Search

Cancer end-of-life care (EoLC) policies assume people want to die at home. We aimed to examine variations in preferences for place of death cross-nationally. A telephone survey of a random sample of individuals aged >= 16 in England, Flanders, Germany, Italy, the Netherlands, Portugal and Spain. We determined where people would prefer to die if they had a serious illness such as advanced cancer, facilitating circumstances, personal values and experiences of illness, death and dying. Of 9344 participants, between 51% (95% CI: 48% to 54%) in Portugal and 84% (95% CI: 82% to 86%) in the Netherlands would prefer to die at home. Cross-national analysis found there to be an influence of circumstances and values but not of experiences of illness, death and dying. Four factors were associated with a preference for home death in more than one country: younger age up to 70+ (Germany, the Netherlands, Portugal, Spain), increased importance of dying in the preferred place (England, Germany, Portugal, Spain), prioritizing keeping a positive attitude (Germany, Spain) and wanting to involve family in decisions if incapable (Flanders, Portugal). At least two-thirds of people prefer a home death in all but one country studied. The strong association with personal values suggests keeping home care at the heart of cancer EoLC.

Background: The Council of Europe has recommended that member states of European Union encourage their citizens to make decisions about their healthcare before they lose capacity to do so. However, it is unclear whether the public wants to make such decisions beforehand. Aim: To examine public preferences for self-involvement in end-of-life care decision-making and identify associated factors. Design: A population-based survey with 9344 adults in England, Belgium, Germany, Italy, the Netherlands, Portugal and Spain. Results: Across countries, 74% preferred self-involvement when capable; 44% preferred self-involvement when incapable through, for example, a living will. Four factors were associated with a preference for self-involvement across capacity and incapacity scenarios, respectively: higher educational attainment ((odds ratio = 1.93–2.77), (odds ratio = 1.33–1.80)); female gender ((odds ratio = 1.27, 95% confidence interval = 1.14–1.41), (odds ratio = 1.30, 95% confidence interval = 1.20–1.42)); younger-middle age ((30–59 years: odds ratio = 1.24–1.40), (50–59 years: odds ratio = 1.23, 95% confidence interval = 1.04–1.46)) and valuing quality over quantity of life or valuing both equally ((odds ratio = 1.49–1.58), (odds ratio = 1.35–1.53)). Those with increased financial hardship (odds ratio = 0.64–0.83) and a preference to die in hospital (not a palliative care unit) (odds ratio = 0.73, 95% confidence interval = 0.60–0.88), a nursing home or residential care (odds ratio = 0.73, 95% confidence interval = 0.54–0.99) were less likely to prefer self-involvement when capable. For the incapacity scenario, single people were more likely to prefer self-involvement (odds ratio = 1.34, 95% confidence interval = 1.18–1.53). Conclusions: Self-involvement in decision-making is important to the European public. However, a large proportion of the public prefer to not make decisions about their care in advance of incapacity. Financial hardship, educational attainment, age, and preferences regarding quality and quantity of life require further examination; these factors should be considered in relation to policy.

Although national findings regarding people's end-of-life care (EoLC) preferences and priorities are available within Europe, a lack of research coordination between countries has meant that cross-national understandings of EoLC remain unknown.To (1) identify English and German understandings of EoLC within the context of an EoLC survey, and (2) to synthesise these understandings to aid interpretation of results from a cross-national survey.An inductive and interpretive two-phased sequential design involving (1) qualitative analysis of cognitive interview data from 15 English and 15 German respondents to develop country-related categories, and (2) qualitative synthesis to identify a conceptually coherent understanding of EoLC.Open and axial coding resulted in six English and six German categories. Commonalities included (a) the importance of social and relational dimensions, (b) dynamic decision making comprising uncertainty, (c) a valuing of life's quality and quantity, and (d) expectations for holistic care involving autonomy, choice, and timely information from trusted professionals. Differences involved attention to practical matters, and thoughts about prolongation of life, preferred place of death, and the role of media and context. Synthesis resulted in four concepts with underlying coherence: expectations of a high standard of EoLC involving autonomy, choice, and context; evolving decision making amid anticipated change; thoughts about living and existing; and worldviews shaping EoLC preferences in real and hypothetical scenarios.Individual and country-related diversity must be remembered when quantifying EoLC understandings. Inductive-interpretive analysis of cognitive interview data aids interpretation of survey findings. Cross-national research coordination and qualitative synthesis assists EoLC in Europe.