1
views
0
recommends
+1 Recommend
0 collections
    0
    shares
      • Record: found
      • Abstract: found
      • Article: found
      Is Open Access

      Key challenges in providing assisted dying in Belgium: a qualitative analysis of health professionals’ experiences

      research-article

      Read this article at

      Bookmark
          There is no author summary for this article yet. Authors can add summaries to their articles on ScienceOpen to make them more accessible to a non-specialist audience.

          Abstract

          Background:

          Assisted dying or ‘euthanasia’ has been legal in Belgium since 2002. Extensive research has been conducted which investigates Belgian euthanasia practice, however, the current challenges that health professionals face when providing euthanasia are not well known. This knowledge is important for evaluating the current system, especially in light of recent developments in Belgian euthanasia law and practice including judicial decisions, legislative amendments and research highlighting the complexity of its governing regulatory framework.

          Objectives:

          This study investigates the key challenges that health professionals experience when providing euthanasia in Belgium.

          Design:

          A qualitative interview study with reflexive thematic analysis.

          Methods:

          Twenty interviews were conducted between September 2022 and March 2024 using Microsoft Teams videoconferencing. Eligible participants were physicians and nurses who spoke English or Dutch and who had been involved in the euthanasia assessment of at least two patients in the past year.

          Results:

          Four themes were generated: (1) the framing of the euthanasia legislation poses challenges; (2) providing euthanasia can place considerable burdens on health professionals; (3) clashing views about euthanasia can hamper opportunities for balanced discussions and (4) euthanasia and processes relating to euthanasia are not always well-understood.

          Conclusion:

          This study highlights the numerous and varied challenges physicians and nurses experience when providing euthanasia in Belgium, even 20 years after its law passing. This study contributes to a wider understanding of universal challenges associated with providing assisted dying and sheds light on issues specific to Belgium. The results provide an opportunity for policymakers to take action to better support providers to manage these challenges, including through a formal review of the legislation and the broader system.

          Plain language summary

          What aspects of providing euthanasia in Belgium do health professionals find challenging?

          This study investigates the challenges that doctors and nurses experience when they are involved in providing euthanasia in Belgium. Euthanasia is when a person makes a voluntary request to a health practitioner for help to die. Belgium has permitted euthanasia since 2002. Under the law, doctors assess whether patients are eligible to access euthanasia. Nurses assist doctors and have other important roles in caring for patients who access euthanasia. Much research explores Belgian euthanasia practice. However, research has not considered the many challenges doctors and nurses experience when assisting patients to access euthanasia. These findings are an important source of knowledge when euthanasia law and practice is reviewed. Measures can be implemented to address these challenges, improving patients’ and providers’ experiences of the euthanasia system. We conducted interviews with 20 doctors and nurses. They described four main challenges: the framing of the euthanasia legislation poses challenges; providing euthanasia can place considerable burdens on health professionals; clashing views about euthanasia can hamper opportunities for balanced discussions; and euthanasia and processes relating to euthanasia are not always well understood. Doctors and nurses should be supported to manage these challenges. Measures should also be implemented to manage these challenges, including evaluating and, if needed, making changes to the law; implementing mandatory training for doctors and nurses involved in providing euthanasia; and providing community education on euthanasia and the legal process. These findings are also important for other places which are considering legalising euthanasia in the future.

          Related collections

          Most cited references51

          • Record: found
          • Abstract: found
          • Article: not found

          Consolidated criteria for reporting qualitative research (COREQ): a 32-item checklist for interviews and focus groups.

          Qualitative research explores complex phenomena encountered by clinicians, health care providers, policy makers and consumers. Although partial checklists are available, no consolidated reporting framework exists for any type of qualitative design. To develop a checklist for explicit and comprehensive reporting of qualitative studies (in depth interviews and focus groups). We performed a comprehensive search in Cochrane and Campbell Protocols, Medline, CINAHL, systematic reviews of qualitative studies, author or reviewer guidelines of major medical journals and reference lists of relevant publications for existing checklists used to assess qualitative studies. Seventy-six items from 22 checklists were compiled into a comprehensive list. All items were grouped into three domains: (i) research team and reflexivity, (ii) study design and (iii) data analysis and reporting. Duplicate items and those that were ambiguous, too broadly defined and impractical to assess were removed. Items most frequently included in the checklists related to sampling method, setting for data collection, method of data collection, respondent validation of findings, method of recording data, description of the derivation of themes and inclusion of supporting quotations. We grouped all items into three domains: (i) research team and reflexivity, (ii) study design and (iii) data analysis and reporting. The criteria included in COREQ, a 32-item checklist, can help researchers to report important aspects of the research team, study methods, context of the study, findings, analysis and interpretations.
            Bookmark
            • Record: found
            • Abstract: found
            • Article: not found

            Sample Size in Qualitative Interview Studies: Guided by Information Power

            Sample sizes must be ascertained in qualitative studies like in quantitative studies but not by the same means. The prevailing concept for sample size in qualitative studies is "saturation." Saturation is closely tied to a specific methodology, and the term is inconsistently applied. We propose the concept "information power" to guide adequate sample size for qualitative studies. Information power indicates that the more information the sample holds, relevant for the actual study, the lower amount of participants is needed. We suggest that the size of a sample with sufficient information power depends on (a) the aim of the study, (b) sample specificity, (c) use of established theory, (d) quality of dialogue, and (e) analysis strategy. We present a model where these elements of information and their relevant dimensions are related to information power. Application of this model in the planning and during data collection of a qualitative study is discussed.
              Bookmark
              • Record: found
              • Abstract: not found
              • Article: not found

              Qualitative Quality: Eight "Big-Tent" Criteria for Excellent Qualitative Research

                Bookmark

                Author and article information

                Contributors
                Role: ConceptualizationRole: Formal analysisRole: InvestigationRole: MethodologyRole: Writing – original draft
                Role: Formal analysisRole: InvestigationRole: Writing – review & editing
                Role: Formal analysisRole: InvestigationRole: MethodologyRole: Writing – review & editing
                Role: Formal analysisRole: InvestigationRole: Writing – review & editing
                Role: ConceptualizationRole: Formal analysisRole: MethodologyRole: Writing – review & editing
                Journal
                Palliat Care Soc Pract
                Palliat Care Soc Pract
                PCR
                sppcr
                Palliative Care and Social Practice
                SAGE Publications (Sage UK: London, England )
                2632-3524
                6 February 2025
                2025
                : 19
                : 26323524251318044
                Affiliations
                [1-26323524251318044]Australian Centre for Health Law Research, Faculty of Business and Law, Queensland University of Technology, 2 George Street, Brisbane City, QLD 4000, Australia
                [2-26323524251318044]Australian Centre for Health Law Research, Faculty of Business and Law, Queensland University of Technology, Brisbane City, QLD, Australia
                [3-26323524251318044]End-of-Life Care Research Group, Ghent University and Vrije Universiteit Brussel, Ghent, Brussels, Belgium
                [4-26323524251318044]Department of Public Health and Primary Care, Ghent University, Ghent, Belgium
                [5-26323524251318044]End-of-Life Care Research Group, Ghent University and Vrije Universiteit Brussel, Ghent, Brussels, Belgium
                [6-26323524251318044]Department of Public Health and Primary Care, Ghent University, Ghent, Belgium
                [7-26323524251318044]Australian Centre for Health Law Research, Faculty of Business and Law, Queensland University of Technology, Brisbane City, QLD, Australia
                Author notes
                Author information
                https://orcid.org/0000-0001-5526-0553
                https://orcid.org/0000-0002-9750-287X
                https://orcid.org/0000-0001-6277-072X
                https://orcid.org/0000-0002-8158-2422
                https://orcid.org/0000-0003-3365-939X
                Article
                10.1177_26323524251318044
                10.1177/26323524251318044
                11803728
                5670173c-f1c2-4baf-aaf4-e35f01f9aec3
                © The Author(s), 2025

                This article is distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 License ( https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/) which permits any use, reproduction and distribution of the work without further permission provided the original work is attributed as specified on the SAGE and Open Access pages ( https://us.sagepub.com/en-us/nam/open-access-at-sage).

                History
                : 10 September 2024
                : 12 January 2025
                Categories
                Original Research
                Custom metadata
                January-December 2025
                ts1

                assisted dying,belgium,euthanasia,qualitative research,regulation

                Comments

                Comment on this article

                scite_
                0
                0
                0
                0
                Smart Citations
                0
                0
                0
                0
                Citing PublicationsSupportingMentioningContrasting
                View Citations

                See how this article has been cited at scite.ai

                scite shows how a scientific paper has been cited by providing the context of the citation, a classification describing whether it supports, mentions, or contrasts the cited claim, and a label indicating in which section the citation was made.

                Similar content262

                Most referenced authors392