Explore the vast range of titles available.

\"This book is the first comprehensive report and analysis of the Dutch euthanasia experience over the last three decades. In contrast to most books about euthanasia, which are written by authors from countries where the practice is illegal and therefore practiced only secretly, this book analyzes empirical data and real-life clinical behavior. Its essays were written by the leading Dutch scholars and clinicians who shaped euthanasia policy and who have studied, evaluated, and helped regulate it. Some of them have themselves practiced euthanasia. The book will contribute to the world literature on physician-assisted death by providing a comprehensive examination of how euthanasia has been practiced and how it has evolved in one specific national and cultural context. It will greatly advance the understanding of euthanasia among both advocates and opponents of the practice\"--Provided by publisher.

During the Coronavirus Disease 2019 (COVID-19) pandemic, the number of consultations and diagnoses in primary care and referrals to specialist care declined substantially compared to prepandemic levels. Beyond deferral of elective non-COVID-19 care by healthcare providers, it is unclear to what extent healthcare avoidance by community-dwelling individuals contributed to this decline in routine healthcare utilisation. Moreover, it is uncertain which specific symptoms were left unheeded by patients and which determinants predispose to healthcare avoidance in the general population. In this cross-sectional study, we assessed prevalence of healthcare avoidance during the pandemic from a patient perspective, including symptoms that were left unheeded, as well as determinants of healthcare avoidance. On April 20, 2020, a paper COVID-19 survey addressing healthcare utilisation, socioeconomic factors, mental and physical health, medication use, and COVID-19-specific symptoms was sent out to 8,732 participants from the population-based Rotterdam Study (response rate 73%). All questionnaires were returned before July 10, 2020. By hand, prevalence of healthcare avoidance was subsequently verified through free text analysis of medical records of general practitioners. Odds ratios (ORs) for avoidance were determined using logistic regression models, adjusted for age, sex, and history of chronic diseases. We found that 1,142 of 5,656 included participants (20.2%) reported having avoided healthcare. Of those, 414 participants (36.3%) reported symptoms that potentially warranted urgent evaluation, including limb weakness (13.6%), palpitations (10.8%), and chest pain (10.2%). Determinants related to avoidance were older age (adjusted OR 1.14 [95% confidence interval (CI) 1.08 to 1.21]), female sex (1.58 [1.38 to 1.82]), low educational level (primary education versus higher vocational/university 1.21 [1.01 to 1.46), poor self-appreciated health (per level decrease 2.00 [1.80 to 2.22]), unemployment (versus employed 2.29 [1.54 to 3.39]), smoking (1.34 [1.08 to 1.65]), concern about contracting COVID-19 (per level increase 1.28 [1.19 to 1.38]) and symptoms of depression (per point increase 1.13 [1.11 to 1.14]) and anxiety (per point increase 1.16 [1.14 to 1.18]). Study limitations included uncertainty about (perceived) severity of the reported symptoms and potentially limited generalisability given the ethnically homogeneous study population. In this population-based cross-sectional study, 1 in 5 individuals avoided healthcare during lockdown in the COVID-19 pandemic, often for potentially urgent symptoms. Healthcare avoidance was strongly associated with female sex, fragile self-appreciated health, and high levels of depression and anxiety. These results emphasise the need for targeted public education urging these vulnerable patients to timely seek medical care for their symptoms to mitigate major health consequences.

BackgroundEuthanasia and physician-assisted suicide (EAS) in patients with psychiatric disease, dementia or patients who are tired of living (without severe morbidity) is highly controversial. Although such cases can fall under the Dutch Euthanasia Act, Dutch physicians seem reluctant to perform EAS, and it is not clear whether or not physicians reject the possibility of EAS in these cases.AimTo determine whether physicians can conceive of granting requests for EAS in patients with cancer, another physical disease, psychiatric disease, dementia or patients who are tired of living, and to evaluate whether physician characteristics are associated with conceivability. A cross-sectional study (survey) was conducted among 2269 Dutch general practitioners, elderly care physicians and clinical specialists.ResultsThe response rate was 64% (n=1456). Most physicians found it conceivable that they would grant a request for EAS in a patient with cancer or another physical disease (85% and 82%). Less than half of the physicians found this conceivable in patients with psychiatric disease (34%), early-stage dementia (40%), advanced dementia (29–33%) or tired of living (27%). General practitioners were most likely to find it conceivable that they would perform EAS.ConclusionsThis study shows that a minority of Dutch physicians find it conceivable that they would grant a request for EAS from a patient with psychiatric disease, dementia or a patient who is tired of living. For physicians who find EAS inconceivable in these cases, legal arguments and personal moral objections both probably play a role.

Opioids are commonly prescribed in the Emergency Department (ED) for acute pain management. However, their use carries significant risks, including dependence and misuse. This study aims to gain insight into the perspectives of ED physicians and physician assistants (PAs) concerning the multifaceted role of the ED in problematic opioid use. This is crucial for reducing opioid-related harms. A qualitative study, using semi-structured interviews. Interviews were conducted with twenty-five ED physicians and PAs from four hospitals in the Netherlands. A diverse group participated in the study, representing different hospital settings and levels of working experience. Reflexive thematic analysis was performed to develop key themes reflecting participants' perspectives and attitudes towards the role of the ED in opioid related harms. Two key themes were developed from the analysis. The first theme 'Preventing opioid-related harms from an ED perspective' underscores the careful approach emergency physicians take when prescribing opioids. This involves restricting opioid prescriptions to specific indications, considering alternative pain management options, limiting prescription durations, and involving patients in shared decision-making. Beyond their own prescribing practices, emergency care providers also collaborate with general practitioners, navigate patient expectations, and operate within a broader societal landscape where pain is increasingly viewed as intolerable. The second theme 'Managing problematic opioid use at the ED' highlights the difficulties faced by emergency care providers in treating individuals who are already using or dependent on opioids. This includes recognizing, intervening, referring, and managing cases of problematic opioid use. This theme also considers the involvement of other healthcare professionals, such as pain specialists and psychiatrists, as well as the roles and responsibilities of patients. Additionally, it considers the broader societal context, particularly the extent of opioid-related harms in the Netherlands. This study sheds light on the complexities surrounding opioid use and emergency care providers' approach to mitigating opioid related harms while navigating patient needs and systemic challenges. EDs play a critical role in addressing opioid-related harms but face significant challenges. Strengthening provider education, integrating patient records, and enhancing partnerships with addiction services are key steps toward refining healthcare responses and policies for this ongoing public health crisis.

ObjectiveBreaking bad news about life-threatening and possibly terminal conditions is a crucial part of paediatric care for children in this situation. Little is known about how the parents of children with life-threatening conditions experience communication of bad news. The objective of this study is to analyse parents’ experiences (barriers and facilitators) of communication of bad news.DesignA qualitative study consisting of a constant comparative analysis of in-depth interviews conducted with parents.SettingThe Netherlands.ParticipantsSixty-four parents—bereaved and non-bereaved—of 44 children (aged 1–12 years, 61% deceased) with a life-threatening condition.InterventionsNone.ResultsBased on parents’ experiences, the following 10 barriers to the communication of bad news were identified: (1) a lack of (timely) communication, (2) physicians’ failure to ask parents for input, (3) parents feel unprepared during and after the conversation, (4) a lack of clarity about future treatment, (5) physicians’ failure to voice uncertainties, (6) physicians’ failure to schedule follow-up conversations, (7) presence of too many or unknown healthcare professionals, (8) parental concerns in breaking bad news to children, (9) managing indications of bad news in non-conversational contexts, and (10) parents’ misunderstanding of medical terminology.ConclusionsThis study shows healthcare professionals how parents experience barriers in bad news conversations. This mainly concerns practical aspects of communication. The results provide practical pointers on how the communication of bad news can be improved to better suit the needs of parents. From the parents’ perspective, the timing of conversations in which they were informed that their child might not survive was far too late. Sometimes, no such conversations ever took place.

RationaleAdvance care planning (ACP) is uncommon in patients with chronic obstructive pulmonary disease (COPD).ObjectivesTo assess whether a nurse-led ACP-intervention can improve quality of patient-physician end-of-life care communication in patients with COPD. Furthermore, the influence of an ACP-intervention on symptoms of anxiety and depression in patients and loved ones was studied. Finally, quality of death and dying was assessed in patients who died during 2-year follow-up.MethodsA multicentre cluster randomised-controlled trial in patients with advanced COPD was performed. The intervention group received an 1.5 hours structured nurse-led ACP-session. Outcomes were: quality of patient-physician end-of-life care communication, prevalence of ACP-discussions 6 months after baseline, symptoms of anxiety and depression in patients and loved ones and quality of death and dying.Results165 patients were enrolled (89 intervention; 76 control). The improvement of quality of patient-physician end-of-life care communication was significantly higher in the intervention group compared with the control group (p<0.001). The ACP-intervention was significantly associated with the occurrence of an ACP-discussion with physicians within 6 months (p=0.003). At follow-up, symptoms of anxiety were significantly lower in loved ones in the intervention group compared with the control group (p=0.02). Symptoms of anxiety in patients and symptoms of depression in both patients and loved ones were comparable at follow-up (p>0.05). The quality of death and dying was comparable between both groups (p=0.17).ConclusionOne nurse-led ACP-intervention session improves patient-physician end-of-life care communication without causing psychosocial distress in both patients and loved ones.

BackgroundDiagnostic errors have been attributed to reasoning flaws caused by cognitive biases. While experiments have shown bias to cause errors, physicians of similar expertise differed in susceptibility to bias. Resisting bias is often said to depend on engaging analytical reasoning, disregarding the influence of knowledge. We examined the role of knowledge and reasoning mode, indicated by diagnosis time and confidence, as predictors of susceptibility to anchoring bias. Anchoring bias occurs when physicians stick to an incorrect diagnosis triggered by early salient distracting features (SDF) despite subsequent conflicting information.MethodsSixty-eight internal medicine residents from two Dutch university hospitals participated in a two-phase experiment. Phase 1: assessment of knowledge of discriminating features (ie, clinical findings that discriminate between lookalike diseases) for six diseases. Phase 2 (1 week later): diagnosis of six cases of these diseases. Each case had two versions differing exclusively in the presence/absence of SDF. Each participant diagnosed three cases with SDF (SDF+) and three without (SDF−). Participants were randomly allocated to case versions. Based on phase 1 assessment, participants were split into higher knowledge or lower knowledge groups. Main outcome measurements: frequency of diagnoses associated with SDF; time to diagnose; and confidence in diagnosis.ResultsWhile both knowledge groups performed similarly on SDF- cases, higher knowledge physicians succumbed to anchoring bias less frequently than their lower knowledge counterparts on SDF+ cases (p=0.02). Overall, physicians spent more time (p<0.001) and had lower confidence (p=0.02) on SDF+ than SDF− cases (p<0.001). However, when diagnosing SDF+ cases, the groups did not differ in time (p=0.88) nor in confidence (p=0.96).ConclusionsPhysicians apparently adopted a more analytical reasoning approach when presented with distracting features, indicated by increased time and lower confidence, trying to combat bias. Yet, extended deliberation alone did not explain the observed performance differences between knowledge groups. Success in mitigating anchoring bias was primarily predicted by knowledge of discriminating features of diagnoses.

Although compassion is a crucial element of physicians' professional performance and high-quality care, research shows it often remains an unmet need of patients. Understanding patients' and physicians' perspectives on compassionate care may provide insights that can be used to foster physicians' ability to respond to patients' compassion needs. Therefore, this study aims to understand how both patients and physicians experience the concept and practice of compassionate care. We conducted semi-structured interviews with eight patients and ten resident physicians at a University Medical Center in the Netherlands. Using thematic analysis, we separately coded patient and resident transcripts to identify themes capturing their experiences of compassionate care. This study was part of a larger project to develop an educational intervention to improve compassion in residents. For both patients and residents, we identified four themes encompassing compassionate care: being there, empathizing, actions to relieve patients' suffering, and connection. For residents, a fifth theme was professional fulfillment (resulting from compassionate care). Although patients and residents both emphasized the importance of compassionate care, patients did not always perceive the physician-patient encounter as compassionate. According to residents, high workloads and time pressures hindered their ability to provide compassionate care. Patients and residents have similar and varying understandings of compassionate care at the same time. Understanding these differences can aid compassion in medical practice. Based on the findings, three topics are suggested to improve compassion in residents: (1) train residents how to ask for patients' compassion needs, (2) address residents' limiting beliefs about the concept and practice of compassion, and (3) acknowledge the art and science of medicine cannot be separated.

The SDM-Q-9 and SDM-Q-Doc measure patient and physician perception of the extent of shared decision making (SDM) during a physician-patient consultation. So far, no self-report instrument for SDM was available in Dutch, and validation of the scales in other languages has been limited. The aim of this study was to translate both scales into Dutch and assess their psychometric characteristics. Participants were patients and their treating physicians (general practitioners and medical specialists). Patients (N = 182) rated their consultation using the SDM-Q-9, 43 physicians rated their consultations using the SDM-Q-Doc (N = 201). Acceptability, reliability (internal consistency), and the factorial structure of the instruments were determined. For convergent validity the CPSpost was used. Reliabilities of both scales were high (alpha SDM-Q-9 0.88; SDM-Q-Doc 0.87). The SDM-Q-9 and SDM-Q-Doc total scores correlated as expected with the CPSpost (SDM-Q-9: r = 0.29; SDM-Q-Doc: r = 0.48) and were significantly different between the CPSpost categories, with lowest mean scores when the physician made the decision alone. Principal Component Analyses showed a two-component model for each scale. A confirmatory factor analysis yielded a mediocre, but acceptable, one-factor model, if Item 1 was excluded; for both scales the best indices of fit were obtained for a one-factor solution, if both Items 1 and 9 were excluded. The Dutch SDM-Q-9 and SDM-Q-Doc demonstrate good acceptance and reliability; they correlated as expected with the CPSpost and are suitable for use in Dutch primary and specialised care. Although the best model fit was found when excluding Items 1 and 9, we believe these items address important aspects of SDM. Therefore, also based on the coherence with theory and comparability with other studies, we suggest keeping all nine items of the scale. Further research on the SDM-concept in patients and physicians, in different clinical settings and different countries, is necessary to gain a better understanding of the SDM-construct and its measurement.

Occupational well-being is inherent to physicians’ professional performance and is indispensable for a cost-effective, robust healthcare system and excellent patient outcomes. Increasing numbers of physicians with symptoms of burnout, depression, and other health issues are demonstrating the need to foster and maintain physicians’ well-being. Assessing physicians’ well-being, occupational demands, and resources can help create more supportive and health-promoting working environments. The WellNext Scan (WNS) is a 46-item questionnaire developed to assess (i) physicians’ well-being and (ii) relevant factors related to physicians’ clinical working environment. We collected data to investigate the validity and reliability of the WNS using a non-randomized, multicenter, cross-sectional survey of 467 physicians (staff, residents, doctors not in training, and fellows) from 17 departments in academic and non-academic teaching medical centers in the Netherlands. Exploratory factor analysis detected three composite scales of well-being (energy and work enjoyment, meaning, and patient-related disengagement) and five explanatory factors (supportive team culture, efficiency of practice, job control and team-based well-being practices, resilience, and self-kindness). Pearson’s correlations, item-total and inter-scale correlations, and Cronbach’s alphas demonstrated good construct validity and internal consistency reliability of the scales ( α : 0.67–0.90; item-total correlations: 0.33–0.84; inter-scale correlations: 0.19–0.62). Overall, the WNS appears to yield reliable and valid data and is now available as a supportive tool for meaningful team-based conversations aimed at improving physician well-being.