Facing a request for assisted death - views of Finnish physicians, a mixed method study.

BACKGROUND: Assisted death, including euthanasia and physician-assisted suicide (PAS), is under debate worldwide, and these practices are adopted in many Western countries. Physicians' attitudes toward assisted death vary across the globe, but little is known about physicians' actual reactions when facing a request for assisted death. There is a clear gap in evidence on how physicians act and respond to patients' requests for assisted death in countries where these actions are not legal. METHODS: A survey including statements concerning euthanasia and PAS and an open question about their actions when facing a request for assisted death was sent to all Finnish physicians. Quantitative data are presented as numbers and percentages. Statistical significance was tested by using the Pearson chi-square test, when appropriate. The qualitative analysis was performed by using an inductive content analysis approach, where categories emerge from the data. RESULTS: Altogether, 6889 physicians or medical students answered the survey, yielding a response rate of 26%. One-third of participants agreed or partly agreed that they could assist a patient in a suicide. The majority (69%) of the participants fully or partly agreed that euthanasia should only be accepted due to difficult physical symptoms, while 12% fully or partly agreed that life turning into a burden should be an acceptable reason for euthanasia. Of the participants, 16% had faced a request for euthanasia or PAS, and 3033 answers from 2565 respondents were achieved to the open questions concerning their actions regarding the request and ethical aspects of assisted death. In the qualitative analysis, six main categories, including 22 subcategories, were formed regarding the phenomenon of how physicians act when facing this request. The six main categories were as follows: providing an alternative to the request, enabling care and support, ignoring the request, giving a reasoned refusal, complying with the request, and seeing the request as a possibility. CONCLUSIONS: Finnish physicians' actions regarding the requests for assisted death, and attitudes toward euthanasia and PAS vary substantially. Open discussion, education, and recommendations concerning a request for assisted death and ethics around it are also highly needed in countries where euthanasia and PAS are not legal.

The validity and reliability of the patient enablement instrument (PEI) after GP appointments in Finnish health care centres.

BACKGROUND: The aim of this study was to assess the validity and reliability of the Patient Enablement Instrument (PEI) in Finnish health care centre patients. A pilot study was conducted to assess the content validity of the PEI. A questionnaire study in three health care centres in Western Finland was performed in order to assess acceptability, construct validity, internal consistency, and measurement error of the instrument. A telephone interview 2 weeks after the appointment was performed to evaluate reproducibility. RESULTS: The pilot study with 17 participants indicated good content validity of the PEI. In the questionnaire study, altogether 483 with a completed PEI score were included in the analyses. Factor analysis and item-scale correlations suggested high structural validity. The internal consistency of the instrument was high (Cronbach's α = 0.93). The PEI score diminished strongly over the two-week period. CONCLUSIONS: The PEI has good content validity and acceptability, good construct validity, high internal consistency but low reproducibility. Thus, the PEI seems to be an applicable tool to measure patient enablement in Finnish primary health care.

Patient enablement after a consultation with a general practitioner-Explaining variation between countries, practices and patients.

BACKGROUND: Patient enablement is a concept developed to measure quality in primary health care. The comparative analysis of patient enablement in an international context is lacking. OBJECTIVE: To explain variation in patient enablement between patients, general practitioners (GPs) and countries. To find independent variables associated with enablement. DESIGN: We constructed multi-level logistic regression models encompassing variables from patient, GP and country levels. The proportions of explained variances at each level and odds ratios for independent variables were calculated. SETTING AND PARTICIPANTS: A total of 7210 GPs and 58 930 patients in 31 countries were recruited through the Quality and Costs of Primary Care in Europe (QUALICOPC) study framework. In addition, data from the Primary Health Care Activity Monitor for Europe (PHAMEU) study and Hofstede's national cultural dimensions were combined with QUALICOPC data. RESULTS: In the final model, 50.6% of the country variance and 18.4% of the practice variance could be explained. Cultural dimensions explained a major part of the variation between countries. Several patient-level and only a few practice-level variables showed statistically significant associations with patient enablement. Structural elements of the relevant health-care system showed no associations. From the 20 study hypotheses, eight were supported and four were partly supported. DISCUSSION AND CONCLUSIONS: There are large differences in patient enablement between GPs and countries. Patient characteristics and patients' perceptions of consultation seem to have the strongest associations with patient enablement. When comparing patient-reported measures as an indicator of health-care system performance, researchers should be aware of the influence of cultural elements.

Comparison of the Patient Enablement Instrument (PEI) with two single-item measures among Finnish Health care centre patients.

BACKGROUND: The Patient Enablement Instrument (PEI) is an established patient-reported outcome measure (PROM) that reflects the quality of appointments with general practitioners (GPs). It is a six-item questionnaire administered to the patient immediately after a consultation. The aim of this study was to evaluate whether a single-item measure could replace the PEI when measuring patient enablement among Finnish health care centre patients. METHODS: Two single-item measures, Q1 and Q2, were chosen for comparison with the PEI. Firstly, a pilot study with questionnaire testing and brief interviews with the respondents were performed in order to assess the content validity of the PEI and the single-item measures. Secondly, a questionnaire study after a single appointment with a GP was carried out in three health care centres in Western Finland in order to evaluate the construct and criterion validity of the single-item measures. A telephone interview was performed 2 weeks after the appointment in order to assess the test-retest reliability of the single-item measures. The sensitivity, specificity, and both positive and negative predictive values of Q1 and Q2 were calculated with different PEI score cut-off points. RESULTS: Altogether 483 patients with a completed PEI were included in the questionnaire study analyses. Altogether 149 and 175 patients had completed Q1 and Q2, respectively, both in the questionnaire and the telephone interview. The correlations between the PEI and Q1 and Q2 were 0.48 and 0.84, respectively. Both the single-item measures had a high sensitivity and a negative predictive value in relation to patients with lower PEI scores. The reliability coefficients were 0.24 for Q1 and 0.76 for Q2. The test-retest values of Q1, Q2, and the PEI were low. CONCLUSIONS: Q2 seems to be a valid and reliable measure of patient enablement. Q1 seems to be less correlated with the PEI, but it also has a high negative predictive value in relation to low enablement scores.

Analysis of factors associated with waiting times for GP appointments in Finnish health centres: a QUALICOPC study.

OBJECTIVE: Access to care is a multidimensional concept, considered as a structural aspect of health care quality; it reflects the functioning of a health care organization. The aim of this study was to investigate patients' experiences of access to care and to analyse factors associated with waiting times to GP appointments at Finnish health centres. A questionnaire survey was addressed to Finnish GPs within the Quality and Costs of Primary Care in Europe study framework. Two to nine patients per GP completed the questionnaire, altogether 1196. Main outcome measures were waiting times for appointments with GPs and factors associated with waiting times. In addition, patients' opinions of access to appointments were analysed. RESULTS: Of the 988 patients who had made their appointment in advance, 84.9% considered it easy to secure an appointment, with 51.9% obtaining an appointment within 1 week. Age and reason for contact were the most significant factors affecting the waiting time. Elderly patients tended to have longer waiting times than younger ones, even when reporting illness as their reason for contact. Thus, waiting times for appointments tend to be prolonged in particular for the elderly and there is room for improvement in the future.

Patient Enablement After a Single Appointment With a GP: Analysis of Finnish QUALICOPC Data.

BACKGROUND: Patient enablement is described as patient's ability to understand and cope with illness after a consultation. The purpose of this study was to analyze factors associated with enablement in Finnish primary health care. An additional aim was to evaluate whether a single question could be used to measure enablement. METHODS: A questionnaire survey was addressed to Finnish general practitioners (GPs) within the Quality and Costs of Primary Care in Europe (QUALICOPC) study framework. A trained fieldworker contacted nine patients for every participating GP. Two to 9 patients per GP (median 9 patients) completed the questionnaire. Patient enablement was measured by a single question based on the Patient Enablement Instrument questionnaire. Multivariate and multilevel analyses were performed to find variables that have an independent association with patient enablement. RESULTS: A total of 1196 patients completed the QUALICOPC questionnaire. A total of 898 patients (75.1%) agreed that they felt better able to cope with their health problem or illness after an appointment with a GP, reflecting patient enablement. In the theme group analyses, 11 factors were found to have a statistically significant ( P < .05) association with enablement. In the final multivariable model, positive perceptions of doctor-patient communication and patient satisfaction were positively associated with enablement. CONCLUSIONS: The results, using a single question to measure enablement, are comparable to previous findings on factors associated with enablement. Further research is needed and these results should be regarded as preliminary.