight percent of patients and 76% of nephrologists rated the intervention worthwhile.
Extremely ill dialysis patients have marked symptom burden, considerably impaired HRQoL and frequently lack advance directives, making them appropriate candidates for palliative care. Patients and nephrologists perceive palliative care favourably despite its lack of effect in this study. A more sustained palliative care intervention with a larger sample size should be attempted to determine its effect on the care of this population.
关于姑息治疗对透析患者的潜在价值的研究较少。在这项试点研究中,我们旨在:(i)确定极危重症血液透析患者的症状负担、健康相关生活质量(HRQoL)和预立医疗指示,以确定他们是否适合接受姑息治疗;(ii)确定患者和肾病学家对姑息治疗的接受程度。
招募了19名改良Charlson合并症评分≥8分的血液透析患者。每位患者都完成了评估症状负担、HRQoL和先前预立医疗计划的调查。姑息治疗专家随后对患者进行了两次家访并给出建议。患者再次完成调查,并查阅透析病历以评估肾病学家:(i)对建议的依从性;(ii)在症状评估调查中对患者报告症状的记录情况。然后,患者和肾病学家完成了评估他们对姑息治疗满意度的调查。
患者报告了10.5种症状,其中40%被肾病学家记录在患者病历中。HRQoL显著受损。32%的患者有生前预嘱。干预后,在症状、HRQoL或确立预立医疗指示的患者数量方面未观察到差异。68%的患者和76%的肾病学家认为该干预是值得的。
极危重症透析患者有明显的症状负担,HRQoL严重受损,且经常缺乏预立医疗指示,这使他们成为姑息治疗的合适人选。尽管本研究中姑息治疗缺乏效果,但患者和肾病学家对其评价良好。应尝试进行样本量更大、更持续的姑息治疗干预,以确定其对该人群护理的影响。