End-of-Life Care and Circumstances of Death in Patients Dying As a Result of Cancer in Belgium and the Netherlands: A Retrospective Comparative Study

Vrije Universiteit Brussel, Laarbeeklaan 103, 1090 Brussels, Belgium.
Journal of Clinical Oncology (Impact Factor: 17.88). 11/2011; 29(32):4327-34. DOI: 10.1200/JCO.2011.34.9498
Source: PubMed

ABSTRACT To examine and compare end-of-life care in patients with cancer dying in Belgium and the Netherlands.
A mortality follow-back study was undertaken in 2008 via representative nationwide sentinel networks of general practitioners (GPs) in Belgium and the Netherlands. By using similar standardized procedures, GPs reported on aspects of end-of-life care and the circumstances of nonsudden death of patients with cancer in their practice.
Of the 422 reported patients with cancer, most resided at home during the last year of life (Belgium, 91%; the Netherlands, 95%). Death occurred at home in 34% (Belgium) and 61% (the Netherlands) and in the hospital in 29% (Belgium) and 19% (the Netherlands). In the last month of life, end-of-life issues were more often discussed in the Netherlands (88%) than in Belgium (68%). In both countries, physical problems were discussed most often (Belgium, 49%; the Netherlands, 78%) and spiritual issues least often (Belgium, 20%; the Netherlands, 32%). Certain end-of-life treatment preferences were known for 43% (Belgium) and 67% (the Netherlands) of patients. In the last week of life, treatment was most often focused on palliation (Belgium, 94%; the Netherlands, 91%). Physical distress was reported in 84% (Belgium) and 76% (the Netherlands) of patients and psychological distress in 59% and 36%. Most distressing was lack of energy (Belgium, 73%; the Netherlands, 71%) and lack of appetite (Belgium, 61%; the Netherlands, 53%). Two thirds of patients were bedridden (Belgium, 67%; the Netherlands, 69%).
Although place of death and communication about end-of-life issues differ substantially, a palliative treatment goal is adopted for the vast majority of patients in both countries. However, GPs reported that the majority of patients experienced symptom distress at the end of life, which suggests important challenges remain for improving end-of-life care.

Download full-text


Available from: Gé A Donker, Jul 05, 2015
  • Source
    [Show abstract] [Hide abstract]
    ABSTRACT: Š Korevaar JC, Heins MJ, Donker GA, Rijken PM, Schellevis FG. Oncologie in de huisartsenpraktijk. Huisarts Wet 2013;56(1):6-10. Doel Kanker komt steeds vaker voor en de behandelingsmogelijkheden worden beter. De huisarts krijgt dus steeds meer mensen in zijn praktijk die in het verleden voor kanker zijn behandeld. Dit artikel geeft een overzicht van de impact van maligne aandoeningen in de huisartsenpraktijk. Methode Op basis van het Landelijk Informatie Netwerk Huisartsenzorg (LINH) hebben we de incidentie van de 10 meest voorkomende kankersoorten over de periode 2002-2010 bepaald, alsmede het aantal contacten met de praktijk in de eerste twee jaar na de diagnose. LINH is een landelijk representatief netwerk van 84 huisartsenpraktijken met meer dan 335.000 ingeschreven patiënten. Resultaten In een normpraktijk heeft een huisarts gemiddeld 73 volwassen patiënten bij wie de diagnose kanker minder dan 9 jaar geleden gesteld is. Bij 33 van deze patiënten is de diagnose minder dan 2 jaar geleden gesteld. Patiënten met kanker hebben de eerste 2 jaar na de diagnosestelling gemiddeld 11 contacten per jaar met de huisartsenpraktijk, waarbij het aantal contacten toeneemt met de leeftijd. Twee tot 3 contacten zijn gerelateerd aan de diagnose kanker. Van de overige contacten houden gemiddeld 3 contacten per jaar verband met alledaagse klachten, vindt er minder dan 1 contact plaats vanwege psychosociale problemen en heeft 1 contact te maken met infectieziekten. Ter vergelijking: alle Nederlanders van 18 jaar en ouder hebben gemiddeld 4 contacten per jaar met de huisartsenpraktijk, dus ruim minder dan de helft van het aantal van kankerpatiënten. Conclusie Gezien de verwachte toename van het aantal patiënten met kanker, gecombineerd met de hogere zorgvraag die deze groep patiënten heeft en de mogelijke verschuiving van de oncologische zorg van de tweede naar de eerste lijn, zullen patiënten met kanker een groter aandeel van de totale huisartsenzorg gaan opeisen. Het is van belang dat alle betrokken partijen tijdig anticiperen op deze groeiende zorgvraag.
    Huisarts en wetenschap 01/2013; 56(1). DOI:10.1007/s12445-013-0008-3
  • Source
    [Show abstract] [Hide abstract]
    ABSTRACT: BACKGROUND: General Practitioners (GPs) are at the first level of contact in many European healthcare systems and they supposedly have a role in supporting cancer patients in achieving their desired place of death. A four-country (Belgium, the Netherlands, Italy and Spain) study was carried out exploring current practices. PATIENTS AND METHODS: EURO SENTI-MELC adopted a retrospective study design and data for this study were collected in 2010 through representative GPs' networks in four countries. In the current study all non-sudden cancer deaths were included with weekly GP registrations. RESULTS: The main study sample included 930 deceased cancer patients: preference for place of death was known by GPs for only 377. GP awareness on the preferred place of death varied across countries, 27% in Italy, 36% in Spain, 45% in Belgium and 72% in the Netherlands (p<0.01). The general level of preferences met was high, from 68% (Italy) to 92% (Spain). CONCLUSIONS: Despite the importance of being able to die in a preferred location, GPs were often unaware about patient preferences, especially in Italy and Spain. If GPs were informed, the preference was often met in all countries, indicating room for improvement in end-of-life care.
    European journal of cancer (Oxford, England: 1990) 02/2013; 49(8). DOI:10.1016/j.ejca.2013.01.006 · 4.82 Impact Factor
  • Source
    [Show abstract] [Hide abstract]
    ABSTRACT: Background Although end-of-life care has become an issue of great clinical and public health concern in Europe and beyond, we lack population-based nationwide data that monitor and compare the circumstances of dying and care received in the final months of life in different countries. The European Sentinel GP Networks Monitoring End of Life Care (EURO SENTIMELC) study was designed to describe and compare the last months of life of patients dying in different European countries. We aim to describe how representative GP networks in the EURO SENTIMELC study operate to monitor end of life care in a country, to describe used methodology, research procedures, representativity and characteristics of the population reached using this methodology. Methods Nationwide representative Networks of General Practitioners (GPs) -- ie epidemiological surveillance systems representative of all GPs in a country or large region of a country -- in Belgium, the Netherlands, Italy and Spain continuously registered every deceased patient (>18 year) in their practice, using weekly standardized registration forms, during two consecutive years (2009--2010). All GPs were asked to identify patients who had died "non-suddenly". The last three months of these patients' lives was surveyed retrospectively. Several quality control measures were used to ensure data of high scientific quality. Results A total of 6858 deaths were registered of which two thirds died non-suddenly (from 62% in the Netherlands to 69% in Spain), representative for the GP populations in the participating countries. Of all non-sudden deaths, between 32% and 44% of deaths were aged 85 or older; between 46% and 54% were female, and between 23% and 49% died at home. Cancer was cause of death in 37% to 53% of non-sudden death cases in the four participating countries. Conclusion Via the EURO SENTI-MELC methodology, we can build a descriptive epidemiological database on end-of-life care provision in several EU countries, measuring across setting and diseases. The data can serve as baseline measurement to compare and monitor end-of-life care over time. The use of representative GP networks for end-of-life care monitoring has huge potential in Europe where several of these networks are operational.
    BMC Family Practice 06/2013; 14(73). DOI:10.1186/1471-2296-14-73 · 1.74 Impact Factor