ReviewSchmerz (Berlin, Germany)2025
[Opportunities and risks of advance directives : An appraisal of the practice in Germany after legal regulation in 2009].
Review in Schmerz (Berlin, Germany), 2025. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Not yet cited in PubMed.
What it found
Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.
The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.
The trial behind it
Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.
Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.
Who cites it
0 citing papers in PubMed.
No citing paper in PubMed yet.
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
2 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
backgroundLiving wills/advance directives (AD) are an important tool for specifying patient wishes regarding medical care in the case of future inability to consent. Since 2009, German legislation defines framework conditions for the creation and validity of such directives in § 1901a BGB.
methodsAn extensive literature search in an international and a German-language database was conducted to identify, analyze, and evaluate scientific articles on opportunities, risks, and problems in the creation and implementation of living wills.
resultsBetween 10 and 40% of patients have an AD. Among the stipulations in the AD, the demand for sufficient pain therapy is very important. However, numerous problems in the preparation and implementation of ADs reduce their value in everyday clinical practice. In particular, unclear conditions of validity, unspecific instructions for action, and lack of availability of the directives prevent practitioners from determining the patient's will. Other fundamental problems include frequent patient ambivalence and clinical ethical dissent. In addition, the framework condition of unlimited coverage set by the law carries the risk that changes of opinion in the course of life or disease are not taken into account.
conclusionPreparing an AD requires a high level of information, consultation, and time, as well as regular review or adjustment of its content. These factors are often not considered, thus complicating implementation and reducing the value of living wills. Possible solutions to these problems or alternative concepts for different patient settings are discussed in this review.
Indexed as
Identifiers
38165491What OpenQuestion holds
Registered trials
Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.