In-session gaming as a tool in treating adolescent problematic gaming.

For some adolescent gamers, playing online games may become problematic, impairing functioning in personal, family, and other life domains. Parental and family factors are known to influence the odds that adolescents may develop problematic gaming (PG), negative parenting and conflictual family dynamics increasing the risk, whereas positive parenting and developmentally supportive family dynamics protecting against PG. This suggests that a treatment for adolescent PG should not only address the gaming behaviors and personal characteristics of the youth, but also the parental and family domains. An established research-supported treatment meeting these requirements is multidimensional family therapy (MDFT), which we adapted for use as adolescent PG treatment. We report here on one adaptation, applying in-session gaming. In-session demonstration of the "problem behavior" is feasible and informative in PG. In the opening stage of therapy, we use in-session gaming to establish an alliance between the therapist and the youth. By inviting them to play games, the therapist demonstrates that they are taken seriously, thus boosting treatment motivation. Later in treatment, gaming is introduced in family sessions, offering useful opportunities to intervene in family members' perspectives and interactional patterns revealed in vivo as the youth plays the game. These sessions can trigger strong emotions and reactions from the parents and youth and give rise to maladaptive transactions between the family members, thus offering ways to facilitate new discussions and experiences of each other. The insights gained from the game demonstration sessions aid the therapeutic process, more so than mere discussion about gaming.

Multidimensional family therapy reduces problematic gaming in adolescents: A randomised controlled trial.

BACKGROUND AND AIMS: Social variables including parental and family factors may serve as risk factors for Internet Gaming Disorder (IGD) in adolescents. An IGD treatment programme should address these factors. We assessed two family therapies - multidimensional family therapy (MDFT) and family therapy as usual (FTAU) - on their impact on the prevalence of IGD and IGD symptoms. METHODS: Eligible for this randomised controlled trial comparing MDFT (N = 12) with FTAU (N = 30) were adolescents of 12-19 years old meeting at least 5 of the 9 DSM-5 IGD criteria and with at least one parent willing to participate in the study. The youths were recruited from the Centre Phénix-Mail, which offers outpatient adolescent addiction care in Geneva. Assessments occurred at baseline and 6 and 12 months. RESULTS: Both family therapies decreased the prevalence of IGD across the one-year period. Both therapies also lowered the number of IGD criteria met, with MDFT outperforming FTAU. There was no effect on the amount of time spent on gaming. At baseline, parents judged their child's gaming problems to be important whereas the adolescents thought these problems were minimal. This discrepancy in judgment diminished across the study period as parents became milder in rating problem severity. MDFT better retained families in treatment than FTAU. DISCUSSION AND CONCLUSIONS: Family therapy, especially MDFT, was effective in treating adolescent IGD. Improvements in family relationships may contribute to the treatment success. Our findings are promising but need to be replicated in larger study. TRIAL REGISTRATION NUMBER: ISRCTN 11142726.

Linking parental mediation practices to adolescents' problematic online screen use: A systematic literature review.

BACKGROUND AND AIMS: To remedy problematic Internet use (PIU) and problematic online gaming (POG) in adolescents, much is expected from efforts by parents to help youths to contain their screen use. Such parental mediation can include (a) refraining from acting, (b) co-viewing or co-gaming with the teen, (c) active mediation, and (d) restrictive mediation. We evaluated if parental mediation practices are linked to PIU and POG in adolescents. METHODS: For a systematic literature review, we searched for publications presenting survey data and relating parental mediation practices to levels of PIU and/or POG in adolescents. The review's selection criteria were met by 18 PIU and 9 POG publications, reporting on 81.002 and 12.915 adolescents, respectively. We extracted data on gaming problems, mediation interventions, study design features, and sample characteristics. RESULTS: No type of parental mediation was consistently associated with lower or elevated problematic screen use rates in the adolescents. Refraining from parental mediation tended to aggravate screen use problems, whereas active mediation (talking to the teen) may mitigate such problems in PIU, but less clearly in POG. The link of restrictive mediation with problematic screen use varied from positive to negative, possibly depending on type of restriction. In both PIU and POG, family cohesion was related to lower rates of the problem behavior concerned and family conflict to higher rates. DISCUSSION AND CONCLUSIONS: Parental mediation practices may affect problematic screen use rates for better or worse. However, research of higher quality, including observations of parent-teen interactions, is needed to confirm the trends noted and advance the critical issue of the possible association between PIU, POG, and family interactions.

Multidimensional family therapy in adolescents with a cannabis use disorder: long-term effects on delinquency in a randomized controlled trial.

BACKGROUND: Substance use and delinquency are considered to be mutual risk factors. Previous studies have shown that multidimensional family therapy (MDFT) is effective in tackling both conditions on the short term. The current study examines the long-term effects of MDFT on criminal offending. METHODS: 109 adolescents with cannabis use disorder and comorbid problem behavior were randomly assigned to either MDFT or cognitive behavioral therapy (CBT). Police arrest data were collected for 6 years: 3 years prior to and 3 years after treatment entry. Using survival analysis and repeated measure General Linear Models (rmGLM), the two treatment groups were compared on number of arrests, type of offence, and severity of offence. Moderator analyses looking at age, disruptive behavior disorders, history of crimes, family functioning, and (severe) cannabis use were conducted (rmGLM). RESULTS: While police arrest rates increased in the 3 years before treatment, the rates decreased substantially after the start of both treatments. No differences were found between the treatment groups with respect to either time to first offence from the start of the treatment or changes in frequency or severity of offending over time. A treatment effect trend favoring MDFT was found for property offending in the subgroup of adolescents with high baseline-severity of cannabis use. CONCLUSIONS: Across a follow-up period of 3 years, MDFT and CBT were similarly effective in reducing delinquency in adolescents with a cannabis use disorder.Trial registration ISRCTN51014277, Registered 17 March 2010-Retrospectively registered, http://www.isrctn.com/ISRCTN51014277.

Multidimensional Family Therapy Reduces Self-Reported Criminality Among Adolescents With a Cannabis Use Disorder.

Multidimensional family therapy (MDFT) is an established treatment program for youth displaying multiproblem behavior. We examined whether MDFT decreased criminal offending among cannabis abusing adolescents, as compared with individual psychotherapy (IP). In a Western European randomized controlled trial comparing MDFT with IP, a sample of 169 adolescents with a cannabis disorder completed self-reports on criminal offending. Half indicated they had committed one or more criminal offenses in the 90 days before the baseline assessment. Follow-up assessments were at 6 and 12 months after randomization. The proportion of adolescents reporting nondelinquency increased during the study period, most so in the MDFT condition. In addition, MDFT lowered the number of violent offenses more than IP. This difference was not seen for property crimes. In cannabis abusing adolescents, MDFT is an effective treatment to prevent and reduce criminal offending. MDFT outperforms IP for violent crimes.

A program of family-centered care for adolescents in short-term stay groups of juvenile justice institutions.

BACKGROUND: To provide successful treatment to detained adolescents, staff in juvenile justice institutions need to work in family-centered ways. As juvenile justice institutions struggled to involve parents in their child's treatment, we developed a program for family-centered care. METHODS: The program was developed in close collaboration with staff from the two juvenile justice institutions participating in the Dutch Academic Workplace Forensic Care for Youth. To achieve an attainable program, we chose a bottom-up approach in which ideas for family-centered care were detailed and discussed by workgroups consisting of group leaders, family therapists, psychologists, other staff, researchers, and a parent. RESULTS: The family-centered care program distinguishes four categories of parental participation: (a) informing parents, (b) parents meeting their child, (c) parents meeting staff, and (d) parents taking part in the treatment program. Additionally, the family-centered care program includes the option to start family therapy during detention of the youths, to be continued after discharge from the juvenile justice institutions. Training and coaching of staff are core components of the family-centered care program. CONCLUSIONS: The combination of training and the identification of attainable ways for staff to promote parental involvement makes the family-centered care program valuable for practice. Because the program builds on suggestions from previous research and on the theoretical background of evidence-based family therapies, it has potential to improve care for detained adolescents and their parents. Further research is required to confirm if this assumption is correct.

Family-Centered Care in Juvenile Justice Institutions: A Mixed Methods Study Protocol.

BACKGROUND: Treatment and rehabilitation interventions in juvenile justice institutions aim to prevent criminal reoffending by adolescents and to enhance their prospects of successful social reintegration. There is evidence that these goals are best achieved when the institution adopts a family-centered approach, involving the parents of the adolescents. The Academic Workplace Forensic Care for Youth has developed two programs for family-centered care for youth detained in groups for short-term and long-term stay, respectively. OBJECTIVE: The overall aim of our study is to evaluate the family-centered care program in the first two years after the first steps of its implementation in short-term stay groups of two juvenile justice institutions in the Netherlands. The current paper discusses our study design. METHODS: Based on a quantitative pilot study, we opted for a study with an explanatory sequential mixed methods design. This pilot is considered the first stage of our study. The second stage of our study includes concurrent quantitative and qualitative approaches. The quantitative part of our study is a pre-post quasi-experimental comparison of family-centered care with usual care in short-term stay groups. The qualitative part of our study involves in-depth interviews with adolescents, parents, and group workers to elaborate on the preceding quantitative pilot study and to help interpret the outcomes of the quasi-experimental quantitative part of the study. RESULTS: We believe that our study will result in the following findings. In the quantitative comparison of usual care with family-centered care, we assume that in the latter group, parents will be more involved with their child and with the institution, and that parents and adolescents will be more motivated to take part in therapy. In addition, we expect family-centered care to improve family interactions, to decrease parenting stress, and to reduce problem behavior among the adolescents. Finally, we assume that adolescents, parents, and the staff of the institutions will be more satisfied with family-centered care than with usual care. In the qualitative part of our study, we will identify the needs and expectations in family-centered care as well as factors influencing parental participation. Insight in these factors will help to further improve our program of family-centered care and its implementation in practice. Our study results will be published over the coming years. CONCLUSIONS: A juvenile justice institution is a difficult setting to evaluate care programs. A combination of practice-based research methods is needed to address all major implementation issues. The study described here takes on the challenge by means of practice-based research. We expect the results of our study to contribute to the improvement of care for adolescents detained in juvenile justice institutions, and for their families.

Multidimensional family therapy decreases the rate of externalising behavioural disorder symptoms in cannabis abusing adolescents: outcomes of the INCANT trial.

BACKGROUND: US-based trials have shown that Multidimensional Family Therapy (MDFT) not only reduces substance abuse among adolescents, but also decreases mental and behavioural disorder symptoms, most notably externalising symptoms. In the INCANT trial, MDFT decreased the rate of cannabis dependence among Western European youth. We now focus on other INCANT outcomes, i.e., lessening of co-morbidity symptoms and improvement of family functioning. METHODS: INCANT was a randomised controlled trial comparing MDFT with individual therapy (IP) at and across sites in Berlin, Brussels, Geneva, The Hague, and Paris. We recruited 450 boys and girls aged 13 up to 18 years with a cannabis use disorder, and their parent(s), and followed them for 12 months. Mental and behavioural characteristics (classified as 'externalising' or 'internalising') and family conflict and cohesion were assessed. RESULTS: From intake through 12 months, MDFT and IP groups improved on all outcome measures. Models including treatment, site, and referral source showed that MDFT outperformed IP in reducing externalising symptoms.Adolescents were either self-referred to treatment (mostly on the initiative from people close to the teen) or referred under some measure of coercion by an external authority. These two groups reacted equally well to treatment. CONCLUSIONS: Both MDFT and IP reduced the rate of externalising and internalising symptoms and improved family functioning among adolescents with a cannabis use disorder. MDFT outperformed IP in decreasing the rate of externalising symptoms. Contrary to common beliefs among therapists in parts of Western Europe, the 'coerced' adolescents did at least as well in treatment as the self-referred adolescents.MDFT shows promise as a treatment for both substance use disorders and externalising symptoms. TRIAL REGISTRATION ISRNCT: ISRCTN51014277.

Implementation fidelity of Multidimensional Family Therapy in an international trial.

Implementation fidelity, a critical aspect of clinical trials research that establishes adequate delivery of the treatment as prescribed in treatment manuals and protocols, is also essential to the successful implementation of effective programs into new practice settings. Although infrequently studied in the drug abuse field, stronger implementation fidelity has been linked to better outcomes in practice but appears to be more difficult to achieve with greater distance from model developers. In the INternational CAnnabis Need for Treatment (INCANT) multi-national randomized clinical trial, investigators tested the effectiveness of Multidimensional Family Therapy (MDFT) in comparison to individual psychotherapy (IP) in Brussels, Berlin, Paris, The Hague, and Geneva with 450 adolescents with a cannabis use disorder and their parents. This study reports on the implementation fidelity of MDFT across these five Western European sites in terms of treatment adherence, dose and program differentiation, and discusses possible implications for international implementation efforts.

Multidimensional family therapy lowers the rate of cannabis dependence in adolescents: a randomised controlled trial in Western European outpatient settings.

BACKGROUND: Noticing a lack of evidence-based programmes for treating adolescents heavily using cannabis in Europe, government representatives from Belgium, France, Germany, The Netherlands, and Switzerland decided to have U.S.-developed multidimensional family therapy (MDFT) tested in their countries in a trans-national trial, called the International Need for Cannabis Treatment (INCANT) study. METHODS: INCANT was a 2 (treatment condition)×5 (time) repeated measures intent-to-treat randomised effectiveness trial comparing MDFT to Individual Psychotherapy (IP). Data were gathered at baseline and 3, 6, 9 and 12 months thereafter. Study participants were recruited at outpatient secondary level addiction, youth, and forensic care clinics in Brussels, Berlin, Paris, The Hague, and Geneva. Participants were adolescents from 13 through 18 years of age with a recent cannabis use disorder. 85% were boys; 40% were of foreign descent. One-third had been arrested for a criminal offence in the past 3 months. Three primary outcomes were assessed: (1) treatment retention, (2) prevalence of cannabis use disorder and (3) 90-day frequency of cannabis consumption. RESULTS: Positive outcomes were found in both the MDFT and IP conditions. MDFT outperformed IP on the measures of treatment retention (p<0.001) and prevalence of cannabis dependence (p=0.015). MDFT reduced the number of cannabis consumption days more than IP in a subgroup of adolescents reporting more frequent cannabis use (p=0.002). CONCLUSIONS: Cannabis use disorder was responsive to treatment. MDFT exceeded IP in decreasing the prevalence of cannabis dependence. MDFT is applicable in Western European outpatient settings, and may show moderately greater benefits than IP in youth with more severe substance use.

Assessment of appropriateness of screening community-dwelling older people to prevent functional decline.

OBJECTIVES: To identify appropriate screening conditions, stratified according to age and vulnerability, to prevent functional decline in older people. DESIGN: A RAND/University of California at Los Angeles appropriateness method. SETTING: The Netherlands. PARTICIPANTS: A multidisciplinary panel of 11 experts. MEASUREMENTS: The panelists assessed the appropriateness of screening for 29 conditions mentioned in guidelines from four countries, stratified according to age (60-74, 75-84, ≥85) and health status (general, vital, and vulnerable) and received a literature overview for each condition, including the guidelines and up-to-date literature. After an individual rating round, panelists discussed disagreements and performed a second individual rating. The median of the second ratings defined the appropriateness of screening. RESULTS: The panel rated screening to be appropriate in three of the 29 conditions, indicating that screening was expected to prevent functional decline. Screening for insufficient physical activity was considered appropriate for all three age and health groups. Screening for cardiovascular risk factors and smoking was considered appropriate for the general and vital population aged 60 to 74. Of the 261 ratings, 63 (24%) were classified as uncertain, of which 42 (67%) concerned the vulnerable population. The panelists considered conditions inappropriate mainly because of lack of an adequate screening tool or lack of evidence of effective interventions for positive screened persons. CONCLUSION: The expert panel considered screening older people to prevent functional decline appropriate for insufficient physical activity and smoking and cardiovascular risk in specific groups. For other conditions, sufficient evidence does not support screening. Based on their experience, panelists expected benefit from developing tests and interventions, especially for vulnerable older people.

European youth care sites serve different populations of adolescents with cannabis use disorder. Baseline and referral data from the INCANT trial.

BACKGROUND: MDFT (Multidimensional Family Therapy) is a family based outpatient treatment programme for adolescent problem behaviour. MDFT has been found effective in the USA in adolescent samples differing in severity and treatment delivery settings. On request of five governments (Belgium, France, Germany, the Netherlands, and Switzerland), MDFT has now been tested in the joint INCANT trial (International Cannabis Need of Treatment) for applicability in Western Europe. In each of the five countries, study participants were recruited from the local population of youth seeking or guided to treatment for, among other things, cannabis use disorder. There is little information in the literature if these populations are comparable between sites/countries or not. Therefore, we examined if the study samples enrolled in the five countries differed in baseline characteristics regarding demographics, clinical profile, and treatment delivery setting. METHODS: INCANT was a multicentre phase III(b) randomized controlled trial with an open-label, parallel group design. It compared MDFT with treatment as usual (TAU) at and across sites in Berlin, Brussels, Geneva, The Hague and Paris.Participants of INCANT were adolescents of either sex, from 13 through 18 years of age, with a cannabis use disorder (dependence or abuse), and at least one parent willing to take part in the treatment. In total, 450 cases/families were randomized (concealed) into INCANT. RESULTS: We collected data about adolescent and family demographics (age, gender, family composition, school, work, friends, and leisure time). In addition, we gathered data about problem behaviour (substance use, alcohol and cannabis use disorders, delinquency, psychiatric co-morbidity).There were no major differences on any of these measures between the treatment conditions (MDFT and TAU) for any of the sites. However, there were cross-site differences on many variables. Most of these could be explained by variations in treatment culture, as reflected by referral policy, i.e., participants' referral source. We distinguished 'self-determined' referral (common in Brussels and Paris) and referral with some authority-related 'external' coercion (common in Geneva and The Hague). The two referral types were more equally divided in Berlin. Many cross-site baseline differences disappeared when we took referral source into account, but not all. CONCLUSIONS: A multisite trial has the advantage of being efficient, but it also carries risks, the most important one being lack of equivalence between local study populations. Our site populations differed in many respects. This is not a problem for analyses and interpretations if the differences somehow can be accounted for. To a major extent, this appeared possible in INCANT. The most important factor underlying the cross-site variations in baseline characteristics was referral source. Correcting for referral source made most differences disappear. Therefore, we will use referral source as a covariate accounting for site differences in future INCANT outcome analyses. TRIAL REGISTRATION NUMBER: ISRCTN: ISRCTN51014277.

INCANT: a transnational randomized trial of multidimensional family therapy versus treatment as usual for adolescents with cannabis use disorder.

BACKGROUND: In 2003, the governments of Belgium, France, Germany, the Netherlands and Switzerland agreed that there was a need in Europe for a treatment programme for adolescents with cannabis use disorders and other behavioural problems. Based on an exhaustive literature review of evidence-based treatments and an international experts meeting, Multidimensional Family Therapy (MDFT) was selected for a pilot study first, which was successful, and then for a joint, transnational randomized controlled trial named INCANT (INternational CAnnabis Need for Treatment). METHODS/DESIGN: INCANT is a randomized controlled trial (RCT) with an open-label, parallel group design. This study compares MDFT with treatment as usual (TAU) at and across sites in Brussels, Berlin, Paris, The Hague and Geneva. Assessments are at baseline and at 3, 6, 9 and 12 months after randomization. A minimum of 450 cases in total is required; sites will recruit 60 cases each in Belgium and Switzerland, and a maximum of 120 each in France, Germany and the Netherlands.Eligible for INCANT are adolescents from 13 through 18 years of age with a cannabis use disorder (dependence or abuse), with at least one parent willing to take part in the treatment. Randomization is concealed to, and therefore beyond control by, the researcher/site requesting it. Randomization is stratified as to gender, age and level of cannabis consumption.Assessments focus on substance use; mental function; behavioural problems; and functioning regarding family, school, peers and leisure time.For outcome analyses, the study will use state of the art latent growth curve modelling techniques, including all randomized participants according to the intention-to-treat principle.INCANT has been approved by the appropriate ethical boards in Belgium, France, Germany, the Netherlands, Switzerland, and the University of Miami Miller School of Medicine. INCANT is funded by the (federal) Ministries of Health of Belgium, Germany, the Netherlands, Switzerland, and by MILDT: the Mission Interministerielle de Lutte Contra la Drogue et de Toximanie, France. DISCUSSION: Until recently, cannabis use disorders in adolescents were not viewed in Europe as requiring treatment, and the co-occurrence of such disorders with other mental and behavioural problems was underestimated. This has changed now.Initially, there was doubt that a RCT would be feasible in treatment sectors and countries with no experience in this type of study. INCANT has proven that such doubts are unjustified. Governments and treatment sites from the five participating countries agreed on a sound study protocol, and the INCANT trial is now underway as planned. TRIAL REGISTRATION: ISRCTN51014277.

What drug policies cost: drug policy spending in the Netherlands in 2003.

AIM: To estimate the public spending on drug policy in the Netherlands. METHODS: Calculation and extrapolation of expenditures from 2003 budgets of all Ministries of the national government, annual reports from other governments and agencies and White Papers, supported by interviews with and information obtained otherwise from policy makers. Expenditures were allocated to four drug policy functions, i.e. prevention, treatment, harm reduction and enforcement. Where exact data on expenditures were lacking, approximations were made representing expert judgement. RESULTS: The total drug policy spending estimate in 2003 was 2,185 million Euros. Allocation to functions amounted to 42 million Euros for prevention, 278 million for treatment, 220 million for harm reduction and 1,646 million for enforcement. CONCLUSIONS: Drug law enforcement is clearly the dominant expenditure. This can be said with certainty despite the noted pitfalls in estimating drug policy expenditures. Many of the available data are not precise. To achieve better figures, a much more detailed analysis would be needed (which is not planned for the foreseeable future). Even then, it would be hard to separate the drug component from more general budgets.

Long-term follow-up after invasive approach of coronary artery disease in daily practice.

BACKGROUND: To assess long-term survival in unselected patients with coronary artery disease in who an invasive approach is considered. METHODS: All patients with significant coronary artery disease who were presented for coronary revascularisation to two tertiary centres in 1992 were included. Follow-up data were collected in September 2002. Multivariate Cox' proportional-hazards regression analysis was applied to assess the independent relation between variables and 10-year survival. RESULTS: A total of 877 patients were included in this analysis. Mean age was 62 and the most common clinical diagnosis was chronic stable angina (60%). Diabetes was present in 12% of the patients. During the follow-up period, 233 patients (27%) died. Predictors of long-term survival were increasing age, diabetes, peripheral vascular disease and a decreased left ventricular function. Compared to medical treated patients, those treated with revascularisation (either by PCI or CABG) had a decreased long-term mortality (p<0.05). Of the patients with PCI 27% had died, compared to 24% in those who had CABG and 36% of those who were treated medically. However, after adjusting for differences in baseline variables, conservative treatment was no significant predictor of long-term mortality. After multivariable analyses, increasing age, decreased left ventricular function and diabetes were independent predictors of long-term mortality. CONCLUSIONS: In patients with coronary artery disease in whom an invasive approach is considered, increasing age, impaired left ventricular function and diabetes are the strongest predictors of long-term mortality. After adjustments for differences in baseline variables, invasive treatment is not associated with a lower long-term mortality.

Appropriateness of coronary revascularization for patients with chronic stable angina or following an acute myocardial infarction: multinational versus Dutch criteria.

OBJECTIVE: We convened a multinational panel to develop appropriateness criteria for percutaneous transluminal coronary angioplasty (PTCA) and coronary artery bypass graft (CABG). To assess the applicability of these criteria, we applied them to patients referred for coronary revascularization. Finally, to understand how multinational criteria may differ from criteria developed by a panel of physicians from one country, we compared the appropriateness ratings using the multinational panel's criteria and those made using similar criteria previously developed by a panel of Dutch physicians. METHODS: We conducted a prospective survey and review of the medical records of 2363 consecutive patients presenting with chronic stable angina or following a myocardial infarction who were referred for PTCA (n=1137) or CABG (n= 1226) at ten Dutch hospitals performing coronary revascularization. Appropriateness was measured using two sets of criteria developed by: (1) a Dutch panel of cardiologists and cardiothoracic surgeons in 1991; and (2) a similarly composed European panel in 1998. RESULTS: More PTCA referrals were rated inappropriate by Dutch criteria compared with multinational criteria among both patients with chronic stable angina (34.8 versus 6.1%; P< 0.001) and those with a recent myocardial infarction (28.1 versus 0.9%; P< 0.001). Among those patients referred for bypass surgery, the Dutch criteria judged a greater proportion of cases inappropriate than multinational criteria did for patients with chronic stable angina (3.7 versus 1.5%, P< 0.001). The proportion of cases rated inappropriate for bypass surgery among patients following a myocardial infarction was similar between the two panels (3.9 versus 2.4%, respectively; P=0.40). After reclassifying the data for two of the clinical factors used in the appropriateness criteria (lesion morphology and intensity of medical therapy) based on evidence that appeared in the literature after the Dutch panel met, we found no significant differences between the Dutch and multinational panels' appropriateness ratings. CONCLUSIONS: While fewer cases were judged inappropriate using the multinational criteria compared with the Dutch criteria, the differences in ratings were related primarily to the clinical factors used by each panel. These findings support the review of appropriateness criteria, and other forms of clinical guidelines, to ensure that they are current with the clinical evidence before using them to assess clinical care. Developing such criteria using a multinational panel, in contrast to multiple single country panels, would be a more efficient use of resources.

Euthanasia in the Netherlands: distinguishing facts from fiction.

KIE: Doctors practicing euthanasia in the Netherlands do so in violation of the law; however, they will not be prosecuted if they appear to have followed strict guidelines handed down by the Dutch judicial system. These guidelines require that there be an explicit and repeated request by the patient that leaves no doubt about the desire to die; that the mental or physical suffering of the patient be very severe with no prospect of relief; that all options for other care have been exhausted; that the patient's decision be well-informed; and that the doctor consult another physician. Institutional euthanasia protocols incorporating the above guidelines and the extent of euthanasia in the Netherlands are mentioned, and misconceptions of foreign commentators about the role of economic motives and inferior terminal care are refuted.^ieng