Identifying Palliative Care Needs Using the Double Surprise Question: Intuitive Knowledge of General Practitioners in Six European Countries is not Influenced by Their Characteristics. A Vignette Study

IntroductionThe Surprise Question ("Would I be surprised if this patient were to die in the next 12 months?") helps to identify patients' who may need palliative care, but its accuracy is limited. Adding a Second Surprise Question ("Would I be surprised if this patient were still alive after 12 months?"), together called the Double Surprise Question, appeared promising.AimTo determine which patient - and GP-characteristics influence responses to the Double Surprise Question.DesignA cross-sectional study of participants, who were invited to complete an online survey with 20 case vignettes. Outcome was what characteristics of the vignettes and of the GPs influence the answers to the Double Surprise Question, using the association between the answers and the estimated chance of dying within one year as a reference. One-way ANOVA and multilevel logistic regression were used. Trial registration: NCT03697213.Setting/participantsGPs from six European countries.Results250 GPs completed the survey. GPs were more likely to answer 'yes' to the Second Surprise Question when the estimated chance of dying was higher, the Australian Modified Karnofsky Performance Scale was lower and for patients with cancer compared to organ-failure. GP characteristics did not influence the answer.ConclusionsThis study indicates that the Double Surprise Question is broadly applicable by GPs as no associations were found between measured GP characteristics and responses to the Double Surprise Question. We recommend prospective studies in real-world populations to relate the answers to the Double Surprise Question to actual death to further demonstrate its clinical efficacy.

Authors

Institutions

Publication Details

Journal
American Journal of Hospice and Palliative Medicine®
Published
2026-10-09
DOI
https://doi.org/10.1177/10499091261489538
Primary Topic
Palliative Care and End-of-Life Issues
Type
article
Field-Weighted Citation Impact
0.00
Controls
|||
ALL TIME
JAN
FEB
MAR
APR
MAY
JUN
JUL
AUG
SEP
OCT
article

Identifying Palliative Care Needs Using the Double Surprise Question: Intuitive Knowledge of General Practitioners in Six European Countries is not Influenced by Their Characteristics. A Vignette Study

Maud Maessen, Bert Leysen, R. Chattat, Kris Vissers et al.
American Journal of Hospice and Palliative Medicine®
Palliative Care and End-of-Life Issues
article

Identifying Palliative Care Needs Using the Double Surprise Question: Intuitive Knowledge of General Practitioners in Six European Countries is not Influenced by Their Characteristics. A Vignette Study

Maud Maessen, Bert Leysen, R. Chattat, Kris Vissers, Johan Wens, Paddy Stone, Yvonne Engels, Victoria Vickerstaff, Sofia Zambrano, Giovanni Ottoboni, Guido Biasco, Nicola White, Christopher D. Tomlinson, Steffen Eychmueller, Christina Avgerinou, Carel Veldhoven, Christina Gerlach, Henk Schers, Ewald Bronkhorst, Veronie Versteeg, Linda Oostendorp
article en

Abstract

IntroductionThe Surprise Question ("Would I be surprised if this patient were to die in the next 12 months?") helps to identify patients' who may need palliative care, but its accuracy is limited. Adding a Second Surprise Question ("Would I be surprised if this patient were still alive after 12 months?"), together called the Double Surprise Question, appeared promising.AimTo determine which patient - and GP-characteristics influence responses to the Double Surprise Question.DesignA cross-sectional study of participants, who were invited to complete an online survey with 20 case vignettes. Outcome was what characteristics of the vignettes and of the GPs influence the answers to the Double Surprise Question, using the association between the answers and the estimated chance of dying within one year as a reference. One-way ANOVA and multilevel logistic regression were used. Trial registration: NCT03697213.Setting/participantsGPs from six European countries.Results250 GPs completed the survey. GPs were more likely to answer 'yes' to the Second Surprise Question when the estimated chance of dying was higher, the Australian Modified Karnofsky Performance Scale was lower and for patients with cancer compared to organ-failure. GP characteristics did not influence the answer.ConclusionsThis study indicates that the Double Surprise Question is broadly applicable by GPs as no associations were found between measured GP characteristics and responses to the Double Surprise Question. We recommend prospective studies in real-world populations to relate the answers to the Double Surprise Question to actual death to further demonstrate its clinical efficacy.

American Journal of Hospice and Palliative Medicine®
University of Bern (CH), Radboud University Nijmegen (NL), University of Antwerp (BE), Queen Mary University of London (GB), Heidelberg University (DE), University Hospital of Bern (CH), University Hospital Heidelberg (DE), University Medical Center (US), Radboud University Medical Center (NL), GNA University (IN), St. Antonius Ziekenhuis (NL), Bibliotheca Hertziana – Max Planck Institute for Art History (IT), University College London (GB), Marie Curie (GB), University of Bologna (IT)
Openalex Percentile: Top 10%
Palliative Care and End-of-Life Issues
AI Navigator

Ask Laika to Summarize, Analyze, and Connect papers live on the map.

Summarize Papers & Methodologies

Extract key findings, datasets, and comparative methods across publications.

Benchmark Rankings & Visual Analytics

Rank top research institutions, authors, funders, topics, and journals by Field-Weighted Citation Impact (FWCI) and paper volume with instant charts.

Connect Distant Disciplines

Bridge topological clusters on the map to find hidden collaborative intersections.