Evaluating Decision-Making Capacity in Elderly Patients with ESKD on Hemodialysis

Background: Although the act on decisions on life-sustaining treatment including hemodialysis (HD) came into force in Korea, there is no specific mention to the assessment of the patient's decision-making capacity (DMC). We compared assessments of DMC of elderly patients with end-stage kidney disease (ESKD) on HD as provided by attending physicians, nurses, legal guardians, and a competence assessment tool. Methods: The DMC of the 94 elderly patients aged 65 and more with ESKD on HD were assessed by physicians (n = 5), nurses (n = 18), legal guardians (n = 94), and the Korean version of the Capacity-to-Consent Screen (K-CCS) as an assessment tool. We analyzed the agreement between intuitive assessments by participants and objective assessments using K-CCS for patients’ DMC. Results: The mean age and dialysis vintage of the patients were 70.2 years and 15.1 years, respectively. The concordance with capacity assessed using the K-CCS was higher in physicians- and nurses- compared with legal guardians-rated capacity (64.8% both vs. 46.3%, p = 0.003). Compared to the capacity assessed by K-CCS, legal guardians tended to underestimate the capacity (Figure 1). While physician-rated capacity showed a good agreement (α = 0.634) with the assessments using the K-CCS, assessments by nurses and legal guardians showed a moderate agreement (α = 0.580 and 0.479, respectively). A good agreement between the competence assessments of the nurses versus those of the physicians (α = 0.768), but a moderate agreement between the assessments of the physicians and nurses versus those of the patients’ legal guardians (α = 0.452 and 0.447, respectively), was observed. Conclusion: Although the intuitive assessments by nephrologists showed a good agreement with the objective evaluation using assessment tools, one-third of their assessments were inaccurate. Particularly, the tendency of legal guardians to underestimate patients' DMC raises concerns about limiting patients' autonomy. Actively utilizing competence assessment tools may help in accurately evaluating DMC of elderly patients with ESKD on HD.Comparison of the decision-making capacity of patients assessed by the competence evaluation tool with intuitive assessments by participants

Authors

Institutions

Publication Details

Journal
Journal of the American Society of Nephrology
Published
2024-10-01
DOI
https://doi.org/10.1681/asn.2024v3et902t
Primary Topic
Dialysis and Renal Disease Management
Type
article
Field-Weighted Citation Impact
0.00
Controls
|||
ALL TIME
JAN
FEB
MAR
APR
MAY
JUN
JUL
AUG
SEP
OCT
article

Evaluating Decision-Making Capacity in Elderly Patients with ESKD on Hemodialysis

Moo Yong Park, Soo Jeong Choi, Jin Kuk Kim, Byung Chul Yu
Journal of the American Society of Nephrology
Dialysis and Renal Disease Management
article

Evaluating Decision-Making Capacity in Elderly Patients with ESKD on Hemodialysis

Moo Yong Park, Soo Jeong Choi, Jin Kuk Kim, Byung Chul Yu
article en

Abstract

Background: Although the act on decisions on life-sustaining treatment including hemodialysis (HD) came into force in Korea, there is no specific mention to the assessment of the patient's decision-making capacity (DMC). We compared assessments of DMC of elderly patients with end-stage kidney disease (ESKD) on HD as provided by attending physicians, nurses, legal guardians, and a competence assessment tool. Methods: The DMC of the 94 elderly patients aged 65 and more with ESKD on HD were assessed by physicians (n = 5), nurses (n = 18), legal guardians (n = 94), and the Korean version of the Capacity-to-Consent Screen (K-CCS) as an assessment tool. We analyzed the agreement between intuitive assessments by participants and objective assessments using K-CCS for patients’ DMC. Results: The mean age and dialysis vintage of the patients were 70.2 years and 15.1 years, respectively. The concordance with capacity assessed using the K-CCS was higher in physicians- and nurses- compared with legal guardians-rated capacity (64.8% both vs. 46.3%, p = 0.003). Compared to the capacity assessed by K-CCS, legal guardians tended to underestimate the capacity (Figure 1). While physician-rated capacity showed a good agreement (α = 0.634) with the assessments using the K-CCS, assessments by nurses and legal guardians showed a moderate agreement (α = 0.580 and 0.479, respectively). A good agreement between the competence assessments of the nurses versus those of the physicians (α = 0.768), but a moderate agreement between the assessments of the physicians and nurses versus those of the patients’ legal guardians (α = 0.452 and 0.447, respectively), was observed. Conclusion: Although the intuitive assessments by nephrologists showed a good agreement with the objective evaluation using assessment tools, one-third of their assessments were inaccurate. Particularly, the tendency of legal guardians to underestimate patients' DMC raises concerns about limiting patients' autonomy. Actively utilizing competence assessment tools may help in accurately evaluating DMC of elderly patients with ESKD on HD.Comparison of the decision-making capacity of patients assessed by the competence evaluation tool with intuitive assessments by participants

Journal of the American Society of NephrologyVol. 35(10S)
Bucheon University (KR)
Peace, Justice and strong institutions
Openalex Percentile: Top 72%
Dialysis and Renal Disease Management
AI Navigator

Ask Laika to Summarize, Analyze, and Connect papers live on the map.

Summarize Papers & Methodologies

Extract key findings, datasets, and comparative methods across publications.

Benchmark Rankings & Visual Analytics

Rank top research institutions, authors, funders, topics, and journals by Field-Weighted Citation Impact (FWCI) and paper volume with instant charts.

Connect Distant Disciplines

Bridge topological clusters on the map to find hidden collaborative intersections.