The final, formatted version of the article will be published soon.You have multiple emails registered with Frontiers:Please enter your email address:

这篇文章的最终格式化版本将很快发布。您在Frontiers注册了多封电子邮件：请输入您的电子邮件地址：

If you already have an account, please

如果您已经有账户，请

login

登录名

You don't have a Frontiers account ? You can

你没有Frontiers帐户？你可以

register hereImportance: Euthanasia or assisted suicide (EAS) in patients suffering from a psychiatric disorder (PD) is a controversial topic worldwide. In the Netherlands, this practice is regulated by law. All cases of EAS have to be reported and are assessed by the Regional Euthanasia Review Committees (RTEs), who publish a selection of all cases on their website.

在此注册重要性：患有精神疾病（PD）的患者的安乐死或辅助自杀（EAS）是世界范围内有争议的话题。在荷兰，这种做法受法律管制。所有EA病例都必须报告，并由区域安乐死审查委员会（RTE）进行评估，该委员会在其网站上公布了所有病例的选择。

.

.

Objective: To provide insight into the Dutch practice of EAS in patients suffering from a psychiatric disorder.

。

Design, setting and participants: We performed a retrospective case review study in which all published cases of EAS in patients suffering from a PD between 2017 and 2022 were analyzed.

设计，设置和参与者：我们进行了一项回顾性病例回顾研究，分析了2017年至2022年间PD患者中所有已发表的EAS病例。

Intervention(s) or exposure(s): Not applicable

干预或暴露：不适用

Main outcome(s) and measure(s): Characteristics of patients who died by EAS because of suffering from a PD, characteristics of the reporting physician and consultant(s) and the RTEs assessment of published cases.

主要结果和措施：因PD而死于EAS的患者的特征，报告医生和顾问的特征以及RTEs对已发表病例的评估。

Results: Of the 72 cases studied, the majority of patients were female (n=48, 67%), suffered from 3 or more conditions (n=38, 53%) and died by euthanasia instead of assistance in suicide (n=56, 78%). In 63% of cases (n=45), the life termination was performed by a physician from the Euthanasia Expertise center (EE).

结果：在所研究的72例患者中，大多数患者为女性（48例，67%），患有3种或3种以上疾病（38例，53%），死于安乐死而非协助自杀（56例，78%）。在63%的病例（n=45）中，生命终止由安乐死专业中心（EE）的医生进行。

The RTEs’ judgement that the case did not meet the due care criteria (n=11) was in all cases related to issues regarding the (advice of the) independent physician or psychiatric expert. .

RTEs判断该病例不符合应有的护理标准（n=11），在所有情况下都与独立医生或精神病专家（建议）的问题有关。

Conclusion and relevance: This qualitative study shows that the RTEs attach great importance to a careful evaluation procedure of physicians handling EAS requests and to the physician demonstrating ability to reflect on his views, especially when the independent consultant evaluates the case different than the physician.

结论和相关性：这项定性研究表明，RTE非常重视医生处理EAS请求的仔细评估程序，以及医生表现出反思自己观点的能力，特别是当独立顾问评估与医生不同的病例时。

Training for physicians and more transparency in the assessment of EAS requests in patients with a PD may lower the threshold for physicians to handle requests of these patients themselves. .

对医生的培训以及对PD患者EAS请求评估的透明度可能会降低医生自己处理这些患者请求的门槛。

Trial registration: Not applicable.

试用注册：不适用。