Attitudes towards end-of-life issues in XXXX : a European survey.

@entity1 @entity1688 @entity158 @entity47 @entity1662
Previous European surveys showed the support of healthcare professionals for treatment withdrawal [i.e., artificial nutrition and hydration (ANH) in @entity47 (VS) @entity1 ]. The recent definition of @entity47 ( @entity47 ), and possibly research advances (e.g., functional neuroimaging), may have lead to uncertainty regarding potential residual perception and may have influenced opinions of healthcare professionals. The aim of the study was to update the end-of-life attitudes towards VS and to determine the end-of-life attitudes towards @entity47 . A 16-item questionnaire related to @entity1662 , @entity158 and end-of-life issues in chronic (i.e., >1 year) VS and @entity47 and @entity1688 was distributed among attendants of medical and scientific conferences around Europe (n = 59). During a lecture, the items were explained orally to the attendants who needed to provide written yes/no responses. Chi-square tests and logistic regression analyses identified differences and associations for age, European region, religiosity, profession, and gender. We here report data on items concerning end-of-life issues on chronic VS and @entity47 . Responses were collected from 2,475 @entity1 . For chronic VS (>1 year), 66% of healthcare professionals agreed to withdraw treatment and 82% wished not to be kept alive (P < 0.001). For chronic @entity47 (>1 year), less attendants agreed to withdraw treatment (28%, P < 0.001) and wished not to be kept alive (67%, P < 0.001). @entity47 was considered worse than VS for the @entity1 in 54% and for their families in 42% of the sample. Respondents' opinions were associated with geographic region and religiosity. Our data show that end-of-life opinions differ for VS as compared to @entity47 . The introduction of the diagnostic criteria for @entity47 has not substantially changed the opinions on end-of-life issues on permanent VS. Additionally, the existing legal ambiguity around @entity47 may have influenced the audience to draw a line between expressing preferences for self versus others, by implicitly recognizing that the latter could be a step on the slippery slope to legalize euthanasia. Given the observed individual variability, we stress the importance of advance directives and identification of proxies when discussing end-of-life issues in @entity1 with @entity1662 .
