OBJECTIVE: To examine differences in end-of-life decision-making in patients dying at home, in a hospital or in a care home. DESIGN: A death certificate study: certifying physicians from representative samples of death certificates, taken between June 2001 and February 2002, were sent questionnaires on the end-of-life decision-making preceding the patient's death. SETTING: Four European countries: Belgium (Flanders), Denmark, Sweden, and Switzerland (German-speaking part). MAIN OUTCOME MEASURES: The incidence of and communication in different end-of-life decisions: physician-assisted death, alleviation of pain/symptoms with a possible life-shortening effect, and non-treatment decisions. RESULTS: Response rates ranged from 59% in Belgium to 69% in Switzerland. The total number of deaths studied was 12 492. Among all non-sudden deaths the incidence of several end-of-life decisions varied by place of death. Physician-assisted death occurred relatively more often at home (0.3-5.1%); non-treatment decisions generally occurred more often in hospitals (22.4-41.3%), although they were also frequently taken in care homes in Belgium (26.0%) and Switzerland (43.1%). Continuous deep sedation, in particular without the administration of food and fluids, was more likely to occur in hospitals. At home, end-of-life decisions were usually more often discussed with patients. The incidence of discussion with other caregivers was generally relatively low at home compared with in hospitals or care homes. CONCLUSION: The results suggest the possibility that end-of-life decision-making is related to the care setting where people die. The study results seem to call for the development of good end-of-life care options and end-of-life communication guidelines in all settings.
OBJECTIVE: To examine differences in end-of-life decision-making in patients dying at home, in a hospital or in a care home. DESIGN: A death certificate study: certifying physicians from representative samples of death certificates, taken between June 2001 and February 2002, were sent questionnaires on the end-of-life decision-making preceding the patient's death. SETTING: Four European countries: Belgium (Flanders), Denmark, Sweden, and Switzerland (German-speaking part). MAIN OUTCOME MEASURES: The incidence of and communication in different end-of-life decisions: physician-assisted death, alleviation of pain/symptoms with a possible life-shortening effect, and non-treatment decisions. RESULTS: Response rates ranged from 59% in Belgium to 69% in Switzerland. The total number of deaths studied was 12 492. Among all non-sudden deaths the incidence of several end-of-life decisions varied by place of death. Physician-assisted death occurred relatively more often at home (0.3-5.1%); non-treatment decisions generally occurred more often in hospitals (22.4-41.3%), although they were also frequently taken in care homes in Belgium (26.0%) and Switzerland (43.1%). Continuous deep sedation, in particular without the administration of food and fluids, was more likely to occur in hospitals. At home, end-of-life decisions were usually more often discussed with patients. The incidence of discussion with other caregivers was generally relatively low at home compared with in hospitals or care homes. CONCLUSION: The results suggest the possibility that end-of-life decision-making is related to the care setting where people die. The study results seem to call for the development of good end-of-life care options and end-of-life communication guidelines in all settings.
Authors: P J van der Maas; G van der Wal; I Haverkate; C L de Graaff; J G Kester; B D Onwuteaka-Philipsen; A van der Heide; J M Bosma; D L Willems Journal: N Engl J Med Date: 1996-11-28 Impact factor: 91.245
Authors: Monica Beccaro; Massimo Costantini; Paolo Giorgi Rossi; Guido Miccinesi; Maria Grimaldi; Paolo Bruzzi Journal: J Epidemiol Community Health Date: 2006-05 Impact factor: 3.710
Authors: N S Wenger; R K Oye; P E Bellamy; J Lynn; R S Phillips; N A Desbiens; P Kussin; S J Youngner Journal: J Gen Intern Med Date: 1994-10 Impact factor: 5.128
Authors: Agnes van der Heide; Luc Deliens; Karin Faisst; Tore Nilstun; Michael Norup; Eugenio Paci; Gerrit van der Wal; Paul J van der Maas Journal: Lancet Date: 2003-08-02 Impact factor: 79.321
Authors: Tinne Smets; Johan Bilsen; Lieve Van den Block; Joachim Cohen; Viviane Van Casteren; Luc Deliens Journal: Br J Gen Pract Date: 2010-04 Impact factor: 5.386
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: Thijs Reyniers; Dirk Houttekier; H Roeline Pasman; Robert Vander Stichele; Joachim Cohen; Luc Deliens Journal: Ann Fam Med Date: 2014 Sep-Oct Impact factor: 5.166
Authors: Koen Meeussen; Lieve Van den Block; Nathalie Bossuyt; Michael Echteld; Johan Bilsen; Luc Deliens Journal: BMC Public Health Date: 2010-04-09 Impact factor: 3.295