The UNPACK Study: Phase 2
Research type
Research Study
Full title
The UNPACK study: Understanding treatment preferences of older Patients and their families deciding between dialysis and comprehensive conservative Care for Kidney failure (Phase 2)
IRAS ID
278956
Contact name
Barnaby Hole
Contact email
Sponsor organisation
The University of Bristol
Duration of Study in the UK
1 years, 5 months, 31 days
Research summary
This application relates to Phase 2 of the UNPACK study. Phase 1 - a qualitative interview study - informed Phase 2: a discrete choice experiment. Phase 2 uses the same screening and recruitment processes as in Phase 1. This application covers piloting of the study at a single site. It is our intention to expand to more sites following an amendment. This application will be submitted to the Research Ethics Committee that reviewed Phase 1.
---
Individuals at risk of kidney failure must choose between transplantation, dialysis, and non-dialysis care (also known as ‘comprehensive conservative care’ - CCC). Older people are rarely medically suitable for transplantation and are more likely to choose CCC than younger people. This may be because they don’t want intrusive treatment and are willing to live shorter lives to avoid it. Dialysis is particularly burdensome for them, with marginal survival benefit. People close to them, such as family members, are also involved in decision-making, but may be less willing to consider reduced survival to avoid treatment burden.
The trade-offs that older UK patients and those close to them are prepared to make have never before been quantified. Phase 1 of the UNPACK study used qualitative interviews to identify they treatment attributes and outcomes important to older people with kidney disease and those close to them when deciding between dialysis or CCC.
The discrete choice experiment is a questionnaire based on hypothetical treatment scenarios that measures treatment preferences of older people at risk of kidney failure and those close to them. The process will quantify and compare the importance of the treatment attributes (location and frequency) and outcomes (quality and quantity of life) identified in Phase 1. The results of this process will be used to inform the development of kidney services that fit better with the preferences of individuals using them.
REC name
East Midlands - Derby Research Ethics Committee
REC reference
20/EM/0067
Date of REC Opinion
6 Apr 2020
REC opinion
Further Information Favourable Opinion