[Patients in pre-dialysis: decision taking and free choice of treatment].

Predialysis is a clinical situation in which the patient has significant impairment of kidney function that will ultimately lead to either death or inclusion in kidney replacement therapy (dialysis and/or transplantation). Since a practical and effective dialysis technique was introduced, the length and quality of survival of patients with end-stage renal failure has constantly increased. Contraindications for dialysis are almost never of a renal origin. The obstacles are the concomitant diseases of the patient. The age of the patient may be one of these obstacles. The average age at initiation of dialysis in our country is currently 67 years and over 50% of patients are 60 years old or older. Decision making: From an ethical viewpoint, there is a consensus in stating that anything that can technically be done, should be done. The principle of nonmaleficence and respect for the autonomy of the patients are "prima facie" principles when the physician has doubts as to whether dialysis provides a benefit to the patient. The principle of autonomy, which makes the patient a competent subject of treatment, allows a framework of shared decisions to be created in which the physician uses his knowledge and experiences in assessing the risk and benefits of dialysis including the alternative of no dialysis. The competent patient, duly informed, will chose the option that is best for him and take the decision. Principle of treatment proportionality: This principle states that there is a moral obligation to implement all therapeutic measures that show a relationship of due proportion between the resources used and the expected result. Dialysis is in principle a proportional treatment for end-stage renal failure. However, it may become a disproportional treatment because of the physical and mental conditions of the elderly patient. The good that is sought with institution of treatment can cause a harm to the patient that justifies noninclusion of the patient in dialysis treatment. Because of the impossibility of establishing universal rules of proportionality, it is necessary to make a personal judgment of conscience in each specific case. Recommendations for initiation or not of dialysis: Taking shared decisions between the patient (or relatives and/or advisors) and the physician. These shared decisions will be documented with signing of the proposed informed consent or rejection of the treatment. The medical team should always be sure that the patients has fully understood the consequences of the decision taken. Explanation of the modalities should include: - Types of dialysis treatment available. - Not to initiate dialysis and continue with conservative treatment until death. This situation may cause many problems if we do not have the help of the palliative care service. - Try dialysis for a limited time. - Stop dialysis and receive medical care until death. - Evaluate the prognosis of renal disease and concomitant diseases, life expectancy and family support. Resolution of conflicts: Conflicts may occur: - Between nephrologist and patient/family. - Between members of the nephrological team. - Between nephrologist and other physicians. When conflicts persist and the need for initiation of dialysis is urgent, it is necessary to initiate treatment and continue it until the resolution of these conflicts, making a record of this decision. In such cases, the Hospital Ethics Care Committee can help with appropriate advice to solve the discrepancies. Decisions taken in advance may be useful in this type of patients. Patients with advanced chronic kidney disease with criteria for Noninclusion or withdrawal of dialysis. - Severe or irreversible dementia. - conditions of permanent unconsciousness. - advanced tumors with metastasis. - terminal disease of another nontransplantable organ. - severe physical and/or mental disabilities. (Strength of Recommendation C)