Enablers and Barriers to Integrating Advance Care Planning in Chronic Kidney Disease Care in a Canadian Provincial Network
Notice bibliographique
Résumé
Background: Individuals with advanced chronic kidney disease benefit from an integrated palliative approach to care through timely advance care planning and discussions about their goals of care. Despite literature and guidelines emphasizing the need for advance care planning in chronic kidney disease management, treatment-focused approach remains the norm, partly due to provider reluctance and discomfort in engaging in advance care planning conversations. In British Columbia (BC), the Integrated Palliative Nephrology (IPN) project was launched to enhance kidney health care provider engagement in advance care planning and goals of care discussions, to train kidney health care providers in the province to initiate serious illness conversations, and to develop standardized resources for patients and providers across a provincial renal network. Objective: As part of the quality improvement, this study highlights the barriers/challenges and enablers to engage in advance care planning for health care providers of adult patients with chronic kidney disease. Design: A multi-methods approach was used. Setting: British Columbia, Canada. Participants: Kidney health care providers who worked in nondialysis and dialysis care settings. Methods: Data were collected through semistructured surveys, individual interviews, and focus groups with health care providers across the province who care for patients with chronic kidney disease. Results: The results of a kidney health care provider survey (n = 90) showed self-reported improvements in knowledge of the integrated palliative approach and competency and comfort engaging in advance care planning discussions. The results of one-on-one interviews (n = 15) and focus groups (n = 32) with kidney health care providers showed that taking a relational approach with patients, enhancing provider comfort and competency with advance care planning, clarifying roles and responsibilities around who should engage in advance care planning conversation was beneficial to patient care. Supporting cohesion among care teams around the goal of advancing an integrated palliative approach, and offering mentorship and targeted education and resources for the kidney care team, can enable effective advance care planning discussions. Limitations: The study was limited by purposive sampling, a small sample size, and potential bias due to participant interests and settings. Conclusions: For kidney health care providers, targeted education and resources, clarity around roles and responsibilities, and long-term relationships with patients may help advance the cultural shift from treatment focus to integrating palliative care across the continuum of the illness journey. Trial registration: Not registered.
Récupéré en direct depuis OpenAlex et désinversé. Les résumés ne sont pas conservés dans cette base de données : les index inversés représentent 8,6 Go des 9,3 Go de texte de la base, et le serveur dispose de 13 Go libres.
Comment cette classification a été obtenuedéplier
Prédiction machine sur la base complète
Imitation des enseignantsNi prévalence calibrée, ni vérité terrain. Validation humaine à venir. Le volet Gemma est une étiquette directe du modèle pour chaque travail de la base, lue sur la notice réduite au titre. Le volet Codex est un classifieur appris des 10 348 étiquettes directes de Codex et calibré sur les taux pondérés de l'échantillon; les champs sans appui suffisant ne portent aucun appel Codex. Le mode candidate est l'union des deux volets; le consensus est leur intersection. Ces sorties portent le statut machine_predicted_unvalidated et ne sont pas des étiquettes humaines.
Scores du classifieur distillé par catégorie (deux têtes)
| Catégorie | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Métarecherche | 0,005 | 0,013 |
| Méta-épidémiologie (sens strict) | 0,000 | 0,000 |
| Méta-épidémiologie (sens large) | 0,000 | 0,000 |
| Bibliométrie | 0,001 | 0,002 |
| Études des sciences et des technologies | 0,016 | 0,002 |
| Communication savante | 0,003 | 0,001 |
| Science ouverte | 0,002 | 0,005 |
| Intégrité de la recherche | 0,001 | 0,001 |
| Charge utile insuffisante (le modèle a refusé de juger) | 0,002 | 0,000 |
Scores machine (provisoires)
Les deux têtes enseignantes du modèle étudiant, lues sur ce travail. Un score ordonne la base pour la relecture; il n'affirme jamais une catégorie, et le statut de validation accompagne chaque rangée tel quel.
Scores de référence d'un modèle non mature (critères de maturité non atteints, 7 itérations). Un score ordonne; il n'affirme jamais une catégorie.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · tel quel depuis la passe de notation : score_only signifie que le nombre peut ordonner les travaux, et qu'aucune étiquette de catégorie n'en découleClassification
machine, non validéePrédiction automatique; un appel candidat d’une seule source (Gemma direct ou Codex distillé), pas un consensus.
Le détail, modèle par modèle et score par score, se trouve en fin de page sous « Comment cette classification a été obtenue ».