'Implementing a broad quality of life tool for determining care wishes and needs of older adults living at home.

The aim was to investigate the views of stakeholders on the practical relevance of a broad quality of life (QoL) outcome tool for care in older adults: the Extended Quality of Life Tool (EQLT). We conducted individual interviews and focus groups with a variety of stakeholders involved in the care for older adults which were analyzed using a framework analysis. Stakeholders considered relevant: focus on the client perspective; perspective on QoL broader than health; the possibility to take diversity into account; and the possibility to determine a minimum level of QoL. Three facilitators for implementation of the tool were mentioned as well as four barriers. The EQLT can support conversations with clients about their needs and wishes, thus enabling decisions about care services based on a broad set of domains of QoL. Implementation of the tool should take into account the facilitators and barriers identified in the current study.

[Moral case deliberation in complex euthanasia requests]. / Moreel beraad bij complexe euthanasieverzoeken.

Dealing with euthanasia requests can be a complex matter for a doctor. How to determine whether the due diligence criteria of the Dutch Euthanasia Act are met in cases that are not straightforward? We argue that moral case deliberation (MCD), methodically structured reflective discussions on concrete moral dilemmas, can provide support in dealing with complex euthanasia requests. In this article, we discuss a case that was talked about during a MCD (in particular the CURA method, where CURA stands for 'concentrating, postponing, reflecting and action') by a group of GPs and nurses who met in the context of a network for ambulatory palliative care.This was about an older patient with multiple chronic conditions who lost any prospects of quality of life.Among other things, it was examined whether requests could be 'well-considered' (one of the due diligence criteria) when the patients are in doubt as to when euthanasia should be carried out.The importance of recognising one's own emotions as a doctor and the quality of communication between patient and doctor were also considered.For that reason, we try to show that MCD can assist in making careful and well-considered decisions when determining a course of action in the case of complex euthanasia requests and can encourage collaborative learning processes.

Developing an ethics support tool for dealing with dilemmas around client autonomy based on moral case deliberations.

BACKGROUND: Moral Case Deliberations (MCDs) are reflective dialogues with a group of participants on their own moral dilemmas. Although MCD is successful as clinical ethics support (CES), it also has limitations. 1. Lessons learned from individual MCDs are not shared in order to be used in other contexts 2. Moral learning stays limited to the participants of the MCD; 3. MCD requires quite some organisational effort, 4. MCD deals with one individual concrete case. It does not address other, similar cases (it is case based). These limitations warrant research into complementary ways of providing CES to healthcare professionals. Our research objective was therefore to develop a low threshold CES tool based on a series of MCDs on autonomy in long-term care. METHODS: We used a qualitative research design in which we analyzed the process and content of a series of MCDs, combined with reflections on the theoretical background of MCD. In total 28 MCDs (10 transcripts and 18 summary reports) were analyzed by means of a thematic content analysis. In various rounds of development, the results of the analysis were combined with theoretical reflections on CES. Consequently, the tool was evaluated in three focus groups and adjusted. RESULTS: The CES tool, called 'moral compass', guides the users through a series of six subsequent questions in order to methodically reflect on their concrete moral dilemma, in the form of a booklet of 23 pages. It combines a methodical element that encourages and structures a reflection process with a substantive element, including norms, values, options, strategies, and insights regarding dealing with client autonomy. CONCLUSION: By using data from a series of MCDs, combined with theoretical reflections on MCD, ethics support and moral learning, we developed a thematic, low-threshold CES tool that supports healthcare professionals in daily practice in dealing with moral questions regarding client autonomy. It integrates examples and insights from earlier MCDs on the same topic. The moral compass is not a replacement of, but can be used complementary to MCD. The feasibility and impact of the moral compass need to be investigated in an evaluative follow-up study. The methodology presented in this paper may be used to develop moral compasses on different topics in various healthcare organizations.