An examination and proposed theoretical model of risk and protective factors for bereavement outcomes for family members of individuals who engaged in medical aid in dying: A systematic review.

BACKGROUND: Medical Aid in Dying is an end-of-life option that allows a physician to provide a patient with a prescription to end their life. Though Medical Aid in Dying intends to reduce suffering for a patient, opponents argue Medical Aid in Dying may increase suffering for the family members during bereavement. To better understand the bereavement outcomes for family members/friends following Medical Aid in Dying, an exhaustive review of the risk and protective factors for bereavement outcomes is warranted. AIM: This systemic review aimed to identify studies that examined bereavement outcomes of family members of individuals who engage in Medial Aid in Dying, identify risk and protective factors for bereavement outcomes, and propose a theoretical model to enhance conceptual clarity. DESIGN: A mixed-method systematic review. DATA SOURCES: Ten databases were searched on June 16, 2021 and later conducted two updates (latest April 25, 2022). RESULTS: Thirteen articles met inclusion criteria. Risk and protective factors were identified pre-Medical Aid in Dying and risk factors post-Medical Aid in Dying. Few studies compared bereavement outcomes for family members of individuals utilizing Medical Aid in Dying to family members who lost someone to natural loss. CONCLUSIONS: This study provides equivocal results about the effects of Medical Aid in Dying on family members following the loss. The theoretical model outlines potential risk and protective factors. This model provides a greater understanding of possible universal risk and protective factors for family members of individuals who engaged in Medical Aid in Dying.

Assessment of Oncology Advanced Practice Professional Willingness to Participate in Medical Aid in Dying.

Importance: In 2021, New Mexico passed legislation allowing nurse practitioners and physician assistants (referred to herein as advanced practice professionals [APPs]) to prescribe medications for medical aid in dying (MAID). Other US states with existing MAID laws (eg, Washington) are also considering expanding MAID prescribing authority to APPs. There is a lack of research exploring APP knowledge of, willingness to, and comfort with acting as a prescribing or consulting clinician for MAID. Objective: To assess perspectives of oncology APPs regarding MAID, including their willingness to prescribe and/or consult for MAID and factors associated with willingness. Design, Setting, and Participants: This cross-sectional, self-report survey study used data collected from APPs working at a comprehensive cancer center in Washington State in fall 2021. Main Outcomes and Measures: The primary survey question was whether APPs would be willing to participate in death with dignity, the term used for MAID in Washington. Survey questions evaluated how influential specific factors were on APP views on MAID as well as respondents' knowledge of and comfort with aspects of the MAID process. Results: Of 167 eligible APPs, 77 (46.1%) responded to the survey. Most respondents (68 [88.3%]) reported their race and ethnicity as White; 72 (93.5%) identified as a woman. Medical oncology (28 [36.4%]) was the most common field of practice, and 21 respondents (27.3%) reported having practiced as an APP for 6 to 10 years. Of all respondents, 61 (79.2%) reported having at least 1 patient who inquired about MAID; depending on the question, less than a third of respondents (5.0%-27.0%) endorsed feeling knowledgeable or very knowledgeable about any aspect of the MAID process. In this study, 39 APPs (50.6%) endorsed being willing to participate in MAID either as a consulting or prescribing clinician, whereas 31 (40.3%) were uncertain of whether they would participate. Willingness to participate was associated with having had more patients pursue MAID (33 of the 39 willing participants [84.6%] vs 15 of the 31 unsure participants [48.4%] reported having 1 or more patients pursue MAID). Higher knowledge and comfort scores were both significantly associated with increased odds of being willing to participate (odds ratio, 1.14 per 1-point score increase [95% CI, 1.03-1.27]; P = .01) vs unsure (1.18 [95% CI, 1.07-1.30; P = .001). Conclusions and Relevance: The results of this survey study suggest that oncology APPs may require preparation for the addition of MAID to their scope of practice. This study also raises questions for future research regarding support for APPs who may be considering participation in MAID but question their role or want physician involvement.

Cross reactivity among the swine mycoplasmas as identified by protein microarray.

Mycoplasmas are cell wall-less bacteria that infect a variety of animals in a species-specific manner. In swine, Mycoplasma hyopneumoniae is the most virulent and presents the most disease and economic problems to the swine industry. Serological assays are commonly used to assess colonization and disease, but antigenic cross-reactivity between M. hyopneumoniae and other mycoplasma species, most notably Mycoplasma hyorhinis, Mycoplasma hyosynoviae and Mycoplasma flocculare, is a concern. The extent of cross-reactivity has not been thoroughly investigated. These studies were designed to identify M. hyopneumoniae proteins that are recognized by rabbit hyperimmune sera raised against the other swine mycoplasmas. Our results indicate extensive cross-reactivity between M. flocculare and M. hyopneumoniae, which explains previous reports seen with ELISA assays. Only three of the thirty-nine M. hyopneumoniae proteins tested showed no cross reactivity with the other three swine mycoplasmas, mhp182 (42kDa C-terminal fragment), mhp638 and mhp684 (C-terminal fragment). Two proteins, mhp384 and mhp511, were cross-reactive with hyperimmune sera generated against three of the four species. None of the anti-M. hyorhinis hyperimmune sera reacted to any of the M. hyopneumoniae proteins. These results suggest that inapparent M. flocculare infections could produce positive responses in M. hyopneumoniae serological assays due to cross-reactivity, and that M. hyosynoviae infections are less likely to do so and M. hyorhinis infections unlikely to affect assay results.