4.6 Article

Prevalence and characteristics of patients in a vegetative state in Dutch nursing homes

Journal

JOURNAL OF NEUROLOGY NEUROSURGERY AND PSYCHIATRY
Volume 76, Issue 10, Pages 1420-1424

Publisher

B M J PUBLISHING GROUP
DOI: 10.1136/jnnp.2004.058198

Keywords

-

Ask authors/readers for more resources

Objectives: To establish the prevalence of vegetative state in Dutch nursing homes, describe the patient characteristics, and highlight the possible influence of medical decisions at the end of life. Design: A cross-sectional survey. The vegetative state was defined according to the Multi Society Task Force on PVS. All Dutch nursing homes were approached to provide data on patients in a vegetative state. In cases of doubt, the researcher discussed the diagnosis with the patient's physician and, if necessary, examined the patient. Information on patients in a vegetative state in care between 2000 and September 2003 and end of life decisions for them were also recorded. Results: All nursing homes and physicians participated. After assessment of 12 doubtful patients, 32 met the criteria of vegetative state lasting longer than one month, a prevalence of 2/1 000 000. Of these, 30 patients' data were analysed: age 9 - 90 years; 73% female; duration of vegetative state 2 months - 20 years ( 26 surviving >1 year, 13>5 years). Stroke was the commonest cause. Between 2000 and September 2003, there were 76 patients in a vegetative state in care of whom 34 died of complications and nine after withdrawal of artificial nutrition and hydration. Conclusions: The prevalence of vegetative state in Dutch nursing homes has been established for the first time. The figures are lower than suggested in the literature. The study included a heterogeneous group of patients, of which a substantial number survived for many years. The results cannot be explained by a policy of systematically withdrawing artificial nutrition and hydration.

Authors

I am an author on this paper
Click your name to claim this paper and add it to your profile.

Reviews

Primary Rating

4.6
Not enough ratings

Secondary Ratings

Novelty
-
Significance
-
Scientific rigor
-
Rate this paper

Recommended

No Data Available
No Data Available