[处理协助自杀--德国姑息医学协会成员的知识、态度和经验]。

IF 1.7 4区 医学 Q3 PUBLIC, ENVIRONMENTAL & OCCUPATIONAL HEALTH
Jacqueline Schwartz, Yann-Nicolas Batzler, Manuela Schallenburger, Alexandra Scherg, Jonas Jansen, Stefan Meier, Remo Küppers, Heiner Melching, Ulrich Grabenhorst, Wiebke Nehls, Claudia Bausewein, Martin Neukirchen
{"title":"[处理协助自杀--德国姑息医学协会成员的知识、态度和经验]。","authors":"Jacqueline Schwartz, Yann-Nicolas Batzler, Manuela Schallenburger, Alexandra Scherg, Jonas Jansen, Stefan Meier, Remo Küppers, Heiner Melching, Ulrich Grabenhorst, Wiebke Nehls, Claudia Bausewein, Martin Neukirchen","doi":"10.1007/s00103-024-03960-z","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><strong>Background: </strong>In February 2020, the Federal Constitutional Court declared § 217 of the German Criminal Code void. Ever since, assisted suicide services have been legal in Germany. This study aims to describe the knowledge, attitudes and experiences of members of the German Association for Palliative Medicine (DGP) regarding assisted suicide.</p><p><strong>Methods: </strong>Online survey with members of the DGP from July to September 2023 using Qualtrics®. The study group developed the questionnaire based on current literature; it was adapted following an initial application among young physicians and an interprofessional panel of experts with consensus voting. Data was analysed using descriptive and explorative statistics.</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>991 DGP-members (18%) participated, of which physicians made up 57.0% (n = 545/957) and nurses 23.4% (n = 224/957). Of the participants, 197/851 (23.1%) incorrectly stated that assisted suicide is prohibited by professional code, 430/914 (47.1%) rejected a restriction of palliative care teams to suicide prevention measures, and 766/930 (82.4%) rejected personal involvement in assisted suicide regardless of a patient's health status. For patients in palliative situations, 473/926 (51.1%) could imagine participating in assisted suicide, and 71% wanted new legislation regulating assisted suicide.</p><p><strong>Conclusion: </strong>There are gaps in the knowledge of the participating members of the DGP regarding the legal and professional status of assisted suicide. Further educational work is needed in this regard. The participants can more easily imagine assisted suicide for people in palliative disease trajectories. As in surveys of members of other medical societies, the attitudes of more experienced staff are reflected. Compared to younger healthcare professionals, they have a more restrictive attitude towards the concept of assisted suicide.</p>","PeriodicalId":9562,"journal":{"name":"Bundesgesundheitsblatt, Gesundheitsforschung, Gesundheitsschutz","volume":" ","pages":"141-149"},"PeriodicalIF":1.7000,"publicationDate":"2025-02-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"[Dealing with assisted suicide-knowledge, attitudes and experiences of members of the German Association for Palliative Medicine].\",\"authors\":\"Jacqueline Schwartz, Yann-Nicolas Batzler, Manuela Schallenburger, Alexandra Scherg, Jonas Jansen, Stefan Meier, Remo Küppers, Heiner Melching, Ulrich Grabenhorst, Wiebke Nehls, Claudia Bausewein, Martin Neukirchen\",\"doi\":\"10.1007/s00103-024-03960-z\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"<p><strong>Background: </strong>In February 2020, the Federal Constitutional Court declared § 217 of the German Criminal Code void. Ever since, assisted suicide services have been legal in Germany. This study aims to describe the knowledge, attitudes and experiences of members of the German Association for Palliative Medicine (DGP) regarding assisted suicide.</p><p><strong>Methods: </strong>Online survey with members of the DGP from July to September 2023 using Qualtrics®. The study group developed the questionnaire based on current literature; it was adapted following an initial application among young physicians and an interprofessional panel of experts with consensus voting. Data was analysed using descriptive and explorative statistics.</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>991 DGP-members (18%) participated, of which physicians made up 57.0% (n = 545/957) and nurses 23.4% (n = 224/957). Of the participants, 197/851 (23.1%) incorrectly stated that assisted suicide is prohibited by professional code, 430/914 (47.1%) rejected a restriction of palliative care teams to suicide prevention measures, and 766/930 (82.4%) rejected personal involvement in assisted suicide regardless of a patient's health status. For patients in palliative situations, 473/926 (51.1%) could imagine participating in assisted suicide, and 71% wanted new legislation regulating assisted suicide.</p><p><strong>Conclusion: </strong>There are gaps in the knowledge of the participating members of the DGP regarding the legal and professional status of assisted suicide. Further educational work is needed in this regard. The participants can more easily imagine assisted suicide for people in palliative disease trajectories. As in surveys of members of other medical societies, the attitudes of more experienced staff are reflected. Compared to younger healthcare professionals, they have a more restrictive attitude towards the concept of assisted suicide.</p>\",\"PeriodicalId\":9562,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"Bundesgesundheitsblatt, Gesundheitsforschung, Gesundheitsschutz\",\"volume\":\" \",\"pages\":\"141-149\"},\"PeriodicalIF\":1.7000,\"publicationDate\":\"2025-02-01\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"\",\"citationCount\":\"0\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"Bundesgesundheitsblatt, Gesundheitsforschung, Gesundheitsschutz\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"3\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.1007/s00103-024-03960-z\",\"RegionNum\":4,\"RegionCategory\":\"医学\",\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"2024/10/7 0:00:00\",\"PubModel\":\"Epub\",\"JCR\":\"Q3\",\"JCRName\":\"PUBLIC, ENVIRONMENTAL & OCCUPATIONAL HEALTH\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Bundesgesundheitsblatt, Gesundheitsforschung, Gesundheitsschutz","FirstCategoryId":"3","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1007/s00103-024-03960-z","RegionNum":4,"RegionCategory":"医学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"2024/10/7 0:00:00","PubModel":"Epub","JCR":"Q3","JCRName":"PUBLIC, ENVIRONMENTAL & OCCUPATIONAL HEALTH","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

摘要

背景:2020 年 2 月,联邦宪法法院宣布《德国刑法典》第 217 条无效。自此,协助自杀服务在德国合法化。本研究旨在描述德国姑息医学协会(DGP)成员对协助自杀的认识、态度和经验:2023年7月至9月,使用Qualtrics®对DGP成员进行在线调查。研究小组在现有文献的基础上编制了调查问卷;在青年医师和跨专业专家小组中进行了初步应用,并通过协商一致的投票对问卷进行了调整。数据采用描述性和探索性统计方法进行分析:991名DGP成员(18%)参加了调查,其中医生占57.0%(n=545/957),护士占23.4%(n=224/957)。在参与者中,197/851(23.1%)人错误地指出专业守则禁止协助自杀,430/914(47.1%)人反对姑息关怀团队仅限于采取自杀预防措施,766/930(82.4%)人反对个人参与协助自杀,无论患者的健康状况如何。对于处于姑息治疗状态的病人,473/926(51.1%)的人可以想象参与协助自杀,71%的人希望制定新的法律来规范协助自杀:参与调查的 DGP 成员对协助自杀的法律和专业地位的认识还存在差距。在这方面需要进一步开展教育工作。参与者可以更容易地想象处于姑息治疗疾病轨迹中的人的协助自杀。与对其他医学协会成员的调查一样,经验丰富的工作人员的态度也得到了反映。与年轻的医护人员相比,他们对协助自杀的概念持更严格的态度。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
[Dealing with assisted suicide-knowledge, attitudes and experiences of members of the German Association for Palliative Medicine].

Background: In February 2020, the Federal Constitutional Court declared § 217 of the German Criminal Code void. Ever since, assisted suicide services have been legal in Germany. This study aims to describe the knowledge, attitudes and experiences of members of the German Association for Palliative Medicine (DGP) regarding assisted suicide.

Methods: Online survey with members of the DGP from July to September 2023 using Qualtrics®. The study group developed the questionnaire based on current literature; it was adapted following an initial application among young physicians and an interprofessional panel of experts with consensus voting. Data was analysed using descriptive and explorative statistics.

Results: 991 DGP-members (18%) participated, of which physicians made up 57.0% (n = 545/957) and nurses 23.4% (n = 224/957). Of the participants, 197/851 (23.1%) incorrectly stated that assisted suicide is prohibited by professional code, 430/914 (47.1%) rejected a restriction of palliative care teams to suicide prevention measures, and 766/930 (82.4%) rejected personal involvement in assisted suicide regardless of a patient's health status. For patients in palliative situations, 473/926 (51.1%) could imagine participating in assisted suicide, and 71% wanted new legislation regulating assisted suicide.

Conclusion: There are gaps in the knowledge of the participating members of the DGP regarding the legal and professional status of assisted suicide. Further educational work is needed in this regard. The participants can more easily imagine assisted suicide for people in palliative disease trajectories. As in surveys of members of other medical societies, the attitudes of more experienced staff are reflected. Compared to younger healthcare professionals, they have a more restrictive attitude towards the concept of assisted suicide.

求助全文
通过发布文献求助,成功后即可免费获取论文全文。 去求助
来源期刊
Bundesgesundheitsblatt, Gesundheitsforschung, Gesundheitsschutz
Bundesgesundheitsblatt, Gesundheitsforschung, Gesundheitsschutz 医学-公共卫生、环境卫生与职业卫生
CiteScore
3.30
自引率
5.90%
发文量
145
审稿时长
3-8 weeks
期刊介绍: Die Monatszeitschrift Bundesgesundheitsblatt - Gesundheitsforschung - Gesundheitsschutz - umfasst alle Fragestellungen und Bereiche, mit denen sich das öffentliche Gesundheitswesen und die staatliche Gesundheitspolitik auseinandersetzen. Ziel ist es, zum einen über wesentliche Entwicklungen in der biologisch-medizinischen Grundlagenforschung auf dem Laufenden zu halten und zum anderen über konkrete Maßnahmen zum Gesundheitsschutz, über Konzepte der Prävention, Risikoabwehr und Gesundheitsförderung zu informieren. Wichtige Themengebiete sind die Epidemiologie übertragbarer und nicht übertragbarer Krankheiten, der umweltbezogene Gesundheitsschutz sowie gesundheitsökonomische, medizinethische und -rechtliche Fragestellungen.
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
确定
请完成安全验证×
copy
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
右上角分享
点击右上角分享
0
联系我们:info@booksci.cn Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。 Copyright © 2023 布克学术 All rights reserved.
京ICP备2023020795号-1
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术官方微信