Physicians' views on the role of relatives in euthanasia and physician-assisted suicide decision-making: a mixed-methods study among physicians in the Netherlands.

BACKGROUND: Relatives have no formal position in the practice of euthanasia and physician-assisted suicide (EAS) according to Dutch legislation. However, research shows that physicians often involve relatives in EAS decision-making. It remains unclear why physicians do (not) want to involve relatives. Therefore, we examined how many physicians in the Netherlands involve relatives in EAS decision-making and explored reasons for (not) involving relatives and what involvement entails. METHODS: In a mixed-methods study, 746 physicians (33% response rate) completed a questionnaire, and 20 were interviewed. The questionnaire included two statements on relatives' involvement in EAS decision-making. Descriptive statistics were used, and multivariable logistic regression analyses to explore characteristics associated with involving relatives. In subsequent interviews, we explored physicians' views on involving relatives in EAS decision-making. Interviews were thematically analysed. RESULTS: The majority of physicians want to know relatives' opinions about an EAS request (80%); a smaller group also takes these opinions into account in EAS decision-making (35%). Physicians who had ever received an explicit EAS request were more likely to want to know opinions and clinical specialists and elderly care physicians were more likely to take these opinions into account. In interviews, physicians mentioned several reasons for involving relatives: e.g. to give relatives space and help them in their acceptance, to tailor support, to be able to perform EAS in harmony, and to mediate in case of conflicting views. Furthermore, physicians explained that relatives' opinions can influence the decision-making process but cannot be a decisive factor. If relatives oppose the EAS request, physicians find the process more difficult and try to mediate between patients and relatives by investigating relatives' objections and providing appropriate information. Reasons for not taking relatives' opinions into account include not wanting to undermine patient autonomy and protecting relatives from a potential burdensome decision. CONCLUSIONS: Although physicians know that relatives have no formal role, involving relatives in EAS decision-making is common practice in the Netherlands. Physicians consider this important as relatives need to continue with their lives and may need bereavement support. Additionally, physicians want to perform EAS in harmony with everyone involved. However, relatives' opinions are not decisive.

Distress among healthcare providers who provided end-of-life care during the COVID-19 pandemic: a longitudinal survey study (the CO-LIVE study).

INTRODUCTION: The COVID-19 pandemic had a significant impact on care at the end-of-life due to restrictions and other circumstances such as high workload and uncertainty about the disease. The objective of this study is to describe the degree of various signs experienced by healthcare providers throughout the first 18 months of the pandemic and to assess what provider's characteristics and care circumstances related to COVID-19 are associated with distress. METHODS: A longitudinal survey study among healthcare providers from different healthcare settings who provided end-of-life care during the pandemic's first 18 months. Data of four time periods were analyzed using descriptive statistics, logistic regression analysis and Generalized Estimating Equation. RESULTS: Of the respondents (n=302) the majority had a nursing background (71.8%) and most worked in a hospital (30.3%). Although reported distress was highest in the first period, during the first wave of COVID-19 pandemic, healthcare providers reported signs of distress in all four time periods. Being more stressed than usual and being regularly exhausted were the most common signs of distress. Healthcare providers working in nursing homes and hospitals were more likely to experience signs of distress, compared to healthcare providers working in hospice facilities, during the whole period of 1.5 years. When HCPs were restricted in providing post-death care, they were more likely to feel more stressed than usual and find their work more often emotionally demanding. CONCLUSION: A substantial amount of healthcare providers reported signs of distress during the first 1.5 years of the COVID-19 pandemic. A cause of distress appears to be that healthcare providers cannot provide the care they desire due the pandemic. Even though the pandemic is over, this remains an important and relevant finding, as high workload can sometimes force healthcare providers to make choices about how they provide care. Given that this can cause prolonged stress and this can lead to burnout (and HCPs leaving their current positions), it is now especially important to continue observing the long term developments of the well-being of our healthcare providers in palliative care and provide timely and adequate support where needed.

Experiences with and needs for aftercare following the death of a loved one in the ICU: a mixed-methods study among bereaved relatives.

BACKGROUND: Bereaved relatives of intensive care unit (ICU) patients are at increased risk of psychological complaints. Aftercare might help them cope with processing the ICU admission and their loved one's death. There is little (qualitative) evidence on how bereaved relatives experience aftercare. Also, the COVID-19 pandemic likely impacted aftercare provision. We aim to examine how many relatives in Dutch ICUs received aftercare before and during the pandemic and to qualitatively describe their experiences and needs regarding aftercare. METHODS: A mixed-methods study among relatives of patients who died in an ICU before or during the COVID-19 pandemic. Bereaved relatives in six ICUs completed a questionnaire (n = 90), including two items on aftercare. These were analyzed using descriptive statistics and Chi-squared tests. Subsequently, both relatives that received and relatives that did not receive aftercare were interviewed about their experiences and needs regarding aftercare. The interviews were thematically analyzed. RESULTS: After the passing of a loved one, 44% of the relatives were asked by a healthcare professional from the hospital how they were doing, and 26% had had a follow-up conversation. Both happened more often during the first wave of the pandemic than during the second wave or before the pandemic. The most common reason for not having had a follow-up conversation was not knowing about this option (44%), followed by not feeling a need (26%). Regarding the latter, interviewed relatives explained that this would not revive their loved one or that they had already discussed everything they wanted. Relatives who wanted a follow-up conversation, wanted this because this would help them realize the severity of their loved one's illness, to exchange personal experiences, and/or to thank the ICU team. Those with a follow-up conversation said that they had reviewed the medical course of the admission and/or discussed their (mental) well-being. CONCLUSIONS: ICU healthcare professionals may play a vital role in addressing aftercare needs by asking relatives how they are doing in the weeks following the death of their loved one and offering them a follow-up conversation with an ICU physician. We recommend to include aftercare for bereaved relatives in ICU guidelines.

Varying (preferred) levels of involvement in treatment decision-making in the intensive care unit before and during the COVID-19 pandemic: a mixed-methods study among relatives.

BACKGROUND: In the intensive care unit (ICU) relatives play a crucial role as surrogate decision-makers, since most patients cannot communicate due to their illness and treatment. Their level of involvement in decision-making can affect their psychological well-being. During the COVID-19 pandemic, relatives' involvement probably changed. We aim to investigate relatives' involvement in decision-making in the ICU before and during the pandemic and their experiences and preferences in this regard. METHODS: A mixed-methods study among relatives of ICU patients admitted to an ICU before or during the COVID-19 pandemic. Relatives in six ICUs completed a questionnaire (n = 329), including two items on decision-making. These were analysed using descriptive statistics and logistic regression analyses. Subsequently, relatives (n = 24) were interviewed about their experiences and preferences regarding decision-making. Thematic analysis was used for analysing the qualitative data. RESULTS: Nearly 55% of the relatives indicated they were at least occasionally asked to be involved in important treatment decisions and of these relatives 97.1% reported to have had enough time to discuss questions and concerns when important decisions were to be made. During the first COVID-19 wave relatives were significantly less likely to be involved in decision-making compared to relatives from pre-COVID-19. The interviews showed that involvement varied from being informed about an already made decision to deliberation about the best treatment option. Preferences for involvement also varied, with some relatives preferring no involvement due to a perceived lack of expertise and others preferring an active role as the patient's advocate. Discussing a patient's quality of life was appreciated by relatives, and according to relatives healthcare professionals also found this valuable. In some cases the preferred and actual involvement was in discordance, preferring either a larger or a smaller role. CONCLUSIONS: As treatment alignment with a patient's values and preferences and accordance between preferred and actual involvement in decision-making is very important, we suggest that the treatment decision-making process should start with discussions about a patient's quality of life, followed by tailoring the process to relatives' preferences as much as possible. Healthcare professionals should be aware of relatives' heterogeneous and possibly changing preferences regarding the decision-making process.

Communication about euthanasia in Dutch nursing homes.

In this research, we explore how competent nursing home residents in the Netherlands experience communication about euthanasia. Interviews were conducted with 15 nursing home residents. Three themes were found during data analysis: 1) The possibility to discuss euthanasia; 2) Interaction and 3) Anticipating the future. Whether or not euthanasia was discussed was influenced by the openness of the resident and the accessibility and openness of their medical practitioner. Important factors mentioned by respondents regarding interaction were the level of connectedness with others, the feeling of being understood and one's own firmness in holding on to the option of euthanasia in the future. Regarding anticipating the future, respondents felt reassured in having an advance directive. They expressed a lack of certainty whether the medical practitioner would be willing to eventually perform euthanasia. As a practical implication, ACP may provide a pathway for improvement of communication about euthanasia with competent residents.

Patients Who Seek to Hasten Death by Voluntarily Stopping Eating and Drinking: A Qualitative Study.

PURPOSE: Voluntary stopping of eating and drinking (VSED) is a controversial method to hasten death. Little is known about why and how people come to VSED. This study assessed patients' motives, how patients decide on VSED, and the ways in which they prepare for VSED and involve others. METHODS: We conducted a qualitative study in the Netherlands of 29 patients; 24 started VSED and 19 died. Thirteen patients were included before or during VSED and 16 afterward. We interviewed 17 patients, 18 relatives, and 10 professional caregivers. Inductive ideal-type analysis was used to describe typologies. RESULTS: Three patient groups emerged. The first group (12 patients) were older people who felt life was completed, for whom control was important. They prepared well for VSED, but could overlook the need for help and the emotional burden their decision could place on relatives. The second group (11 patients) were older care-dependent patients with a poor quality of life. They sometimes started VSED suddenly, and they relied heavily on (informal) caregivers to prepare and execute their plan. The third group (6 patients) were psychiatric patients with a long-standing but fluctuating death wish, most of whom were younger. They often prepared for VSED in secrecy or started VSED unprepared. CONCLUSIONS: Patients embarking on a trajectory toward VSED are a very diverse group, with different care needs. Guidance for care during VSED needs to be applicable to all 3 groups.

The age limit for euthanasia requests in the Netherlands: a Delphi study among paediatric experts.

BACKGROUND: The Dutch Euthanasia Act applies to patients 12 years and older, which makes euthanasia for minors younger than 12 legally impossible. The issue under discussion specifically regards the capacity of minors to request euthanasia. OBJECTIVE: Gain insight in paediatric experts' views about which criteria are important to assess capacity, from what age minors can meet those criteria, what an assessment procedure should look like and what role parents should have. METHODS: A Delphi study with 16 experts (paediatricians, paediatric nurses and paediatric psychologists) who work in Children Comfort Teams in Dutch academic hospitals. The questionnaire contained statements concerning criteria for capacity and procedural criteria. Consensus was defined as ≥80% agreement. RESULTS: The experts agreed that five criteria for capacity, found in a previous literature study, are all important. They agreed that some children between ages 9 and 11 could meet all the criteria. Consensus was reached for the statements that the entire medical team should be involved in the decision making and that a second independent expert must assess the case. Experts agreed that the parents' opinion is relevant and should always be taken into account, but it need not be decisive. CONCLUSION: This study shows that the age limit of 12 years in the Dutch Euthanasia Act is too strong according to paediatric experts. Letting go of the age limit or lowering the age limit combined with adequate capacity assessment for minors younger than 12 are options that should be discussed further.

End-of-life treatment preference discussions between older people and their physician before and during the COVID-19 pandemic: cross sectional and longitudinal analyses from the Longitudinal Aging Study Amsterdam.

BACKGROUND: COVID-19 could lead to hospitalisation and ICU admission, especially in older adults. Therefore, during the pandemic, it became more important to discuss wishes and preferences, such as older peoples' desire for intensive treatment in a hospital in acute situations, or not. This study explores what percentage of Dutch older people aged 75 and over discussed Advance Care Planning (ACP) topics with a physician during the first months of the COVID-19 pandemic and whether this was different in these people before the COVID-19 pandemic. METHODS: Data of two ancillary data collections of the Longitudinal Aging Study Amsterdam were used: the LASA 75 PLUS study and the LASA COVID-19 study. The latter provided cross sectional data (during COVID-19; n = 428) and longitudinal data came from participants in both studies (before and during COVID-19; n = 219). RESULTS: Most older adults had thought about ACP topics during COVID-19 (76,4%), and a minority had also discussed ACP topics with a physician (20.3%). Thinking about ACP topics increased during COVID-19 compared to before COVID-19 in a sample with measurements on both timeframes (82,5% vs 68,0%). Not thinking about ACP topics decreased in the first months of the COVID-pandemic compared to before COVID-19 for all ACP topics together (68.0% vs 82.2%) and each topic separately (hospital 42.0% vs 63.9%; nursing home 36.5% vs 53.3%; treatment options 47.0% vs 62.1%; resuscitation 53.0% vs 70.7%). CONCLUSIONS: Older people do think about ACP topics, which is an important first step in ACP, and this has increased during COVID-19. However, discussing ACP topics with a physician is still not that common. General practitioners could therefore take the initiative in broaching the subject of ACP. This can for instance be done by organizing information meetings.

Support for relatives in the intensive care unit: lessons from a cross-sectional multicentre cohort study during the COVID-19 pandemic.

BACKGROUND: Support for relatives is highly important in the intensive care unit (ICU). During the first COVID-19 wave  support for relatives had to be changed considerably. The alternative support could have decreased the quality and sense of support. We aimed to evaluate how support for relatives in Dutch ICUs was organised during the first COVID-19 wave and how this was experienced by these relatives in comparison to relatives from pre-COVID-19 and the second wave. Additionally, we aimed to investigate which elements of support are associated with positive experiences. METHODS: We performed a cross-sectional multicentre cohort study in six Dutch ICUs in the Netherlands. Written questionnaires were distributed among relatives of ICU patients from pre-COVID-19, the first wave and the second wave. The questionnaire included questions on demographics, the organisation of support, and the experiences and satisfaction of relatives with the support. RESULTS: A total of 329 relatives completed the questionnaire (52% partner, 72% woman and 63% ICU stay of 11 days or longer). Support for relatives of ICU patients during the first COVID-19 wave differed significantly from pre-COVID-19 and the second wave. Differences were found in all categories of elements of support: who, when, how and what. Overall, relatives from the three time periods were very positive about the support. The only difference in satisfaction between the three time periods, was the higher proportion of relatives indicating that healthcare professionals had enough time for them during the first wave. Elements of support which were associated with many positive experiences and satisfaction were: fixed timeslot, receiving information (e.g. leaflets) on ≥ 2 topics, discussing > 5 topics with healthcare professionals, and being offered emotional support. CONCLUSIONS: Although, support for relatives in the ICU changed considerably during the COVID-19 pandemic, relatives were still positive about this support. The altered support gave insight into avenues for improvement for future comparable situations as well as for normal daily ICU practice: e.g. daily contact at a fixed timeslot, offering video calling between patients and relatives, and offering emotional support. ICUs should consider which elements need improvement in their practice.

Training nurses to facilitate and implement CURA in palliative care institutions: development and evaluation of a blended learning program.

BACKGROUND: Healthcare professionals in palliative care are found to be confronted with moral challenges on a frequent basis. CURA is a low-threshold instrument for dialogical ethical reflection that was developed to deal with these challenges. A previous study identified the need of healthcare professionals to be trained to introduce CURA in their organization, initiate and facilitate reflections with CURA, and contribute to the implementation of CURA. The aim of this study was to develop and evaluate a training for professionals to become 'CURA-ambassadors'. METHODS: The training was developed in a participatory way in two cycles. We trained 72 healthcare professionals. The training was evaluated by means of a questionnaire and six semi-structured interviews. RESULTS: The study resulted in a blended learning training combining training sessions with an e-module and with practicing with organizing and facilitating CURA in daily healthcare practice. The main objectives of the training are to enable CURA-ambassadors to introduce CURA within their organization, initiate and facilitate ethical reflections using CURA, and contribute to the implementation of CURA. Participants were generally positive about the training program and the trainers. Technical difficulties related to the e-module were mentioned as main point of improvement. DISCUSSION: The training program can generate ownership, responsibility, and competency among CURA-ambassadors, which are essential foundations for implementing complex interventions in healthcare practice. The training program received positive evaluations shortly after completing the program. This study adds to our understanding of what is needed for healthcare professionals to use CURA, in order to support them in dealing with moral challenges and to foster their moral resilience. Further research is needed to assess whether participants experience the training as sufficient and effective when using and implementing CURA structurally in their organizations over a longer period of time.

Relatives' grief at three moments after death of a loved one during COVID-19 pandemic (the CO-LIVE study).

COVID-19 has complicated grieving experiences. Rich qualitative description of these experiences is lacking. We interviewed 10 bereaved relatives (mainly daughters) 2-3 times each: shortly after their relative died in the first wave of COVID-19 pandemic, and after 12 and 18 months (29 interviews in total). Analyses took place according to inductive content analysis. Losses were threefold: the loss of the loved one; of the (desired) way to say farewell, and of social support. We identified five ways in which the three COVID-19 related loss experiences interacted: overshadowed grief, cumulative grief, triggered grief, derailed grief, and conciliatory grief. This study demonstrated that pre-COVID-19 diagnoses and understandings of grief are not sufficient to picture grief during and after the COVID-19 pandemic. These grief experiences are more complex and deserve further exploration.

Effectiveness of CURA: Healthcare professionals' moral resilience and moral competences.

Background: Clinical ethics support instruments aim to support healthcare professionals in dealing with moral challenges in clinical practice. CURA is a relatively new instrument tailored to the wishes and needs of healthcare professionals in palliative care, especially nurses. It aims to foster their moral resilience and moral competences.Aim: To investigate the effects of using CURA on healthcare professionals regarding their Moral Resilience and Moral Competences.Design: Single group pre-/post-test design with two questionnaires.Methods: Questionnaires used were the Rushton Moral Resilience Scale measuring Moral Resilience and the Euro-MCD, measuring Moral Competences. Respondents mainly consisted of nurses and nurse assistants who used CURA in daily practice. Forty-seven respondents contributed to both pre- and post-test with 18 months between both tests. Analysis was done using descriptive statistics and Wilcoxon signed rank tests. This study followed the SQUIRE checklist.Ethical considerations: This study was approved by the Institutional Review Board of Amsterdam UMC. Informed consent was obtained from all respondents.Results: The total Moral Resilience score and the scores of two subscales of the RMRS, that is, Responses to Moral Adversity and Relational Integrity, increased significantly. All subscales of the Euro-MCD increased significantly at posttest. Using CURA more often did not lead to significant higher scores on most (sub) scales.Conclusion: This study indicates that CURA can be used to foster moral resilience and moral competences of healthcare professionals. CURA therefore is a promising instrument to support healthcare professionals in dealing with moral challenges in everyday practice.

CURA-An Ethics Support Instrument for Nurses in Palliative Care. Feasibility and First Perceived Outcomes.

Evaluating the feasibility and first perceived outcomes of a newly developed clinical ethics support instrument called CURA. This instrument is tailored to the needs of nurses that provide palliative care and is intended to foster both moral competences and moral resilience. This study is a descriptive cross-sectional evaluation study. Respondents consisted of nurses and nurse assistants (n = 97) following a continuing education program (course participants) and colleagues of these course participants (n = 124). Two questionnaires with five-point Likert scales were used. The feasibility questionnaire was given to all respondents, the perceived outcomes questionnaire only to the course participants. Data collection took place over a period of six months. Respondents were predominantly positive on most items of the feasibility questionnaire. The steps of CURA are clearly described (84% of course participants agreed or strongly agreed, 94% of colleagues) and easy to apply (78-87%). The perceived outcomes showed that CURA helped respondents to reflect on moral challenges (71% (strongly) agreed), in perspective taking (67%), with being aware of moral challenges (63%) and in dealing with moral distress (54%). Respondents did experience organizational barriers: only half of the respondents (strongly) agreed that they could easily find time for using CURA. CURA is a feasible instrument for nurses and nurse assistants providing palliative care. However, reported difficulties in organizing and making time for reflections with CURA indicate organizational preconditions ought to be met in order to implement CURA in daily practice. Furthermore, these results indicate that CURA helps to build moral competences and fosters moral resilience.

Dying in times of COVID-19: Experiences in different care settings - An online questionnaire study among bereaved relatives (the CO-LIVE study).

BACKGROUND: The COVID-19 pandemic and restricting measures have affected end-of-life care across different settings. AIM: To compare experiences of bereaved relatives with end-of-life care for a family member or friend who died at home, in a hospital, nursing home or hospice during the pandemic. DESIGN: An open observational online survey was developed and disseminated via social media and public fora (March-July 2020). Data were analyzed using descriptive statistics and logistic regression analyses. PARTICIPANTS: Individuals who lost a family member or friend in the Netherlands during the COVID-19 pandemic. RESULTS: The questionnaire was filled out by 393 bereaved relatives who lost a family member or friend at home (n = 68), in a hospital (n = 114), nursing home (n = 176) or hospice (n = 35). Bereaved relatives of patients who died in a hospital most often evaluated medical care (79%) as sufficient, whereas medical care (54.5%) was least often evaluated as sufficient in nursing homes. Emotional support for relatives was most often evaluated as sufficient at home (67.7%) and least often in nursing homes (40.3%). Sufficient emotional support for relatives was associated with a higher likelihood to rate the place of death as appropriate. Bereaved relatives of patients who died at a place other than home and whose care was restricted due to COVID-19 were less likely to evaluate the place of death as appropriate. CONCLUSION: End-of-life care during the COVID-19 pandemic was evaluated least favourably in nursing homes. The quality of emotional support for relatives and whether care was restricted or not were important for assessing the place of death as appropriate.

Participatory development of CURA, a clinical ethics support instrument for palliative care.

BACKGROUND: Existing clinical ethics support (CES) instruments are considered useful. However, users report obstacles in using them in daily practice. Including end users and other stakeholders in developing CES instruments might help to overcome these limitations. This study describes the development process of a new ethics support instrument called CURA, a low-threshold four-step instrument focused on nurses and nurse assistants working in palliative care. METHOD: We used a participatory development design. We worked together with stakeholders in a Community of Practice throughout the study. Potential end users (nurses and nurse assistants in palliative care) used CURA in several pilots and provided us with feedback which we used to improve CURA. RESULTS: We distinguished three phases in the development process. Phase one, Identifying Needs, focused on identifying stakeholder and end user needs and preferences, learning from existing CES instruments, their development and evaluation, and identify gaps. Phase two, Development, focused on designing, developing, refining and tailoring the instrument on the basis of iterative co-creation. Phase three, Dissemination, focused on implementation and dissemination. The instrument, CURA, is a four-step low-threshold instrument that fosters ethical reflection. CONCLUSIONS: Participatory development is a valuable approach for developing clinical ethics support instruments. Collaborating with end users and other stakeholders in our development study has helped to meet the needs and preferences of end users, to come up with strategies to refine the instrument in order to enhance its feasibility, and to overcome reported limitations of existing clinical ethics instruments.

Caregiver's burden at the end of life of their loved one: insights from a longitudinal qualitative study among working family caregivers.

BACKGROUND: Growing numbers of people with advanced illnesses who wish to die at home, a concurrent decline in the accessibility of professional home care, and policies aiming at prolonging work participation are increasing the reliance on family caregivers. This study aimed to describe trajectories in burden of working family caregivers who care for patients with a life-threatening illness, and identify factors in work and care that are related to changes in burden over time. METHODS: Semi-structured interviews were held in one to four rounds between July 2018 and November 2020 with 17 working family caregivers of patients with a life-threatening illness living at home. Transcripts were analysed as a single unit to create timelines per participant. Next, individual burden trajectories were created and grouped based on the course of burden over time. Factors related to changes in burden were analysed, as well as similarities and differences between the groups. RESULTS: It was common for family caregivers who combine work and end-of-life care to experience a burden. Two trajectories of caregiver burden were identified; caregivers with a persistent level of burden and caregivers with an increasing burden over time. Family caregivers with a persistent level of burden seemed to be at risk for burnout throughout the illness trajectory, but were often able to cope with the situation by making arrangements in care or work. Caregivers with an increasing burden were unable to make sufficient adjustments, which often resulted in burnout symptoms and sick leave. In both groups, burden was mostly related to aspects of the care situation. The emotional burden, a decreasing burden after death and a different view on the trajectory in hindsight proved to be important overarching themes. CONCLUSIONS: Providing care to a loved one nearing the end of life is often emotionally burdensome and intensive. To facilitate the combination of paid work and family care, and reduce the risk of burnout, more support is needed from employers and healthcare professionals during the illness trajectory and after death. Bereaved family caregivers also warrant more attention from their supervisors and occupational physicians in order to facilitate their return to work.

Nurses' perspective on their involvement in decision-making about life-prolonging treatments: A quantitative survey study.

AIMS: In hospital settings, decisions about potentially life-prolonging treatments are often made in a dialogue between a patient and their physician, with a focus on active treatment. Nurses can have a valuable contribution in this process, but it seems they are not always involved. Our aim was to explore how hospital nurses perceive their current role and preferred role in shared decision-making about potentially life-prolonging treatment in patients in the last phase of life. DESIGN: Cross-sectional quantitative study conducted in the Netherlands in April and May 2019. METHODS: An online survey, using a questionnaire consisting of 12 statements on nurses' opinion about supporting patients in decisions about potentially life-prolonging treatments, and 13 statements on nurses' actual involvement in these decisions. RESULTS: In total 179 hospital nurses from multiple institutions who care for adult patients in the last phase of life responded. Nurses agreed that they should have a role in shared decision-making about potentially life-prolonging treatments, indicating greatest agreement with 'It is my task to speak up for my patient' and 'It is important that my role in supporting patients is clear'. However, nurses also said that in practice they were often not involved in shared decision-making, with least involvement in 'active participation in communication about treatment decisions' and 'supporting a patient with the decision'. CONCLUSION: There is a discrepancy between nurses' preferred role in decision-making about potentially life-prolonging treatment and their actual role. More effort is needed to increase nurses' involvement. IMPACT: Nurses' contribution to decision-making is increasingly considered to be valuable by the nurses themselves, physicians and patients, though involvement is still not common. Future research should focus on strategies, such as training programs, that empower nurses to take an active role in decision-making.

Dignity reflections based on experiences of end-of-life care during the first wave of the COVID-19 pandemic: A qualitative inquiry among bereaved relatives in the Netherlands (the CO-LIVE study).

BACKGROUND: The COVID-19 pandemic affects care practices for critically ill patients, with or without a COVID-19 infection, and may have affected the experience of dying for patients and their relatives in the physical, psychological, social and spiritual domains. AIM: To give insight into aspects of end-of-life care practices that might have jeopardised or supported the dignity of the patients and their family members during the first wave of the COVID-19 pandemic in the Netherlands. METHODOLOGY: A qualitative study involving 25 in-depth interviews with purposively sampled bereaved relatives of patients who died during the COVID-19 pandemic between March and July 2020 in the Netherlands. We created a dignity-inspired framework for analysis, and used the models of Chochinov et al. and Van Gennip et al. as sensitising concepts. These focus on illness-related aspects and the individual, relational and societal/organisational level of dignity. RESULTS: Four themes concerning aspects of end-of-life care practices were identified as possibly jeopardising the dignity of patients or relatives: 'Dealing with an unknown illness', 'Being isolated', 'Restricted farewells' and 'Lack of attentiveness and communication'. The analysis showed that 'Meaningful end-of-life moments' and 'Compassionate professional support' contributed to the dignity of patients and their relatives. CONCLUSION: This study illuminates possible aspects of end-of-life care practices that jeopardised or supported dignity. Experienced dignity of bereaved relatives was associated with the unfamiliarity of the virus and issues associated with preventive measures. However, most aspects that had an impact on the dignity experiences of relatives were based in human action and relationships. Relatives experienced that preventive measures could be mitigated by health care professionals to make them less devastating.

CURA: A clinical ethics support instrument for caregivers in palliative care.

This article presents an ethics support instrument for healthcare professionals called CURA. It is designed with a focus on and together with nurses and nurse assistants in palliative care. First, we shortly go into the background and the development study of the instrument. Next, we describe the four steps CURA prescribes for ethical reflection: (1) Concentrate, (2) Unrush, (3) Reflect, and (4) Act. In order to demonstrate how CURA can structure a moral reflection among caregivers, we discuss how a case was discussed with CURA at a psychogeriatric ward of an elderly care home. Furthermore, we go into some considerations regarding the use of the instrument in clinical practice. Finally, we focus on the need for further research on the effectiveness and implementation of CURA.

Cross-Sectional Research Into People Passing Away Through Self-Ingesting Self-Collected Lethal Medication After Receiving Demedicalized Assistance in Suicide.

This study describes the characteristics of-and the counseling received by-counselees who passed away through self-ingesting self-collected lethal medication after receiving demedicalised assistance in suicide. We analyzed registration forms filled in by counselors working with Foundation De Einder about 273 counselees who passed away from 2011 to 2015. The majority of these counselees had a serious disease and physical or psychiatric suffering. Half of them had requested physician assistance in dying. This shows that patients with a denied request for physician assistance in dying can persist in their wish to end life. This also shows that not all people with an underlying medical disease request for physician assistance in dying. Physicians and psychiatrist are often uninvolved in these self-chosen deaths while they could have a valuable role in the process concerning assessing competency, diagnosing diseases, and offering (or referring for) treatment.