Older patient considering treatment for advanced renal disease: protocol for a scoping review of the information available for shared decision-making
Abstract
<p><strong>Introduction: </strong>Older adults constitute the largestgroup of patients on dialysis in most parts of theworld. Management of advanced renal disease inthe older adult is complex; treatment outcomes andprognosis can be markedly different from youngerpatients. Clinical teams caring for such patients areoften called on to provide information regardingprognosis and outcomes with treatmentparticularly, the comparison between having dialysistreatment versus not having dialysis. Thesediscussions can be difficult for clinicians becausethey have to contend with incomplete or nascentdata regarding prognosis and outcomes in this agegroup. We aim to summarise the currently availableinformation regarding the prognosis and outcomesof advanced renal disease in the older adult bymeans of a scoping review of the literature. Thisarticle discusses our protocol.</p><p><strong>Methods:</strong> This scoping review will be undertakenin accordance with the Joanna Briggs Institutesmethodology for scoping reviews. A directed searchwill look for relevant articles in English (withinelectronic databases and the grey literature), writtenbetween 2000 and 2016, which have studied olderpatients with advanced renal disease (estimatedglomerular filtration rate <30 mL/min/1.73 m2). Afterscreening by two independent reviewers, selectedarticles will be analysed using a data charting tool.Reporting will include descriptions, analysis ofthemes using qualitative software and display ofinformation using charts.</p><p><strong>Ethics and dissemination:</strong> This scoping reviewwill analyse previously collected data, and so doesnot require ethical approval. Results will bedisseminated through academic journals,conferences and seminars. We anticipate that oursummary of the currently available knowledgeregarding the older adult with advanced renaldisease will be a repository of information forclinicians in the field. We expect to identify areas ofstudy that are suited to systematic reviews. Ourfindings can also be expected to influenceguidelines and clinical practice recommendations inthe future.</p>Date
2016Type
Refereed ArticleIdentifier
oai:ecite.utas.edu.au:113072http://ecite.utas.edu.au/113072
http://dx.doi.org/10.1136/bmjopen-2016- 013755