Aftercare Provision for Bereaved Relatives Following Euthanasia or Physician-Assisted Suicide: A Cross-Sectional Questionnaire Study Among Physicians

IF 2.6 3区 医学 Q2 PUBLIC, ENVIRONMENTAL & OCCUPATIONAL HEALTH International Journal of Public Health Pub Date : 2024-07-25 DOI:10.3389/ijph.2024.1607346
S. Renckens, H. R. Pasman, Agnes van der Heide, B. Onwuteaka-Philipsen
{"title":"Aftercare Provision for Bereaved Relatives Following Euthanasia or Physician-Assisted Suicide: A Cross-Sectional Questionnaire Study Among Physicians","authors":"S. Renckens, H. R. Pasman, Agnes van der Heide, B. Onwuteaka-Philipsen","doi":"10.3389/ijph.2024.1607346","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"Objectives: Relatives of patients who died after euthanasia or physician-assisted suicide (EAS) might need (specific) aftercare. We examined if and how physicians provide aftercare to bereaved relatives of patients who died after EAS, and which patient-, physician- and process characteristics are associated with providing aftercare.Methods: A cross-sectional questionnaire study was conducted among 127 physicians (general practitioners, clinical specialists, and elderly care physicians) in the Netherlands. Associations were examined using multivariable logistic regression analyses.Results: Most physicians had had at least one follow-up conversation with bereaved relatives (77.2%). Clinical specialists less often provided aftercare compared to GPs. Also, aftercare was more often provided when the deceased had a cohabiting partner. Topics addressed during aftercare conversations included looking back on practical aspects of the EAS trajectory, the emotional experience of relatives during the EAS trajectory and relatives’ current mental wellbeing. A minority of aftercare conversations led to referral to additional care (6.3%).Conclusion: Aftercare conversations with a physician covering a wide-range of topics are likely to be valuable for all bereaved relatives, and not just for “at risk” populations typically targeted by policies and guidelines.","PeriodicalId":14322,"journal":{"name":"International Journal of Public Health","volume":null,"pages":null},"PeriodicalIF":2.6000,"publicationDate":"2024-07-25","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"International Journal of Public Health","FirstCategoryId":"3","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.3389/ijph.2024.1607346","RegionNum":3,"RegionCategory":"医学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q2","JCRName":"PUBLIC, ENVIRONMENTAL & OCCUPATIONAL HEALTH","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

Objectives: Relatives of patients who died after euthanasia or physician-assisted suicide (EAS) might need (specific) aftercare. We examined if and how physicians provide aftercare to bereaved relatives of patients who died after EAS, and which patient-, physician- and process characteristics are associated with providing aftercare.Methods: A cross-sectional questionnaire study was conducted among 127 physicians (general practitioners, clinical specialists, and elderly care physicians) in the Netherlands. Associations were examined using multivariable logistic regression analyses.Results: Most physicians had had at least one follow-up conversation with bereaved relatives (77.2%). Clinical specialists less often provided aftercare compared to GPs. Also, aftercare was more often provided when the deceased had a cohabiting partner. Topics addressed during aftercare conversations included looking back on practical aspects of the EAS trajectory, the emotional experience of relatives during the EAS trajectory and relatives’ current mental wellbeing. A minority of aftercare conversations led to referral to additional care (6.3%).Conclusion: Aftercare conversations with a physician covering a wide-range of topics are likely to be valuable for all bereaved relatives, and not just for “at risk” populations typically targeted by policies and guidelines.
查看原文
分享 分享
微信好友 朋友圈 QQ好友 复制链接
本刊更多论文
为安乐死或医生协助自杀后的遗属提供善后服务:一项针对医生的横断面问卷调查研究
目的:安乐死或医生协助自杀(EAS)后死亡患者的亲属可能需要(特定的)善后护理。我们研究了医生是否以及如何为安乐死后死亡患者的遗属提供善后护理,以及哪些患者、医生和流程特征与提供善后护理有关:方法: 对荷兰的 127 名医生(全科医生、临床专家和老年护理医生)进行了横断面问卷调查。采用多变量逻辑回归分析法研究了两者之间的关联:大多数医生至少与丧亲亲属进行过一次后续谈话(77.2%)。与全科医生相比,临床专家较少提供善后护理。此外,当逝者有同居伴侣时,更常提供善后护理。善后关怀谈话中涉及的主题包括回顾紧急医疗服务轨迹的实际方面、亲属在紧急医疗服务轨迹中的情感经历以及亲属目前的精神健康状况。少数事后护理谈话导致转介到其他护理机构(6.3%):结论:与医生进行涉及广泛主题的善后护理谈话可能对所有丧亲者都有价值,而不仅仅是政策和指南通常针对的 "高危 "人群。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 去求助
来源期刊
International Journal of Public Health
International Journal of Public Health 医学-公共卫生、环境卫生与职业卫生
CiteScore
4.20
自引率
2.20%
发文量
269
审稿时长
12 months
期刊介绍: The International Journal of Public Health publishes scientific articles relevant to global public health, from different countries and cultures, and assembles them into issues that raise awareness and understanding of public health problems and solutions. The Journal welcomes submissions of original research, critical and relevant reviews, methodological papers and manuscripts that emphasize theoretical content. IJPH sometimes publishes commentaries and opinions. Special issues highlight key areas of current research. The Editorial Board''s mission is to provide a thoughtful forum for contemporary issues and challenges in global public health research and practice.
期刊最新文献
Comparative Evaluation of the Antibiotic Resistance Profile of Staphylococcus aureus Isolated From Breeders and Livestock. Comparison of Causes of Mortality Between Hospitalized Unsheltered Homeless Patients and Non-Homeless Sex and Age-Matched Controls: A Retrospective Case-Control Study. Determinants of Utilization of Antenatal Care Services Among Women of Childbearing Age in Jigawa State, Nigeria. An Improved Air Health Index Based on Short-Term Cardiovascular Effects in Tianjin, China. Global Burden of Inflammatory Bowel Disease Among Children and Adolescents: A Comprehensive Analysis (1990-2019).
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
现在去查看 取消
×
提示
确定
0
微信
客服QQ
Book学术公众号 扫码关注我们
反馈
×
意见反馈
请填写您的意见或建议
请填写您的手机或邮箱
已复制链接
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
×
扫码分享
扫码分享
Book学术官方微信
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术
文献互助 智能选刊 最新文献 互助须知 联系我们:info@booksci.cn
Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。
Copyright © 2023 Book学术 All rights reserved.
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号 京ICP备2023020795号-1