shh.sePublications
Change search
CiteExportLink to record
Permanent link

Direct link
Cite
Citation style
  • apa
  • ieee
  • modern-language-association-8th-edition
  • vancouver
  • Other style
More styles
Language
  • de-DE
  • en-GB
  • en-US
  • fi-FI
  • nn-NO
  • nn-NB
  • sv-SE
  • Other locale
More languages
Output format
  • html
  • text
  • asciidoc
  • rtf
Discrepancy in responses to the surprise question between hemodialysis nurses and physicians, with focus on patient clinical characteristics: A comparative study
Sophiahemmet University.ORCID iD: 0000-0001-5612-8351
Sophiahemmet University.ORCID iD: 0000-0002-3647-1686
Show others and affiliations
2023 (English)In: Hemodialysis International, ISSN 1492-7535, E-ISSN 1542-4758, Vol. 27, no 4, p. 454-464Article in journal (Refereed) Published
Abstract [en]

INTRODUCTION: The surprise question (SQ) "Would I be surprised if this patient died within the next xx months" can be used by different professions to foresee the need of serious illness conversations in patients approaching end of life. However, little is known about the different perspectives of nurses and physicians in responses to the SQ and factors influencing their appraisals. The aim was to explore nurses' and physicians' responses to the SQ regarding patients on hemodialysis, and to investigate how these answers were associated with patient clinical characteristics.

METHODS: This comparative cross-sectional study included 361 patients for whom 112 nurses and 15 physicians responded to the SQ regarding 6 and 12 months. Patient characteristics, performance status, and comorbidities were obtained. Cohen's kappa was used to analyze the interrater agreement between nurses and physicians in their responses to the SQ and multivariable logistic regression was applied to reveal the independent association to patient clinical characteristics.

FINDINGS: Proportions of nurses and physicians responding to the SQ with "no, not surprised" was similar regarding 6 and 12 months. However, there was a substantial difference concerning which specific patient the nurses and physicians responded "no, not surprised", within 6 (κ = 0.366, p < 0.001, 95% CI = 0.288-0.474) and 12 months (κ = 0.379, p < 0.001, 95% CI = 0.281-0.477). There were also differences in the patient clinical characteristics associated with nurses' and physicians' responses to the SQ.

DISCUSSION: Nurses and physicians have different perspectives in their appraisal when responding to the SQ for patients on hemodialysis. This may reinforce the need for communication and discussion between nurses and physicians to identify the need of serious illness conversations in patients approaching the end of life, in order to adapt hemodialysis care to patient preferences and needs.

Place, publisher, year, edition, pages
2023. Vol. 27, no 4, p. 454-464
Keywords [en]
Comparative study, Multi-professional, Palliative care, Renal dialysis, Surprise question
National Category
Nursing
Identifiers
URN: urn:nbn:se:shh:diva-4984DOI: 10.1111/hdi.13103PubMedID: 37318069OAI: oai:DiVA.org:shh-4984DiVA, id: diva2:1787161
Available from: 2023-08-11 Created: 2023-08-11 Last updated: 2023-10-17Bibliographically approved

Open Access in DiVA

fulltext(381 kB)18 downloads
File information
File name FULLTEXT01.pdfFile size 381 kBChecksum SHA-512
036ad520c6ed83a62e1a05f9e7eeea930d8df4bca7742d65c45c5a5d555b58fd5e5b48164d5c0da6c66a721159ad307a7dd026093d03d5af46e72dff5c44a134
Type fulltextMimetype application/pdf

Other links

Publisher's full textPubMed

Authority records

Wallin, JeanetteAxelsson, LenaWennman-Larsen, Agneta

Search in DiVA

By author/editor
Wallin, JeanetteAxelsson, LenaWennman-Larsen, Agneta
By organisation
Sophiahemmet University
In the same journal
Hemodialysis International
Nursing

Search outside of DiVA

GoogleGoogle Scholar
Total: 18 downloads
The number of downloads is the sum of all downloads of full texts. It may include eg previous versions that are now no longer available

doi
pubmed
urn-nbn

Altmetric score

doi
pubmed
urn-nbn
Total: 145 hits
CiteExportLink to record
Permanent link

Direct link
Cite
Citation style
  • apa
  • ieee
  • modern-language-association-8th-edition
  • vancouver
  • Other style
More styles
Language
  • de-DE
  • en-GB
  • en-US
  • fi-FI
  • nn-NO
  • nn-NB
  • sv-SE
  • Other locale
More languages
Output format
  • html
  • text
  • asciidoc
  • rtf