Skip to main content

Best Case/Worst Case: A Multisite Randomized Trial of Scenario Planning for Patients With Late-Stage Kidney Disease

Journal
Journal of the American Geriatrics Society (Q1)
Published
5 September 2026
Study design
Randomized controlled trial
Evidence level
Level 1, High (CEBM 1b)
Authors
Lily N Stalter, Bret M Hanlon, Kyle J Bushaw, Jenna Nitkowski, Anne Buffington, Katharine L Cheung, et al.
PMID
42698358
DOI
10.1111/jgs.70695

Why clinicians should know about it

  • Picked for Nephrology (top studies of the week, 6 September 2026): Cluster RCT, communication tool for dialysis decisions

Abstract

BACKGROUND: Best Case/Worst Case (BC/WC) is a communication tool to support nephrologists and older adults with advanced chronic kidney disease with decisions about dialysis. We compared the effectiveness of training nephrologists to use BC/WC versus usual care on receipt of palliative care, quality of life (QOL), quality of communication, dialysis initiation, and death. PARTICIPANTS AND SETTING: From February 2021 to December 2023, we enrolled patients at 10 US sites who were ≥ 60 years, had an estimated glomerular filtration rate (eGFR) ≤ 24 mL/min/1.73m2, with estimated survival ≤ 18 months, and were considering dialysis initiation in the outpatient setting. We randomized nephrologists to intervention or usual care. METHODS: In this cluster randomized trial, we followed patients for up to 2 years using chart review and patient and caregiver surveys. The primary outcome was receipt of palliative care within 12 months of patient enrollment. RESULTS: We enrolled 68 nephrologists (36 intervention) and 268 patients (105 intervention). On intention-to-treat analysis, receipt of palliative care within 12 months did not significantly differ between groups (hazard ratio (HR) 0.94, 95% Confidence Interval (CI), 0.59-1.52; p = 0.812). Patients of intervention nephrologists were more likely to initiate dialysis (HR, 1.50, 95% CI, 1.00-2.25; p = 0.048) and report worse QOL throughout the study (FACIT-Pal effect estimate, -6.51; 95% CI, -12.20, -0.81; p = 0.025; FACT-G effect estimate, -4.78; 95% CI, -8.35, -1.22; p = 0.010). We found no significant differences in intensity of treatment at the end of life, quality of communication, or on-study death between groups. CONCLUSION: Training nephrologists to use the BC/WC communication tool does not significantly affect receipt of palliative care or other measurable clinical outcomes. TRIAL REGISTRATION: NCT04466865 (URL: clinicaltrials.gov/study/NCT04466865), registered 07/07/2020.

Abstract as published, via PubMed.

View on PubMedFull text at the publisherOpen in the app

For healthcare professionals. The summary is generated by AI from the published abstract, and the evidence level is assigned automatically from the study design on the Oxford CEBM hierarchy. Neither is medical advice. Read the full paper before changing practice.