ArticleBMC medical ethics2025
The euthanasia law from the perspective of healthcare professionals in Spain.
Article in BMC medical ethics, 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
5 authors.
Funding
Abstract
backgroundIn 2021, Spain passed Organic Law 3/2021, which regulates euthanasia and represents an extension of rights to make decisions in the context of health care. According to the Law, the state must guarantee access to Medical Assistance in Dying (MAiD) through health services. Therefore, the involvement of health professionals is crucial. The aim of this work is to analyse the perspectives of health professionals on the provision of MAiD. Particular attention is paid to the social impact of the Law, the conceptual problems it raises, and the distribution of rights and responsibilities of professionals and patients, as well as the procedural aspects included in the regulation, the experiences of professionals regarding MAiD, and the implementation differences observed among regions.
methodsIt was an exploratory qualitative research applying a thematic analysis through semi-structured interviews with physicians and nurses from primary care, hospital care, and palliative care, recruited from three Autonomous Communities in Spain (Madrid, Catalonia, and Andalusia) between March and May 2023.
resultsA total of 25 interviews were conducted with medical and nursing professionals, 17 women and 8 men. The information collected was organised according to these discursive axes: social impact of the Law; terminological and conceptual problems; rights and responsibilities of professionals and patients; procedure (time limits, role of professionals); experiences of professionals regarding MAiD; and differences in implementation among the regions of the study. For this analysis, the participants’ positions on the provision of MAiD were considered.
conclusionsThe professionals interviewed generally express a positive assessment of the legal safeguards of MAiD Law in Spain. However, challenges remain in its implementation, such as perceived legal ambiguities, assessment of suffering, and balancing autonomy. Structural inequalities and limited support may affect access and provider well-being. Strengthening professional training, teamwork, and institutional resources, as well as a relational approach, is essential. The findings offer practice-based guidance for policy and clinical care and highlight the need for further research on real-world impacts.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What 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.