B D Onwuteaka-Philipsen1, G van der Wal. 1. Department of Social Medicine, Institute for Research in Extramural Medicine, Vrije Universiteit, Van der Boechorststraat 7, 1081 BT, Amsterdam, The Netherlands. b.philipsen.emgo@med.vu.nl
Abstract
UNLABELLED: In the project 'Support and consultation in Euthanasia in Amsterdam' (SCEA) general practitioners can turn to 20 especially trained physicians for advice or consultation concerning euthanasia or physician-assisted suicide. In this study the implementation was evaluated and it was investigated whether the goals of SCEA, supporting physicians and improving the quality of consultation, the quality of decision-making and the willingness to report, were met. Methods used were a questionnaire send to all general practitioners registered in Amsterdam (n=398), registration forms SCEA physicians filled in for every time SCEA was contacted and records of the public prosecutor. After the study period of 14 months, of the general practitioners who had performed euthanasia during this period, 53% had contacted SCEA at least once. The vast majority of general practitioners felt supported by SCEA. The quality of consultation was (even) higher in cases of euthanasia in which a SCEA physician acted as consultant than in cases with another consultant. We found no relation between use of SCEA and the last two goals of SCEA. CONCLUSIONS: Whether the lack of relation found between SCEA and it's last two goals is real or due to the studies limitations remains unclear. The results of this study do suggest that SCEA, by further improving the quality of consultation, has contributed to the safeguarding of euthanasia and assisted suicide. Therefore, similar networks are being developed throughout the Netherlands.
UNLABELLED: In the project 'Support and consultation in Euthanasia in Amsterdam' (SCEA) general practitioners can turn to 20 especially trained physicians for advice or consultation concerning euthanasia or physician-assisted suicide. In this study the implementation was evaluated and it was investigated whether the goals of SCEA, supporting physicians and improving the quality of consultation, the quality of decision-making and the willingness to report, were met. Methods used were a questionnaire send to all general practitioners registered in Amsterdam (n=398), registration forms SCEA physicians filled in for every time SCEA was contacted and records of the public prosecutor. After the study period of 14 months, of the general practitioners who had performed euthanasia during this period, 53% had contacted SCEA at least once. The vast majority of general practitioners felt supported by SCEA. The quality of consultation was (even) higher in cases of euthanasia in which a SCEA physician acted as consultant than in cases with another consultant. We found no relation between use of SCEA and the last two goals of SCEA. CONCLUSIONS: Whether the lack of relation found between SCEA and it's last two goals is real or due to the studies limitations remains unclear. The results of this study do suggest that SCEA, by further improving the quality of consultation, has contributed to the safeguarding of euthanasia and assisted suicide. Therefore, similar networks are being developed throughout the Netherlands.
Keywords:
Death and Euthanasia; Empirical Approach
Authors: Yanna Van Wesemael; Joachim Cohen; Bregje D Onwuteaka-Philipsen; Johan Bilsen; Wim Distelmans; Luc Deliens Journal: Health Serv Res Date: 2009-09-24 Impact factor: 3.402
Authors: Yanna Van Wesemael; Joachim Cohen; Bregje D Onwuteaka-Philipsen; Johan Bilsen; Luc Deliens Journal: BMC Health Serv Res Date: 2009-12-04 Impact factor: 2.655