Jump to comment:

• Letter of Critique - The impact of healthcare professionals’ personality and religious beliefs on the decisions to forego life sustaining treatments: an observational, multicentre, cross-sectional study in Greek intensive care units
  Davia Douglas
  Published on: 28 November 2022
• Letter of Critique - The impact of healthcare professionals’ personality and religious beliefs on the decisions to forego life sustaining treatments: an observational, multicentre, cross-sectional study in Greek intensive care units
  Terry Campbell
  Published on: 23 November 2022
• Re: The impact of healthcare professionals’ personality and religious beliefs on the decisions to forego life sustaining treatments: an observational, multicentre, cross-sectional study in Greek intensive care units
  Adria Knowles, Dr. Terry Campbell
  Published on: 11 December 2020

• Published on: 28 November 2022

  Letter of Critique - The impact of healthcare professionals’ personality and religious beliefs on the decisions to forego life sustaining treatments: an observational, multicentre, cross-sectional study in Greek intensive care units

  • Davia Douglas, Nursing Student University of the Bahamas

  Dear Editor,

  This statement is in reaction to the article that was previously published on July 21, 2017. I would like to bring to the attention towards Ntantana et al. (2017) article titled “The impact of healthcare professionals’ personality and religious beliefs on the decisions to forego life-sustaining treatments: An observational, multicenter, cross-sectional study in Greek Intensive Care Unit.”
  First, I want to thank the authors for their hard work on a study that provides valuable insights into the variables influencing medical practitioners' choices not to administer life-saving measures. Their results indicated that fears of legal consequences resulted in negative attitudes towards preceding life-sustaining treatment. In addition, the results showed that religious beliefs were associated with the decision to withhold life-saving intervention. Second, I wanted to point out some things that you could improve. This was a cross-sectional study, meaning the authors collected the data over time. However, there could have been changes throughout the study. Also, this study did not consider any personal views of the patient.

  The authors can consider several factors that might have improved their study results. The first factor has a control group. The control group would have involved participants who were not asked questions about religion and ethics when caring for terminally ill patients. Kesmodel (2018) depicts that authors exercise caution...

  Show More

  Dear Editor,

  This statement is in reaction to the article that was previously published on July 21, 2017. I would like to bring to the attention towards Ntantana et al. (2017) article titled “The impact of healthcare professionals’ personality and religious beliefs on the decisions to forego life-sustaining treatments: An observational, multicenter, cross-sectional study in Greek Intensive Care Unit.”
  First, I want to thank the authors for their hard work on a study that provides valuable insights into the variables influencing medical practitioners' choices not to administer life-saving measures. Their results indicated that fears of legal consequences resulted in negative attitudes towards preceding life-sustaining treatment. In addition, the results showed that religious beliefs were associated with the decision to withhold life-saving intervention. Second, I wanted to point out some things that you could improve. This was a cross-sectional study, meaning the authors collected the data over time. However, there could have been changes throughout the study. Also, this study did not consider any personal views of the patient.

  The authors can consider several factors that might have improved their study results. The first factor has a control group. The control group would have involved participants who were not asked questions about religion and ethics when caring for terminally ill patients. Kesmodel (2018) depicts that authors exercise caution when concluding causes unless they can safely assume that the exposure is constant over time and is unaffected by actually experiencing the result. However, this article did not apply this principle to reduce informational bias since the participant’s religious beliefs varied over the study period. In addition, patient views on religion and ethics can also influence the cause of religion and withholding of critical care service. Kesmodel (2018) depicts that authors don’t need to conclude cause-effect relations in this cross-sectional study.

  It is important to understand that the intent of this paper is not to criticize the work of current researchers but rather to improve the quality of research being done today. To achieve this goal, it is necessary first to understand the shortcomings of current research methods. We can only develop new and improved methods to achieve better results.

   
  References
  Kesmodel, U. S. (2018). Cross-sectional studies - what are they good for? Acta Obstetricia Et Gynecologica Scandinavica, 97(4), 388–393. https://doi.org/10.1111/aogs.13331

  Kesmodel, U. S. (2018). Information bias in epidemiological studies with a special focus on obstetrics and gynecology. Acta Obstetricia Et Gynecologica Scandinavica, 97(4), 417–423. https://doi.org/10.1111/aogs.13330

  Ntantana, A., Matamis, D., Savvidou, S., Marmanidou, K., Giannakou, M., Gouva, Μ., Nakos, G., & Koulouras, V. (2017). The impact of healthcare professionals’ personality and religious beliefs on the decisions to forego life-sustaining treatments: An observational, multicentre, cross-sectional study in Greek Intensive Care Units. BMJ Open, 7(7), 1–11. https://doi.org/10.1136/bmjopen-2016-013916

  Show Less

  Conflict of Interest:
  Conflict of interest
  None Declared

  • Back to top
• Published on: 23 November 2022

  Letter of Critique - The impact of healthcare professionals’ personality and religious beliefs on the decisions to forego life sustaining treatments: an observational, multicentre, cross-sectional study in Greek intensive care units

  • Terry Campbell, Lecturer University of The Bahamas

  This statement is in reaction to the article that was previously published on July 21, 2017. The article's emphasis on religious aspects of healthcare professionals' personalities made it quite interesting. I learned from reading this study that a professional's personal beliefs affect whether they are in favor of or opposed to euthanasia. Moreover, the main obstacle that prevents medical practitioners from making end-of-life decisions.
  The report speaks to the healthcare provider's worry about lawsuit or prosecutions, although the patient's family was not informed of the diagnosis. Even though healthcare workers are aware of many ethical guidelines, it is problematic when they fail to inform the patient's family. The study also discusses the role that religion may have in deciding whether euthanasia is morally acceptable.
  Euthanasia is therefore prohibited in The Bahamas. This is because euthanasia is sinful in God's eyes, according to the majority-Christian nation of The Bahamas. Because of that palliative care is prioritized for those who are terminally ill but do not have access to euthanasia. Sharp (2019) made similar observations in relation to the study's conclusion about religion, stating that religion has a significant impact on the choice regarding whether to suspend or discontinue life-sustaining measures.
  In a study by Inghelbrecht et. al., (2009), Compared to non-religious nurses, religious nursing staf...

  Show More

  This statement is in reaction to the article that was previously published on July 21, 2017. The article's emphasis on religious aspects of healthcare professionals' personalities made it quite interesting. I learned from reading this study that a professional's personal beliefs affect whether they are in favor of or opposed to euthanasia. Moreover, the main obstacle that prevents medical practitioners from making end-of-life decisions.
  The report speaks to the healthcare provider's worry about lawsuit or prosecutions, although the patient's family was not informed of the diagnosis. Even though healthcare workers are aware of many ethical guidelines, it is problematic when they fail to inform the patient's family. The study also discusses the role that religion may have in deciding whether euthanasia is morally acceptable.
  Euthanasia is therefore prohibited in The Bahamas. This is because euthanasia is sinful in God's eyes, according to the majority-Christian nation of The Bahamas. Because of that palliative care is prioritized for those who are terminally ill but do not have access to euthanasia. Sharp (2019) made similar observations in relation to the study's conclusion about religion, stating that religion has a significant impact on the choice regarding whether to suspend or discontinue life-sustaining measures.
  In a study by Inghelbrecht et. al., (2009), Compared to non-religious nurses, religious nursing staff are far less open to assisted suicide. This too shows that the beliefs of a personal does affect if they are for or against the practice of Euthanasia
  The study's primary flaw is that it ignores the opinions of the 34.3% of respondents who choose not to participate, which creates a bias in representation. For that reason, I suggest advanced analyzing be done to take into consideration the opinion of a wider variety of people, in this case the nurses and doctors.
  References
  Inghelbrecht, E., Bilsen, J., Mortier, F., Deliens, L. (2009). Attitudes of nurses towards euthanasia and towards their role in euthanasia: A nationwide study in Flanders, Belgium. International Journal of Nursing Studies, 46(9), 1209-1218. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ijnurstu.2009.02.009
  Sharp, S. (2019). The bible and attitudes toward voluntary euthanasia. Death Studies, 43(4), 240–247. https://doi-org.cob.idm.oclc.org/10.1080/07481187.2018.1450793

  Show Less

  Conflict of Interest:
  None declared.

  • Back to top
• Published on: 11 December 2020

  Re: The impact of healthcare professionals’ personality and religious beliefs on the decisions to forego life sustaining treatments: an observational, multicentre, cross-sectional study in Greek intensive care units

  • Adria Knowles, Nursing Student University of The Bahamas
  • Other Contributors:
    • Dr. Terry Campbell, University Nursing Lecturer

  This reply is in response to the above published article on July 21, 2017. The article was very captivating due to the focus on religious aspects associated with healthcare professionals’ personality. In reading this study, I understood that professional’s personal belief influences whether they are for or against euthanasia. Additionally, the predominant barrier that hinders the healthcare professionals from making end of life decisions.
  The research eludes to the healthcare professional's fear of litigation; however, information about the patient’s diagnosis was withheld from the patient’s family. Although the healthcare professionals are aware of the numerous ethical principles, failure to inform the patient’s family is an issue. The research also speaks to how religion plays a factor in determining whether euthanasia is ethically right.
  Consequently, in The Bahamas, euthanasia is against the law. This is due to The Bahamas being a predominantly Christian nation which views euthanasia as wrong in the eyes of God. As a result, there is a focus on palliative care for persons with terminal illness without the option of euthanasia.
  As it relates to the point on religion within the study, Sharp (2019) had similar points which states that, religion greatly influence the decision of whether to withhold or withdraw life sustaining measures. Hence, this concludes to the attitudes of the Greek healthcare professionals mentioned in the study due to the predo...

  Show More

  This reply is in response to the above published article on July 21, 2017. The article was very captivating due to the focus on religious aspects associated with healthcare professionals’ personality. In reading this study, I understood that professional’s personal belief influences whether they are for or against euthanasia. Additionally, the predominant barrier that hinders the healthcare professionals from making end of life decisions.
  The research eludes to the healthcare professional's fear of litigation; however, information about the patient’s diagnosis was withheld from the patient’s family. Although the healthcare professionals are aware of the numerous ethical principles, failure to inform the patient’s family is an issue. The research also speaks to how religion plays a factor in determining whether euthanasia is ethically right.
  Consequently, in The Bahamas, euthanasia is against the law. This is due to The Bahamas being a predominantly Christian nation which views euthanasia as wrong in the eyes of God. As a result, there is a focus on palliative care for persons with terminal illness without the option of euthanasia.
  As it relates to the point on religion within the study, Sharp (2019) had similar points which states that, religion greatly influence the decision of whether to withhold or withdraw life sustaining measures. Hence, this concludes to the attitudes of the Greek healthcare professionals mentioned in the study due to the predominant religion being orthodox Christians. Moreover, a study was done in Iran examining the attitudes of nurses on euthanasia. In Iran, the predominant religion is Islamism and most nurses had a negative attitude due to their belief system (Naseh et al., 2015). There was also mention about the pressure of societal correctness that influences a person’s belief on decision to forego life-sustaining treatments (Ryynänen et al., 2002, p. 327). Subsequently, societal correctness does not change the individual’s attitude but it prompts them to make a decision. Hence, in this instance, the healthcare professionals sought to not partake in euthanasia to avoid negative criticism from the society.
  Accordingly, I would recommend further exploring cultural backgrounds. Since it is evident that religion and society are factors in the attitudes toward euthanasia. Additionally, the ethical values should be explored to further understand the justification of attitudes toward euthanasia.

  References
  Naseh, L., Rafiei, H., & Heidari, M. (2015). Nurses' attitudes towards euthanasia: A cross-sectional study in Iran. International Journal of Palliative Nursing, 21(1), 43-48. https://doi.org/10.12968/ijpn.2015.21.1.43
  Ryynänen, O.-P., Myllykangas, M., Viren, M., & Heino, H. (2002). Attitudes towards euthanasia among physicians, nurses and the general public in Finland. Public Health (Nature), 116(6), 322.
  Sharp, S. (2019). The bible and attitudes toward voluntary euthanasia. Death Studies, 43(4), 240–247. https://doi-org.cob.idm.oclc.org/10.1080/07481187.2018.1450793

  Show Less

  Conflict of Interest:
  None declared.

  • Back to top