Abstract
BACKGROUND: Many nephrology providers express difficulty in discussing care options for patients who forgo KRT, which hampers their ability to help patients make decisions about their current and future treatment of kidney disease. METHODS: We conducted a qualitative study using interviews with a national sample of nephrology providers (i.e., physicians and advanced practice providers) who participated in US professional societies between July and December 2022. We performed a thematic analysis of interviews to identify emergent themes reflecting providers' experiences discussing care for patients who forgo KRT. RESULTS: There were 21 providers (age 54±13 years, female 81%, White 32%) who participated in interviews, of whom 43% were physicians and most (57%) practiced in academic settings. Three dominant themes emerged from interviews reflecting challenges to discussing the option to forgo KRT: (1) Inconsistent terminology: while providers sought to use terms to describe care for patients who forgo KRT that affirmed patients' decision, clearly conveyed that KRT would not be pursued, and were already familiar to patients and other providers, they disagreed about which terms satisfied these priorities; (2) blurred distinctions between KRT and its alternative: providers' descriptions of their care practices suggested that differences in their approaches to caring for patients who forgo KRT and those who are planning to pursue KRT could be opaque; and (3) deciphering patients' decision to forgo KRT: providers did not readily accept patients' expressed preferences to forgo KRT at face value and described using a variety of methods to assess whether patients would follow through with their decision. CONCLUSIONS: Providers used different, inconsistent terms to describe care for patients who forgo KRT. They disagreed about what this care entailed and were uncertain about what patients might mean when they express not wanting to undergo KRT.