The associations of palliative care experts regarding food refusal : a cross-sectional study with an open question evaluated by triangulation analysis

Introduction: Health professionals in oncologic and palliative care settings are often faced with the problem that patients stop eating and drinking. While the causes of food refusal are very different, the result is often malnutrition, which is linked to health comorbidities and a high mortality rate. However, the professionals lack the time and knowledge to clarify the cause for each patient. What associations do health professionals have when faced with food refusal? Objective: To investigate the associations that health professionals in oncological and palliative settings have about denied eating behavior. Methods: A cross-sectional study, starting with an open question focusing professionals’ associations regarding food refusal. The results were inductively analyzed, whereby generic categories were developed. Subsequently, the categories were transformed into quantitative data to calculate the relationships between the categories. Results: A total of 350 out of 2000 participants completed the survey, resulting in a response rate of 17.5%. Food refusal is primarily associated with physical and ethical aspects and with endof-life. Half of the participants frequently find that patients refuse to eat. The attitudes show that the autonomy of the patient is the highest good and is to be respected. Even in the case of patients with limited decision-making capacity, the refusal to eat is acceptable. Conclusion: Clarifying the cause of food refusal requires a great deal of knowledge and is strongly influenced by the associations of health professionals. While the associations have very negative connotations, information and training is needed to make professionals aware of this and to change their associations. With this knowledge and in an interprofessional cooperation, mis-labelling of patient settings can be avoided and fears can be reduce

Experiences of relatives with outpatient palliative care : a cross-sectional study

Aim: The authors aimed to evaluate the experiences of the relatives of dying people, both in regard to benefits and special needs, when supported by a mobile palliative care bridging service (MPCBS), which exists to enable dying people to stay at home and to support patients' relatives. Design: A cross-sectional survey. Methods: A standardised survey was performed, asking 106 relatives of dying people about their experiences with the MPCBS (response rate=47.3%). Descriptive statistics were analysed using SPSS 23. Findings: Many relatives (62.5%) reported that their dying relations when discharged from a facility to stay at home were not symptom-free. The MPCBS helped relatives maintain home care, and this was reported to be helpful. Support provided by the MPCBS made it easier for 77.6% of relatives to adjust care as soon as situations changed, and helped ensure that symptoms could be better controlled, at least for 68.2% of relatives. Younger relatives felt more encouraged by the MPCBS to care for their relatives dying at home

An optional European contract law code: Advantages and disadvantages

Contract law, European union, Legal federalism, Regulatory competition,

Guidelines for the use and interpretation of assays for monitoring autophagy (4th edition)

In 2008, we published the first set of guidelines for standardizing research in autophagy. Since then, this topic has received increasing attention, and many scientists have entered the field. Our knowledge base and relevant new technologies have also been expanding. Thus, it is important to formulate on a regular basis updated guidelines for monitoring autophagy in different organisms. Despite numerous reviews, there continues to be confusion regarding acceptable methods to evaluate autophagy, especially in multicellular eukaryotes. Here, we present a set of guidelines for investigators to select and interpret methods to examine autophagy and related processes, and for reviewers to provide realistic and reasonable critiques of reports that are focused on these processes. These guidelines are not meant to be a dogmatic set of rules, because the appropriateness of any assay largely depends on the question being asked and the system being used. Moreover, no individual assay is perfect for every situation, calling for the use of multiple techniques to properly monitor autophagy in each experimental setting. Finally, several core components of the autophagy machinery have been implicated in distinct autophagic processes (canonical and noncanonical autophagy), implying that genetic approaches to block autophagy should rely on targeting two or more autophagy-related genes that ideally participate in distinct steps of the pathway. Along similar lines, because multiple proteins involved in autophagy also regulate other cellular pathways including apoptosis, not all of them can be used as a specific marker for bona fide autophagic responses. Here, we critically discuss current methods of assessing autophagy and the information they can, or cannot, provide. Our ultimate goal is to encourage intellectual and technical innovation in the field