[Maintaining solidarity: is mutuality the solution?]. / Voor wat, hoort wat?

Solidarity is essentially the willingness to contribute to the community and its demands, which may even involve contributing more than one is expecting to receive. Another principle is mutuality: this refers to a balance between rights and obligations or between mutual obligations. In its advisory document 'The importance of mutuality......solidarity takes work!', The Dutch Council for Public Health and Health Care underlines the importance of ensuring solidarity within the Dutch health care system, e.g. by encouraging patients to take responsibility for their own health, possibly by introducing elements of mutuality. In our contribution, we comment on the Council's advice. Although we fully agree with the overall conclusion that solidarity should be maintained within the system, we do not see how the introduction of increased mutuality will contribute to this goal.

Understanding health care providers' reluctance to adopt a national electronic patient record: an empirical and legal analysis.

BACKGROUND: Several countries are implementing a national electronic patient record (n-EPR). Despite the assumed positive effects of n-EPRs on the efficiency, continuity, safety and quality of care, their overall adoption remains low and meets resistance from involved parties. The implementation of the Dutch n-EPR also raised considerable controversy, which eventually caused the Dutch government to stop its contribution to the national infrastructure. AIM: To explain Dutch health care providers' reluctance in adopting the n-EPR, we investigated their perceptions of problems associated with the n-EPR and their legal position regarding then-EPR. We hereby aim to provide suggestions about approaches that could promote successful implementation. METHODS: The study consisted of two parts. The empirical part of the study was conducted in three health care settings: acute care, diabetes care, and ambulatory mental health care. Two health care organisations were included per setting. Between January and June 2010, 17 stakeholders working in these organisations were interviewed to investigate health care providers' perceptions of problems associated with the n-EPR. In the legal part of the study, legal documents were analysed to study health care providers' legal position regarding the n-EPR and any associated problems. RESULTS: The respondents expressed concerns about the confidentiality and safety of information exchange and the reliability and quality of patient data in the n-EPR, and indicated that their liability in case of medical errors was not sufficiently clear. The perceived problems could partly be attributed to legal uncertainties. CONCLUSIONS: It is recommended to start the implementation of an n-EPR in limited geographical areas. This will allow health care providers to experience benefits of electronic information exchange before being asked to participate in information exchange at a larger scale. The problems that health care providers perceive in the n-EPR should be minimised. Legislation underlying the n-EPR should provide sufficient clarity about health care professionals' responsibilities and liabilities.

[To resuscitate or not? Discuss timely with all chronically ill patients]. / Reanimeren of niet? Bespreek dit tijdig met iedere chronisch zieke patiënt.

In-hospital adult cardiopulmonary resuscitation is successful in only approximately 20% of cases and may result in permanent neurological damage. Two reasons justify not commencing resuscitation: either the patient does not want to be resuscitated, or resuscitation is considered medically futile by the doctor. This subject should be discussed timely with all chronically ill patients who are likely to be admitted to hospital, preferably in the outpatient clinic setting, and results must be communicated with all doctors involved (e.g. general practitioners). Here we describe 3 cases that demonstrate the need to discuss possible restrictions on cardiopulmonary resuscitation with all chronically ill patients, regardless of their age. The first was a 45-year-old HIV-positive male with chronic clinical depression who refused ICU care, the second a 75-year-old patient whose initial 'do no resuscitate' order was reversed based on the wishes of her daughter and the third a 45-year-old female with sickle cell disease who expressed a sustained wish not to be treated in the ICU or to be resuscitated.

Dutch criteria of due care for physician-assisted dying in medical practice: a physician perspective.

INTRODUCTION: The Dutch Euthanasia Act (2002) states that euthanasia is not punishable if the attending physician acts in accordance with the statutory due care criteria. These criteria hold that: there should be a voluntary and well-considered request, the patient's suffering should be unbearable and hopeless, the patient should be informed about their situation, there are no reasonable alternatives, an independent physician should be consulted, and the method should be medically and technically appropriate. This study investigates whether physicians experience problems with these criteria in medical practice. METHODS: In 2006, questionnaires were sent to a random, stratified sample of 2100 Dutch physicians (response rate: 56%). Physicians were asked about problems in their decision-making related to requests for euthanasia or assisted suicide after enforcement of the 2002 Euthanasia Act. RESULTS: Of all physicians who had received a request for euthanasia or assisted suicide (75%), 25% had experienced problems in the decision-making with regard to at least one of the criteria of due care. Physicians who had experienced problems mostly indicated to have had problems related to evaluating whether or not the patient's suffering was unbearable and hopeless (79%) and whether or not the patient's request was voluntary or well considered (58%). DISCUSSION: Physicians in The Netherlands most frequently reported problems related to aspects in which they have to evaluate the patient's subjective perspective(s). However, it can be questioned whether placing emphasis on these subjective aspects is an adequate fulfilment of the duties imposed on physicians, as laid down in the Dutch Euthanasia Act.

[The Dutch 'Wet op het Bevolkingsonderzoek' (Population Screening Act): adaptation preferable to repeal]. / De Wet op het Bevolkingsonderzoek: liever aanpassen dan intrekken.

The Dutch 'Wet op het Bevolkingsonderzoek' (Population Screening Act) requires a license for some forms of screening, for example, screening for incurable diseases. In its recent report on commercial screening practices, the Dutch Health Inspectorate concludes that the Act is frequently not complied with. This is partly because in some respects the provisions of the Act are either not clear enough or difficult to apply. However, the more practical enforcement issues can and should be solved. Although some question whether the Act has a future, it should be remembered that the Act has demonstrated its value in the past. And in view of recent developments in the field of commercial screening and testing the need for legal instruments to control the increasing supply of screening services directly to the public is growing. A recent report by the Health Council of the Netherlands confirms this viewpoint.

[Claims for damages due to bile-duct injury following laparoscopic cholecystectomy: some legal remarks]. / Schadeclaims vanwege galwegletsel na een laparoscopische cholecystectomie: enkele juridische kanttekeningen.

Of 278 patients who were referred to a tertiary centre because of a bile-duct injury incurred during a laparoscopic cholecystectomy, 19% had sued the doctor or hospital involved. This percentage is relatively low compared with data from the US, and also if compared with the much larger group of patients who believe that their injury was due to medical negligence. When patients perceive their injury in this way, malpractice litigation is not the only option available to them; they can also lodge a complaint with the hospital's complaint committee or with the medical disciplinary board. If such complaints are found justified, this increases the chance of a settlement without court proceedings. Patients should be informed about the possibility of bile-duct injury during laparoscopic cholecystectomy. Apart from the legal obligation to do so, an informed patient will be less inclined to attribute the injury automatically to a medical error. Finally, the high number of complications and claims justifies further debate on whether a no-fault compensation system is to be preferred over the present system of compensation based on medical negligence.

Explaining differences between hospitals in number of organ donors.

The shortage of donor organs calls for a careful examination of all improvement options. In this study, 80 Dutch hospitals were compared. They provided 868 donors in a 5-year period, constituting 91% of all donors in that period in The Netherlands. Multilevel regression analysis was used to explain the differences between hospitals. Potential explanatory variables were hospital-specific mortality statistics, donor policy and structural hospital characteristics. Of all donors, 81% came from one quarter of the hospitals, mainly larger hospitals. A strong relationship was found between the number of donors and hospital-specific mortality statistics. Hospitals with a neurosurgery department had additional donors. Seven hospitals systematically underperformed over a period of 5 years. If these hospitals were to increase their donor efficiency to their expected value, it would lead to an increase of 10% in the number of donors. Most donors are found in large hospitals, implying that resources to improve donor-recruitment should be channelled to larger hospitals. This study presents an efficient strategy toward a benchmark for hospitals of their organ donation rates. Some larger hospitals performed less well than others. This suggests that there is still room for improvement. There is no evidence for large undiscovered and unused pools of donor organs.

Terminal sedation: between pain relief, withholding treatment and euthanasia.

In the last five to ten years there has been increasing debate on terminal sedation, a medical practice that is difficult to place between other decisions at the end of life, like alleviating pain, withholding treatment, and (in jurisdictions where this is allowed) euthanasia or physician-assisted suicide. Terminal sedation is the administration of sedative drugs with the aim to reduce the consciousness of a terminal patient in order to relieve distress. It is frequently accompanied by the withdrawal (or withholding) of life-sustaining interventions, such as hydration and nutrition. It is typically a measure of the last resort, to be considered in situations where all other measures to reduce pain and suffering have failed. While similar to palliative measures as far as the sedation itself is concerned, withholding of hydration and nutrition brings terminal sedation into the realm of non treatment decisions. At the same time, to the extent that the combination of these two measures may shorten the patient's life, the practice may be easily associated with euthanasia. It is no surprise therefore, that terminal sedation has been called (and has been disqualified as) 'slow euthanasia' or 'backdoor euthanasia'. This paper addresses the question how terminal sedation may be looked upon from a legal point of view. Is it indeed a disguised form of euthanasia, or should it be considered as a practice in its own right? In the latter case, what does it imply in legal terms, and under which conditions and safeguards could it be legally justified? To answer these questions, I will look first at the different clinical realities that may be brought under the heading 'terminal sedation'. Then I will deal with its two components--sedation on the one hand, and withholding artificial feeding on the other--in a legal perspective. The paper ends with conclusions on terminal sedation as a whole.

[Fourth evaluation of the law on the review of termination of life on request and assisted suicide (Euthanasia Act)]. / Vierde evaluatie van de Wet Toetsing Levensbeëindiging op Verzoek en Hulp bij Zelfdoding (Euthanasiewet).

This fall, an extensive study will start to evaluate the Dutch Euthanasia Act. This law was enacted in 2002. According to this law, physicians must report cases of euthanasia and physician-assisted suicide. The cases are then judged by regional euthanasia review committees consisting of a lawyer, a physician and an ethicist. Only if they conclude that the case does not meet the requirements for prudent practice, it will be sent to the public prosecutor. The study will be focused on the practice of medical end-of-life decision-making, the functioning and effects of the Euthanasia Act, and opinions of physicians about the scope of the law and the demarcation between different end-of-life decisions. The study will comprise 4 sub-studies: a judicial evaluation, a death certificate study, a survey among physicians and a panel study among physicians, nurses, members of euthanasia review committees, lawyers and ethicists. This study is the fourth in a row of nationwide studies into end-of-life practices that have been performed since 1990. The previous studies contributed to the public debate about medical care at the end of life and to the development of policy in this field. It is expected that this study, by providing up-to-date information on and insight into end-of-life care in the Netherlands, will do the same.

Risky procedures by nurses in hospitals: problems and (contemplated) refusals of orders by physicians, and views of physicians and nurses.

Occurrence of problems with, refusals of orders and contemplated refusals of orders for risky procedures by nurses in Dutch hospitals and views on the safety of performance was studied using postal questionnaires (600 physicians and 3200 nurses, response 60-71%). Of the respondents, 11-30% experienced problems with and (contemplated) refusals of orders for risky procedures in the previous 12 months. Gynaecologists and internists most frequently mentioned problems concerning the practical performance of the procedure (44% and 30%, respectively). The reason for a problem or a contemplated refusal most frequently given by nurses was that they disagreed with the medication policy (34% and 35%, respectively). The reason for a refusal most frequently given by the gynaecologists, internists and nurses was that the nurses themselves were of the opinion that they did not have the necessary authorisation (95%, 67%, and 62%, respectively). With regard to certain procedures, the views of professionals are more strict than the current legal regulations.

Risky procedures by nurses in hospitals: problems and (contemplated) refusals of orders by physicians, and views of physicians and nurses: a questionnaire survey.

Occurrence of problems with, refusals of orders and contemplated refusals of orders for risky procedures by nurses in Dutch hospitals and views on the safety of performance was studied using postal questionnaires (600 physicians and 3200 nurses, response 60--71%). Of the respondents, 11--30% experienced problems with and (contemplated) refusals of orders for risky procedures in the previous 12 months. Gynaecologists and internists most frequently mentioned problems concerning the practical performance of the procedure (44% and 30%, respectively). The reason for a problem or a contemplated refusal most frequently given by nurses was that they disagreed with the medication policy (34% and 35%, respectively). The reason for a refusal most frequently given by the gynaecologists, internists, and nurses was that the nurses themselves were of the opinion that they did not have the necessary authorisation (95%, 67%, and 62%, respectively). With regard to certain procedures, the views of professionals are more strict than the current legal regulations.

[Organ Donation Act: against an objection system]. / Wet op de orgaandonatie: tegen een bezwaarsysteem.

The Organ Donation Act (1998) has not resulted in an increase in donated organs. However, it should not be changed from a system registering consent to post-mortem donation to one in which objection is registered. The consent system is more suitable to ensuring the freedom to donate or not, and a system registering objection may not increase the number of donated organs. More serious implementation of the current system could however achieve this.

Reserved procedures in Dutch hospitals: knowledge, experiences and views of physicians and nurses.

The Individual Health Care Professions Act came into force in The Netherlands in 1997, introducing a mixed system for the regulation of the practice of medicine. One of its components, the reserved procedures regulations, was studied in hospitals to gain insight into the knowledge, experiences and views of physicians and nurses with regard to these regulations. Questionnaires were sent to representative samples of 250 gynaecologists, 350 internists, and 3200 nurses, response rates were 65, 60 and 71%, respectively. Almost all respondents were aware that physicians are authorised to perform reserved procedures on their own initiative (93-99%), and 48-63% knew that nurses are not authorised to do this. A substantial percentage of the nurses performed reserved procedures on their own initiative (17-53%). A majority of gynaecologists and internists presumed that the hospital had ensured the proficiency of the nurses to perform reserved procedures (58% resp. 65%), while 82% of the nurses determined their own proficiency for each procedure. Most respondents felt that the reserved procedures regulations offer adequate protection for patients (58-72%). Although recommendations are made for improvement, the functioning of the reserved procedures regulations in hospitals is considered to be moderately positive.

Genetic databases and consent for use of medical records.

The legislation on the Icelandic genetic database provides for an opting-out system for the collection of encoded medical information from individual medical records. From the beginning this has raised criticism, in Iceland itself and abroad. The Supreme Court has now decided that this approach of presumed consent is not unconstitutional per se, but that there are not sufficient safeguards to ensure that the information collected is not traceable to individuals. The decision of the court is of importance for the debate (at national and international level) on the legal and ethical aspects of population-based genetic databases. Furthermore, it is interesting because it recognizes the right of close relatives of a deceased person to oppose the collection and use of his or her medical data for genetic research, at least as long as these data may still be identifiable.

Legal developments concerning active euthanasia on request in the Netherlands.

KIE: The author describes social and legal developments in the debate over active euthanasia in the Netherlands. There, as in all of Western Europe, euthanasia is a crime. Although the medical profession in several European countries has rejected efforts to change the situation, the Dutch Medical Association in 1984 issued a statement indicating an increased willingness to accept euthanasia under stringent guidelines. Some court decisions have been lenient in applying penal law to doctors acting at the wish of their patients. The Netherlands State Commission on Euthanasia published a 1985 report advocating modification of the Penal Code. [An English summary of the report appears in the same issue of Bioethics]. An emotional debate is underway in medical and legal journals and in the mass media, but the Council of State has advised against any legislative change for now. Meanwhile, euthanasia continues to occur in the Netherlands at an estimated rate of 5,000 to 8,000 cases a year.^ieng