| 1. |
- De Carvalho, Mamede, et al.
(författare)
-
International Survey of ALS Experts about Critical Questions for Assessing Patients with ALS
- 2017
-
Ingår i: Amyotrophic Lateral Sclerosis and Frontotemporal Degeneration. - : Taylor & Francis. - 2167-8421 .- 2167-9223. ; 18:7-8, s. 505-510
-
Tidskriftsartikel (refereegranskat)abstract
- Objective: To define an applicable dataset for ALS patient registries we weighted specific clinical items as scored by worldwide ALS experts.Methods: Sixty participants were invited based on relevant clinical work, publications and personal acquaintance. They rated 160 clinical items consensually agreed by the members of our project, incorporating specialists from five European Centres. Scoring scheme was defined as: 1 - essential; 2 - important; 3 - not very important. A mixed effect model was applied to rank items and to find possible correlations with geographical region (Europe vs. outside Europe).Results: We received 40 responses, 20 from Europe and 20 from outside; 42/160 data were scored as essential by >50% of the respondents, including: date of birth, gender, date of disease onset, date of diagnosis, ethnicity, region of onset, predominant upper neuron (UMN) or lower motor neuron (LMN) impairment, proximal versus distal weakness, respiratory symptoms, dysarthria, weight loss, signs of LMN/UMN involvement, emotional incontinence, cognitive changes, respiratory signs, neck weakness, body mass index, ALSFRS-R at entry, ALSFRS-R subscores at entry, timing and pattern of spreading and staging, electromyography, spirometry, MRI, CK level, riluzole intake, genetic background, history of physical exercise and previous and current main occupation. Four components were scored as non-relevant, including place of birth, blood pressure and pain at onset. There was no significant difference between regions (European vs. non-European countries).Conclusions: Our study identified a consensual set of clinical data with 42 specific items that can be used as a minimal data set for patient registers and for clinical trials.
|
|
| 2. |
- Weber, Christian, et al.
(författare)
-
Existential decision-making in a fatal progressive disease : how much do legal and medical frameworks matter?
- 2017
-
Ingår i: BMC Palliative Care. - : Springer Science and Business Media LLC. - 1472-684X. ; 16
-
Tidskriftsartikel (refereegranskat)abstract
- Background: Healthcare legislation in European countries is similar in many respects. Most importantly, the framework of informed consent determines that physicians have the duty to provide detailed information about available therapeutic options and that patients have the right to refuse measures that contradict their personal values. However, when it comes to end-of-life decision-making a number of differences exist in the more specific regulations of individual countries. These differences and how they might nevertheless impact patient’s choices will be addressed in the current debate.Main text: In this article we show how the legal and medical frameworks of Germany, Poland and Sweden differ with regard to end-of-life decisions for patients with a fatal progressive disease. Taking Amyotrophic Lateral Sclerosis (ALS) as an example, we systematically compare clinical guidelines and healthcare law, pointing out the country-specific differences most relevant for existential decision-making. A fictional case report discusses the implications of these differences for a patient with ALS living in either of the three countries. Patients with ALS in Germany, Poland and Sweden are confronted with a similar spectrum of treatment options. However, the analysis of the normative frameworks shows that the conditions for making existential decisions differ considerably in Germany, Poland and Sweden. Specifically, these differences concern (1) the legal status of advance directives, (2) the conditions under which life-sustaining therapies are started or withheld, and (3) the legal regulations on assisted dying.Conclusion: According to the presented data, regulations of terminating life-sustaining treatments and the framework of “informed consent” are quite differently understood and implemented in the legal setting of the three countries. It is possible, and even likely, that these differences in the legal and medical frameworks have a considerable influence on existential decisions of patients with ALS.
|
|
