Search

Strategies to increase appropriateness of EoL care, such as shared decision making (SDM), and advance care planning (ACP) are internationally embraced, especially since the COVID-19 pandemic. However, individuals preferences regarding EoL care may differ internationally. Current literature lacks insight in how preferences in EoL care differ between countries and continents. This study's aim is to compare Dutch and Japanese general publics attitudes and preferences toward EoL care, and EoL decisions. Methods: a cross-sectional survey design was chosen. The survey was held among samples of the Dutch and Japanese general public, using a Nationwide social research panel of 220.000 registrants in the Netherlands and 1.200.000 in Japan. A quota sampling was done (age, gender, and living area). N = 1.040 in each country.More Japanese than Dutch citizens tend to avoid thinking in advance about future situations of dependence (26.0% vs 9.4%; P = .000); say they would feel themselves a burden for relatives if they would become dependent in their last phase of life (79.3% vs 47.8%; P = .000); and choose the hospital as their preferred place of death (19.4% vs 3.6% P = .000). More Dutch than Japanese people say they would be happy with a proactive approach of their doctor regarding EoL issues (78.0% vs 65.1% JPN; P = .000).Preferences in EoL care substantially differ between the Netherlands and Japan. These differences should be taken into account a) when interpreting geographical variation in EoL care, and b) if strategies such as SDM or ACP - are considered. Such strategies will fail if an international "one size fits all" approach would be followed.

The accumulated healthcare performance data related to unwarranted practice variations are not necessarily disseminated to patients and citizens. To clarify the needs for public disclosure, we explored Japanese and Dutch citizens' preferences and values towards information disclosure and healthcare disparity.Online opt-in survey was conducted and we asked citizens their preference to know about the healthcare performance indicators of regions and hospitals, and their attitudes towards healthcare equity. After a descriptive statistical analysis, Chi-squared automatic interaction detection tree analysis was performed to explore the socio-demographic determinants which were associated with positive value for information disclosure and healthcare equity. Then, we compared the combination of attributes of the highest and the lowest subgroups of each country and compared within and between countries. Last, logistic regression analysis was performed to further evaluate the impact of each determinant.Significant differences were observed between the 2 countries (Japan [JPN] 1038; Netherlands [NL] 1040). The crucial attributes identified were age, sex, educational background, and living area (JPN), along with age and sex (NL). Japanese comprised multiple subgroups with heterogeneous values, showed relatively low interest in knowing the information, and seemed to accept healthcare inequality, especially among urban males aged 20 to 59 years. Contrarily, Dutch people mostly showed high interest in both items. Female and older respondents valued information disclosure highly across countries.To share healthcare performance knowledge and empowering the public, historical, cultural, and socio-demographic context including health literacy of citizens' subgroups should be considered in making comprehensive public reports.