Advance directives and the impact of timing. A qualitative study with Swiss general practitioners.

PRINCIPLES: Advance directives are seen as an important tool for documenting the wishes of patients who are no longer competent to make decisions in regards to their medical care. Due to their nature, approaching the subject of advance directives with a patient can be difficult for both the medical care provider and the patient. This paper focuses on general practitioners' perspectives regarding the timing at which this discussion should take place, as well as the advantages and disadvantages of the different moments. METHODS: In 2013, 23 semi-structured face-to-face interviews were performed with Swiss general practitioners. Interviews were analysed using qualitative content analysis. RESULTS: In our sample, 23 general practitioners provided different options that they felt were appropriate moments: either (a) when the patient is still healthy, (b) when illness becomes predominant, or (c) when a patient has been transferred to a long-term care facility. Furthermore, general practitioners reported uncertainty and discomfort regarding initiating the discussion. CONCLUSION: The distinct approaches, perspectives and rationales show that there is no well-defined or "right" moment. However, participants often associated advance directives with death. This link caused discomfort and uncertainty, which led to hesitation and delay on the part of general practitioners. Therefore we recommend further training on how to professionally initiate a conversation about advance directives. Furthermore, based on our results and experience, we recommend an early approach with healthy patients paired with later regular updates as it seems to be the most effective way to inform patients about their end-of-life care options.

Associations between fruit and vegetable consumption and psychological distress: results from a population-based study.

BACKGROUND: Several studies observed associations of various aspects of diet with mental health, but little is known about the relationship between following the 5-a-day recommendation for fruit and vegetables consumption and mental health. Thus, we examined the associations of the Swiss daily recommended fruit and vegetable intake with psychological distress. METHODS: Data from 20,220 individuals aged 15+ years from the 2012 Swiss Health Survey were analyzed. The recommended portions of fruit and vegetables per day were defined as 5-a-day (at least 2 portions of fruit and 3 of vegetables). The outcome was perceived psychological distress over the previous 4 weeks (measured by the 5-item mental health index [MHI-5]). High distress (MHI-5 score ≤ 52), moderate distress (MHI-5 > 52 and ≤ 72) and low distress (MHI-5 > 72 and ≤ 100) were differentiated and multinomial logistic regression analyses adjusted for known confounding factors were performed. RESULTS: The 5-a-day recommendation was met by 11.6 % of the participants with low distress, 9.3 % of those with moderate distress, and 6.2 % of those with high distress. Consumers fulfilling the 5-a-day recommendation had lower odds of being highly or moderately distressed than individuals consuming less fruit and vegetables (moderate vs. low distress: OR = 0.82, 95 % confidence interval [CI] 0.69-0.97; high vs. low distress: OR = 0.55, 95 % CI 0.41-0.75). CONCLUSIONS: Daily intake of 5 servings of fruit and vegetable was associated with lower psychological distress. Longitudinal studies are needed to further determine the causal nature of this relationship.