KfH - Kuratorium für Dialyse und Nierentransplantation, Neu-Isenburg, Germany,
INWT Statics, Berlin, Germany.
Kidney Blood Press Res. 2019;44(2):158-169. doi: 10.1159/000498994. Epub 2019 May 2.
In Germany, practice patterns of conservative renal care (CRC), dialysis withdrawal (DW), and concomitant palliative care in patients who choose these options are unknown.
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).
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.
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.
在德国,选择保守性肾脏治疗(CRC)、透析退出(DW)和姑息性治疗的患者的治疗模式尚不清楚。
我们设计了一项调查,包括 13 个关于 CRC 和 DW 管理和频率、当地姑息治疗结构以及决策过程基本原理的结构化问题和一个开放性问题,并将其发送给一家非营利性肾脏护理提供商(KfH-德国透析和肾脏移植协会,新伊森堡)的所有肾脏中心的主任(n=193)。
回复率为 62.2%(n=122 个中心),包括 14197 名现患透析患者和 159652 名肾脏门诊患者。85%的受访者为男性(年龄在 45-64 岁之间)。男性的肾脏医学经验中位数为 22.2 年,女性为 20.8 年。所有中心均提供 CRC,患者比例和频率不同(中心人群的平均值为 8.4%,中位数为 5%,范围为 0-50%)。DW 的平均比例为每年 2.85%(中位数为 2%,范围为 1-15%)。医生和中心的特点与 CRC 或 DW 的使用无显著相关性。姑息治疗管理各不相同,包括当地姑息治疗团队、全科医生支持或肾脏团队自身支持。临终关怀仅在接受 CRC 的患者中建立。决策的基本原则是患者的意愿(CRC 为 90%,DW 为 67%)。CRC 中有 18%的患者在治疗方案的选择上“经常”改变意见,73%的患者“偶尔”改变意见。医生的决策主要取决于个体患者的预期致命预后和身体或精神状况不佳。报告了为肾脏患者提供姑息治疗的不同障碍,如姑息治疗医学教育不足、人员短缺、缺乏资金和当地姑息治疗结构。
与国际数字相比,非营利性肾脏中心报告的德国 CRC 和 DW 比例处于较低水平。姑息治疗管理的中心实践各不相同,并且取决于当地姑息治疗资源的可用性和肾脏团队的态度。姑息治疗的质量和决策过程需要进一步评估。