Judith Rietjens

Euthanasia and other end-of-life decisions in the Netherlands in 1990, 1995, and 2001

Empirical data on the rate of euthanasia, physician-assisted suicide, and other end-of-life decisions have greatly contributed to the debate about the role of such practices in modern health care. In the Netherlands, the continuing debate about whether and when physician-assisted dying is acceptable seems to be resulting in a gradual stabilisation of end-of-life practices. We replicated interview and death-certificate studies done in 1990 and 1995 to investigate whether end-of-life practices had altered between 1995 and 2001. Since 1995, the demand for physician-assisted death has not risen among patients and physicians, who seem to have become somewhat more reluctant in their attitude towards this practice.

Continuous deep sedation for patients nearing death in the Netherlands: descriptive study

Objectives To study the practice of continuous deep sedation in 2005 in the Netherlands and compare it with findings from 2001. Design Questionnaire study about random samples of deaths reported to a central death registry in 2005 and 2001. Setting Nationwide physician study in the Netherlands. Participants Reporting physicians received a questionnaire about the medical decisions that preceded the patient’s death; 78% (n=6860) responded in 2005 and 74% (n=5617) in 2001. Main outcome measures Characteristics of continuous deep sedation (attending physician, types of patients, drugs used, duration, estimated effect on shortening life, palliative consultation). Requests for euthanasia. Results The use of continuous deep sedation increased from 5.6% (95% confidence interval 5.0% to 6.2%) of deaths in 2001 to 7.1% (6.5% to 7.6%) in 2005, mostly in patients treated by general practitioners and in those with cancer (in 2005, 47% of sedated patients had cancer v 33% in 2001). In 83% of cases sedation was induced by benzodiazepines, and in 94% patients were sedated for periods of less than one week until death. Nine per cent of those who received continuous deep sedation had previously requested euthanasia but their requests were not granted. Nine per cent of the physicians had consulted a palliative expert. Conclusions The increased use of continuous deep sedation for patients nearing death in the Netherlands and the limited use of palliative consultation suggests that this practice is increasingly considered as part of regular medical practice.

Palliative Sedation in a Specialized Unit for Acute Palliative Care in a Cancer Hospital: Comparing Patients Dying With and Without Palliative Sedation

Palliative sedation is undergoing extensive debate. The aims of this study were to describe the practice of palliative sedation at a specialized acute palliative care unit and to study whether patients who received palliative sedation differed from patients who did not. We performed a systematic retrospective analysis of the medical and nursing records of all 157 cancer patients who died at the acute palliative care unit between 2001 and 2005. Palliative sedation, defined as continuous deep sedation prior to death, was used for 43% of all deceased patients. In 87% of the sedated patients, it was started in the last two days before death. Sedated and nonsedated patients did not differ in survival after admission (eight days vs. seven days, P=0.12). Sedated patients were younger (55 years vs. 59 years, P=0.04) and more often had malignancies of the digestive tract (P<0.01). In both groups, common symptoms at admission were pain (79% vs. 87%, P=0.23), constipation, (40% vs. 48%, P=0.46), and dyspnea (32% vs. 29%, P=0.77). On the day that palliative sedation was started, sedated patients more often suffered from dyspnea and delirium than nonsedated patients at a comparable day before death. The most important indications for palliative sedation were terminal restlessness (60%) and dyspnea (46%). We conclude that at the studied acute palliative care unit, patients who ultimately received palliative sedation did not have symptoms different than nonsedated patients at admission, but on the day at which the sedation was started, they suffered more often from delirium and dyspnea.

Preferences of the Dutch general public for a good death and associations with attitudes towards end-of-life decision-making

Background: Euthanasia and other end-of-life decisions are acceptable to the large majority of the Dutch public. Insight in the relationships of such acceptance, with characteristics considered important for a ‘good death’, may contribute to the understanding of this liberal attitude. Method: Questionnaires were mailed to 1777 members of the Dutch public (response: 78%), containing questions relating to a good death, attitudes towards euthanasia, terminal sedation and increasing morphine, and demographics. Associations between characteristics of a good death and attitudes towards these end-of-life decisions were analysed. Findings: Characteristics that were considered important for a good death were: the possibility to say goodbye to loved ones (94%), dying with dignity (92%), being able to decide about end-of-life care (88%), and dying free of pain (87%). Acceptance of euthanasia, terminal sedation and increasing morphine were related to the wish to have a dignified death, and with concerns about burdening relatives with terminal care. Acceptance of euthanasia was also associated with the wish to be able to decide about medical end-of-life treatments and about the moment of death. Interpretation: Besides saying farewell and dying pain free and with dignity, many members of the Dutch public consider values of control and maintenance of independence as important for a good death.

Two decades of research on euthanasia from the netherlands. What have we learnt and what questions remain

Two decades of research on euthanasia in the Netherlands have resulted into clear insights in the frequency and characteristics of euthanasia and other medical end-of-life decisions in the Netherlands. These empirical studies have contributed to the quality of the public debate, and to the regulating and public control of euthanasia and physician-assisted suicide. No slippery slope seems to have occurred. Physicians seem to adhere to the criteria for due care in the large majority of cases. Further, it has been shown that the majority of physicians think that the euthanasia Act has improved their legal certainty and contributes to the carefulness of life-terminating acts. In 2005, eighty percent of the euthanasia cases were reported to the review committees. Thus, the transparency envisaged by the Act still does not extend to all cases. Unreported cases almost all involve the use of opioids, and are not considered to be euthanasia by physicians. More education and debate is needed to disentangle in these situations which acts should be regarded as euthanasia and which should not. Medical end-of-life decision-making is a crucial part of end-of-life care. It should therefore be given continuous attention in health care policy and medical training. Systematic periodic research is crucial for enhancing our understanding of end-of-life care in modern medicine, in which the pursuit of a good quality of dying is nowadays widely recognized as an important goal, in addition to the traditional goals such as curing diseases and prolonging life.

Opinions of health care professionals and the public after eight years of euthanasia legislation in the Netherlands: A mixed methods approach

Background: The practice of euthanasia and physician-assisted suicide (PAS) in the Netherlands has been regulated since 2002 by the Euthanasia Act. In the ongoing debate about the interpretation of this Act, comparative information about the opinions of the different stakeholders is needed. Aim: To evaluate the opinions of Dutch physicians, nurses and the general public on the legal requirements for euthanasia and PAS. Design: A cross-sectional survey among Dutch physicians and nurses in primary and secondary care and members of the Dutch general public, followed by qualitative interviews among selected respondents. The participants were: 793 physicians, 1243 nurses and 1960 members of the general public who completed the questionnaire; 83 were interviewed. Results: Most respondents agreed with the requirement of a patient request (64–88%) and the absence of a requirement concerning life expectancy (48–71%). PAS was thought acceptable by 24–39% of respondents for patients requesting it because of mental suffering due to loss of control, chronic depression or early dementia. In the case of severe dementia, one third of physicians, 58% of nurses and 77% of the general public agreed with performing euthanasia based on an advance directive. Interviewees illustrated these findings and supported the Act. Conclusions: Health care professionals and the general public mostly support the legal requirements for euthanasia and PAS. The law permits euthanasia or PAS for mental suffering but this possibility is not widely endorsed. The general public is more liberal towards euthanasia for advanced dementia than health care professionals. We conclude that there is ample support for the law after eight years of legal euthanasia.

Using continuous sedation until death for cancer patients: A qualitative interview study of physicians’ and nurses’ practice in three European countries:

Background: Extensive debate surrounds the practice of continuous sedation until death to control refractory symptoms in terminal cancer care. We examined reported practice of United Kingdom, Belgian and Dutch physicians and nurses. Methods: Qualitative case studies using interviews. Setting: Hospitals, the domestic home and hospices or palliative care units. Participants: In all, 57 Physicians and 73 nurses involved in the care of 84 cancer patients. Results: UK respondents reported a continuum of practice from the provision of low doses of sedatives to control terminal restlessness to rarely encountered deep sedation. In contrast, Belgian respondents predominantly described the use of deep sedation, emphasizing the importance of responding to the patient’s request. Dutch respondents emphasized making an official medical decision informed by the patient’s wish and establishing that a refractory symptom was present. Respondents employed rationales that showed different stances towards four key issues: the preservation of consciousness, concerns about the potential hastening of death, whether they perceived continuous sedation until death as an ‘alternative’ to euthanasia and whether they sought to follow guidelines or frameworks for practice. Conclusion: This qualitative analysis suggests that there is systematic variation in end-of-life care sedation practice and its conceptualization in the United Kingdom, Belgium and the Netherlands.

Definition and recommendations for advance care planning: an international consensus supported by the European Association for Palliative Care

Advance care planning (ACP) is increasingly implemented in oncology and beyond, but a definition of ACP and recommendations concerning its use are lacking. We used a formal Delphi consensus process to help develop a definition of ACP and provide recommendations for its application. Of the 109 experts (82 from Europe, 16 from North America, and 11 from Australia) who rated the ACP definitions and its 41 recommendations, agreement for each definition or recommendation was between 68-100%. ACP was defined as the ability to enable individuals to define goals and preferences for future medical treatment and care, to discuss these goals and preferences with family and health-care providers, and to record and review these preferences if appropriate. Recommendations included the adaptation of ACP based on the readiness of the individual; targeting ACP content as the individuals health condition worsens; and, using trained non-physician facilitators to support the ACP process. We present a list of outcome measures to enable the pooling and comparison of results of ACP studies. We believe that our recommendations can provide guidance for clinical practice, ACP policy, and research.

Judgement of suffering in the case of a euthanasia request in The Netherlands

Introduction: In The Netherlands, physicians have to be convinced that the patient suffers unbearably and hopelessly before granting a request for euthanasia. The extent to which general practitioners (GPs), consulted physicians and members of the euthanasia review committees judge this criterion similarly was evaluated. Methods: 300 GPs, 150 consultants and 27 members of review committees were sent a questionnaire with patient descriptions. Besides a “standard case” of a patient with physical suffering and limited life expectancy, the descriptions included cases in which the request was mainly rooted in psychosocial or existential suffering, such as fear of future suffering or dependency. For each case, respondents were asked whether they recognised the case from their own practice and whether they considered the suffering to be unbearable. Results: The cases were recognisable for almost all respondents. For the “standard case” nearly all respondents were convinced that the patient suffered unbearably. For the other cases, GPs thought the suffering was unbearable less often (2–49%) than consultants (25–79%) and members of the euthanasia review committees (24–88%). In each group, the suffering of patients with early dementia and patients who were “tired of living” was least often considered to be unbearable. Conclusions: When non-physical aspects of suffering are central in a euthanasia request, there is variance between and within GPs, consultants and members of the euthanasia committees in their judgement of the patient’s suffering. Possible explanations could be differences in their roles in the decision-making process, differences in experience with evaluating a euthanasia request, or differences in views regarding the permissibility of euthanasia.

General practitioners' report of continuous deep sedation until death for patients dying at home: A descriptive study from Belgium

Abstract Background: Palliative sedation is increasingly used at the end of life by general practitioners (GPs). Objectives: To study the characteristics of one type of palliative sedation, ‘continuous deep sedation until death’, for patients dying at home in Belgium. Methods: SENTI-MELC, a large-scale mortality follow-back study of a representative surveillance network of Belgian GPs was conducted in 2005–2006. Out of 415 non-sudden home deaths registered, we identified all 31 cases of continuous deep sedation until death as reported by the GPs. GPs were interviewed face-to-face about patient characteristics, the decision-making process and characteristics of each case. Results: 28 interviews were conducted (response rate 28/31). 19 patients had cancer. 19 patients suffered persistently and unbearably. Pain was the main indication for continuous deep sedation (15 cases). In 6 cases, the patient was competent but was not involved in decision making. Relatives and care providers were involved in 23 cases and 18 cases, respectively. Benzodiazepines were used in 21 cases. During sedation, 11/28 of patients awoke, mostly due to insufficient medication. In 13 cases, the GP partially or explicitly intended to hasten the patients death. Conclusion: Continuous deep sedation until death, as practiced by Belgian GPs, is in most cases used for patients with unbearable suffering. Competent patients are not always involved in decision making while in most cases, the patients family is.