PURPOSE: To examine and compare end-of-life care in patients with cancer dying in Belgium and the Netherlands. PATIENTS AND METHODS: A mortality follow-back study was undertaken in 2008 via representative nationwide sentinel networks of general practitioners (GPs) in Belgium and the Netherlands. By using similar standardized procedures, GPs reported on aspects of end-of-life care and the circumstances of nonsudden death of patients with cancer in their practice. RESULTS: Of the 422 reported patients with cancer, most resided at home during the last year of life (Belgium, 91%; the Netherlands, 95%). Death occurred at home in 34% (Belgium) and 61% (the Netherlands) and in the hospital in 29% (Belgium) and 19% (the Netherlands). In the last month of life, end-of-life issues were more often discussed in the Netherlands (88%) than in Belgium (68%). In both countries, physical problems were discussed most often (Belgium, 49%; the Netherlands, 78%) and spiritual issues least often (Belgium, 20%; the Netherlands, 32%). Certain end-of-life treatment preferences were known for 43% (Belgium) and 67% (the Netherlands) of patients. In the last week of life, treatment was most often focused on palliation (Belgium, 94%; the Netherlands, 91%). Physical distress was reported in 84% (Belgium) and 76% (the Netherlands) of patients and psychological distress in 59% and 36%. Most distressing was lack of energy (Belgium, 73%; the Netherlands, 71%) and lack of appetite (Belgium, 61%; the Netherlands, 53%). Two thirds of patients were bedridden (Belgium, 67%; the Netherlands, 69%). CONCLUSION: Although place of death and communication about end-of-life issues differ substantially, a palliative treatment goal is adopted for the vast majority of patients in both countries. However, GPs reported that the majority of patients experienced symptom distress at the end of life, which suggests important challenges remain for improving end-of-life care.
PURPOSE: To examine and compare end-of-life care in patients with cancer dying in Belgium and the Netherlands. PATIENTS AND METHODS: A mortality follow-back study was undertaken in 2008 via representative nationwide sentinel networks of general practitioners (GPs) in Belgium and the Netherlands. By using similar standardized procedures, GPs reported on aspects of end-of-life care and the circumstances of nonsudden death of patients with cancer in their practice. RESULTS: Of the 422 reported patients with cancer, most resided at home during the last year of life (Belgium, 91%; the Netherlands, 95%). Death occurred at home in 34% (Belgium) and 61% (the Netherlands) and in the hospital in 29% (Belgium) and 19% (the Netherlands). In the last month of life, end-of-life issues were more often discussed in the Netherlands (88%) than in Belgium (68%). In both countries, physical problems were discussed most often (Belgium, 49%; the Netherlands, 78%) and spiritual issues least often (Belgium, 20%; the Netherlands, 32%). Certain end-of-life treatment preferences were known for 43% (Belgium) and 67% (the Netherlands) of patients. In the last week of life, treatment was most often focused on palliation (Belgium, 94%; the Netherlands, 91%). Physical distress was reported in 84% (Belgium) and 76% (the Netherlands) of patients and psychological distress in 59% and 36%. Most distressing was lack of energy (Belgium, 73%; the Netherlands, 71%) and lack of appetite (Belgium, 61%; the Netherlands, 53%). Two thirds of patients were bedridden (Belgium, 67%; the Netherlands, 69%). CONCLUSION: Although place of death and communication about end-of-life issues differ substantially, a palliative treatment goal is adopted for the vast majority of patients in both countries. However, GPs reported that the majority of patients experienced symptom distress at the end of life, which suggests important challenges remain for improving end-of-life care.
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: J A F Koekkoek; L Dirven; J C Reijneveld; E M Sizoo; H R W Pasman; T J Postma; L Deliens; R Grant; S McNamara; W Grisold; E Medicus; G Stockhammer; S Oberndorfer; B Flechl; C Marosi; M J B Taphoorn; J J Heimans Journal: J Neurooncol Date: 2014-07-20 Impact factor: 4.130
Authors: Maaike L De Roo; Guido Miccinesi; Bregje D Onwuteaka-Philipsen; Nele Van Den Noortgate; Lieve Van den Block; Andrea Bonacchi; Gé A Donker; Jose E Lozano Alonso; Sarah Moreels; Luc Deliens; Anneke L Francke Journal: PLoS One Date: 2014-04-08 Impact factor: 3.240
Authors: Winne Ko; Luc Deliens; Guido Miccinesi; Francesco Giusti; Sarah Moreels; Gé A Donker; Bregje Onwuteaka-Philipsen; Oscar Zurriaga; Aurora López-Maside; Lieve Van den Block Journal: BMC Cancer Date: 2014-12-16 Impact factor: 4.430
Authors: Paul R Duberstein; Michael Chen; Michael Hoerger; Ronald M Epstein; Laura M Perry; Sule Yilmaz; Fahad Saeed; Supriya G Mohile; Sally A Norton Journal: J Pain Symptom Manage Date: 2019-10-19 Impact factor: 3.612
Authors: Manon S Boddaert; Chantal Pereira; Jeroen Adema; Kris C P Vissers; Yvette M van der Linden; Natasja J H Raijmakers; Heidi P Fransen Journal: BMJ Support Palliat Care Date: 2020-12-22 Impact factor: 4.633
Authors: Klazien W Matter-Walstra; Rita Achermann; Roland Rapold; Dirk Klingbiel; Andrea Bordoni; Silvia Dehler; Gernot Jundt; Isabelle Konzelmann; Kerri M Clough-Gorr; Thomas D Szucs; Matthias Schwenkglenks; Bernhard C Pestalozzi Journal: BMC Cancer Date: 2014-05-01 Impact factor: 4.430