Highlights from this issue
We know that end-of-life practices in medicine vary widely across countries. The paper by Schildman et al (see page 327) reports a questionnaire survey of all members of the German Society for Palliative Medicine using the German language version of the EURELD survey instrument.1 The study has a goo...
Main Author: | |
---|---|
Format: | Electronic Article |
Language: | English |
Check availability: | HBZ Gateway |
Journals Online & Print: | |
Fernleihe: | Fernleihe für die Fachinformationsdienste |
Published: |
BMJ Publ.
2011
|
In: |
Journal of medical ethics
Year: 2011, Volume: 37, Issue: 6, Pages: 325 |
Online Access: |
Volltext (JSTOR) Volltext (kostenfrei) Volltext (kostenfrei) |
Summary: | We know that end-of-life practices in medicine vary widely across countries. The paper by Schildman et al (see page 327) reports a questionnaire survey of all members of the German Society for Palliative Medicine using the German language version of the EURELD survey instrument.1 The study has a good response rate of 55.8% and finds that decisions to withdraw or withhold treatment are very common, but that German physicians estimate that the life-shortening effects of most of these decisions are very limited, although in 17 of 234 cases the life-shortening effect was estimated to be more than 1 month.Another interesting and somewhat provocative paper in this issue also discusses end-of-life issues, in this case decision making for … |
---|---|
ISSN: | 1473-4257 |
Contains: | Enthalten in: Journal of medical ethics
|
Persistent identifiers: | DOI: 10.1136/jme.2011.045096 |