4 research outputs found

    Reporting of euthanasia and physician-assisted suicide in the Netherlands: descriptive study

    Get PDF
    Background: An important principle underlying the Dutch Euthanasia Act is physicians' responsibility to alleviate patients' suffering. The Dutch Act states that euthanasia and physician-assisted suicide are not punishable if the attending physician acts in accordance with criteria of due care. These criteria concern the patient's request, the patient's suffering (unbearable and hopeless), the information provided to the patient, the presence of reasonable alternatives, consultation of another physician and the applied method of ending life. To demonstrate their compliance, the Act requires physicians to report euthanasia to a review committee. We studied which arguments Dutch physicians use to substantiate their adherence to the criteria and which aspects attract review committees' attention. Methods: We examined 158 files of reported euthanasia and physician-assisted suicide cases that were approved by the review committees. We studied the physicians' reports and the verdicts of the review committees by using a checklist. Results: Physicians reported that the patient's request had been well-considered because the patient was clear-headed (65%) and/or had repeated the request several times (23%). Unbearable suffering was often substantiated with physical symptoms (62%), function loss (33%), dependency (28%) or deterioration (15%). In 35%, physicians reported that there had been alternatives to relieve patients' suffering which were refused by the majority. The nature of the relationship with the consultant was sometimes unclear: the consultant was reported to have been an unknown colleague (39%), a known colleague (21%), otherwise (25%), or not clearly specified in the report (24%). Review committees relatively often scrutinized the consultation (41%) and the patient's (unbearable) suffering (32%); they had few questions about possible alternatives (1%). Conclusion: Dutch physicians substantiate their adherence to the criteria in a variable way with an emphasis on physical symptoms. The information they provide is in most cases sufficient to enable adequate review. Review committees' control seems to focus on (unbearable) suffering and on procedural issues

    Ineffectiveness and adverse events of nitrofurantoin in women with urinary tract infection and renal impairment in primary care

    No full text
    Item does not contain fulltextPURPOSE: To determine whether treatment with nitrofurantoin in women with urinary tract infection (UTI) and renal impairment in primary care is associated with a higher risk of ineffectiveness and/or serious adverse events than in women without renal impairment. METHODS: A cohort of 21,317 women treated with nitrofurantoin and a cohort of 7,926 women treated with trimethoprim, identified from the Pharmo Record Linkage System, were analysed. The primary outcome was ineffectiveness of treatment of nitrofurantoin defined as the start of a second antibacterial within 1 month after the start of nitrofurantoin. The secondary outcome was the occurrence of serious adverse events of nitrofurantoin leading to hospitalization within 90 days. A cohort of trimethoprim users was used to determine if the associations found for nitrofurantoin were mainly related to nitrofurantoin itself. The association between renal impairment and the risk of these outcomes was determined with Cox regression and expressed as hazard ratios (HRs). RESULTS: Overall, the incidence density for ineffectiveness was 5.4 per 1,000 person-days, and moderate renal impairment was not associated with ineffective treatment [HR 1.1, 95 % confidence interval (CI) 0.74-1.51]. The overall incidence density for adverse events was 0.02 per 1,000 person-days. In patients with renal impairment (<50 ml/min/1.73 m(2)) the risk of pulmonary adverse events leading to hospitalization was significantly increased (HR 4.1, 95 % CI 1.31-13.09) CONCLUSIONS: Nitrofurantoin treatment was not associated with a higher risk of ineffectiveness in women with UTI and moderate renal impairment (30-50 ml/min/1.73m(2)). However, we did find a significant association between renal impairment (<50 ml/min/1.73 m(2)) and pulmonary adverse events leading to hospitalization

    The labelling and reporting of euthanasia by Belgian physicians: a study of hypothetical cases

    No full text
    Background: Belgium legalized euthanasia in 2002. Physicians must report each euthanasia case to the Federal Control and Evaluation Committee. This study examines which end-of-life decisions (ELDs) Belgian physicians label 'euthanasia', which ELDs they think should be reported and the physician characteristics associated with correct labelling of euthanasia cases, the awareness that they should be reported and the reporting of them. Methods: Five hypothetical cases of ELDs: intensified pain alleviation, palliative/terminal sedation, euthanasia with neuromuscular relaxants, euthanasia with morphine and life-ending without patient request were presented in a cross-sectional survey of 914 physicians in Belgium in 2009. Results: About 19% of physicians did not label a euthanasia case with neuromuscular relaxants 'euthanasia', 27% did not know that it should be reported. Most physicians labelled a euthanasia case with morphine 'intensification of pain and symptom treatment' (39%) or 'palliative/terminal sedation' (37%); 21% of physicians labelled this case 'euthanasia'. Cases describing other ELDs were sometimes also labelled 'euthanasia'. Factors associated with a higher likelihood of labelling a euthanasia case correctly were: living in Flanders, being informed about the euthanasia law and having a positive attitude towards societal control over euthanasia. Whether a physician correctly labelled the euthanasia cases strongly determined their reporting knowledge and intentions. Conclusion: There is no consensus among physicians about the labelling of euthanasia and other ELDs, and about which cases must be reported. Mislabelling of ELDs could impede societal control over euthanasia. The provision of better information to physicians appears to be necessary
    corecore