Content of a Decision Analysis for Treatment Choice in End-stage Renal Disease

Abstract

For an illness whose treatment options lead to similar survival, quality-of-life issues determine the choice. If the patient has not yet experienced the treatments, then the information provided regarding the options plays a crucial role in the patient's choice. The authors interviewed 43 people who are intimately involved with the treatments for end-stage renal disease (ESRD) (ten physicians, 11 nurses, and 22 patients) with a view to determining what information needs to be considered when choosing between the various treatment options for this illness. They compared the three groups based on the items obtained from the interviews to deter mine whether the inclusion of patients in the process changed the content of the treatment descriptions. They were also interested in determining whether the use of the frequency with which an item is mentioned in the interviews is a valid measure of its relative importance to other items. 1,269 relevant items were obtained from the interviews and categorized into 51 areas of concern (subject domains). The health professionals (physicians and nurses) were found to have mentioned seven subject domains more often than the patients, and no domain was mentioned more often by the patients than by the health professionals. The frequency that an item was mentioned was correlated (r = 0.55) with direct measures of its importance. These results imply that careful consultation with health professionals to determine the content of a decision analysis or informational materials that address treatment choice is sufficient to address patient concerns and that items can be chosen for inclusion based on the relative frequencies with which they are mentioned. Key words: end-stage renal dis ease ; treatment choice; decision analysis; informed consent. (Med Decis Making 1994; 14:91-97)

Get full access to this article

View all access options for this article.

References

Hutchinson TA , Thomas DC , Lemieux JC , Harvey CE Prognostically controlled comparison of dialysis and renal transplantation. Kidney Int. 1984 ;26:44-51.

Campbell JD , Campbell AR The social and economic costs of end-stage renal disease. N Engl J Med. 1978;299:386-92.

Pauker SG , Coronary artery surgery: the use of decision analysis. Ann Intern Med. 1976;85:8-18.

Weinstein MC , Fineberg HV Clinical Decision Analysis. Philadelphia : W. B. Saunders, 1980:4-5.

Pauker SP , Pauker SG Prenatal diagnosis: a directive approach to genetic counseling using decision analysis. Yale J Biol Med. 1977;50:275-89.

Kassirer JP , Moskowitz AJ , Lau J. , Pauker SG Decision analysis: a progress report. Ann Intern Med. 1987;106:275-91.

Pliskin JS , Beck CH Decision analysis in individual clinical decision making: a real-world application in treatment of renal disease. Meth Inform Med. 1976;15:43-6.

Sackett DL , Torrance GW The utility of different health states as perceived by the general public . J Chronic Dis. 1978;31:697-704.

Churchill DN , Torrance GW , Taylor DW , et al. Measurement of quality of life in end-stage renal disease: the time trade-off approach . Clin Invest Med. 1987;10:14-20.

10.

Cuchural GJ , Levey AS , Pauker SG Kidney failure or cancer: should immunosuppression be continued in a transplant patient with malignant melanoma? Med Decis Making. 1984;4:82-107.

11.

Barnes BA An overview of the treatment of end-stage renal disease and a consideration of some of the consequences. In: Bunker JP , ed. Costs, Risks, and Benefits of Surgery. New York: Oxford University Press, 1977:325-41.

12.

Stange PV , Sumner AT Predicting treatment costs and life expectancy for end-stage renal disease . N Engl J Med. 1978;298:372-8.

13.

Roberts SD , Maxwell DR , Gross TL Cost-effective care of end-stage renal disease: a billion dollar question . Ann Intern Med. 1980;92:243-8.

14.

Churchill DN , Lemon BC , Torrance GW A cost-effectiveness analysis of continuous ambulatory peritoneal dialysis and hospital hemodialysis . Med Decis Making. 1984;4:489-500.

15.

Garner TI , Dardis R. Cost-effectiveness analysis of end-stage renal disease treatments . Med Care. 1987;25:25-34.

16.

Tousignant P. , Guttmann RD , Hollomby DJ Transplantation and home hemodialysis: their cost-effectiveness. J Chronic Dis. 1985;38:589-601.

17.

Krakauer H. Assessment of alternative technologies for the treatment of end-stage renal disease. Isr J Med Sci. 1986;22:245-59.

18.

Simon DG A cost-effectiveness analysis of cyclosporine in cadaveric kidney transplantation . Med Decis Making. 1986;6:199-207.

19.

Spitzer WO , Dobson AJ , Hall J. , et al. Measuring the quality of life of cancer patients. J Chronic Dis. 1981;34:585-97.

20.

Llewellyn-Thomas H. , Sutherland HJ , Tibshirani R. , Ciampi A. , Till JE , Boyd NF The measurement of patients' values in medicine . Med Decis Making. 1982;2:449-62.

21.

Wall EM Valued outcomes in the selection of a contraceptive method. West J Med. 1984;141:335-8.

22.

Boyd NF , Sutherland HJ , Heasman KZ , Tritchler DL , Cummings BJ Whose utilities for decision analysis? Med Decis Making. 1990;10:58-67.

23.

Patrick DL , Bush JW , Chen MM Toward an operational definition of health. J Health Soc Behav. 1973;14:6-23.

24.

Groome PA , Hutchinson TA , Prichard SS , ESRD treatment modality selection: which factors are important in the decision ? Adv Periton Dial. 1991;7:54-6.

25.

Deber RB , Blidner IN , Barnsley JM , Uldall R. Choice of treatment: what factors are important? Dial Transplant. 1982;12:1050-3.

26.

Sutherland HJ , Lockwood GA , Boyd NF Ratings of the importance of quality of life variables: therapeutic implications for patients with metastatic breast cancer . J Clin Epidemiol. 1990;43:661-6.