Search

Auditors' liability is a hot topic nowadays. Due to the increased risks of auditors and the lack of appropriate insurance, a limitation of auditors' liability seems appropriate. Based on the economic study of the London Economics, the European Commission issued a consultation paper to discuss a European harmonization of auditors' liability. But to harmonize a liability cap on auditors, one needs to examine not only the economic implications, but also the legal restraints and differences of auditors' liability regimes within the European Union. This paper shows that there are large discrepancies concerning auditor's liability towards third parties within the legal systems of the European Union. In Belgium, an auditor is liable towards each interested party. However, the public role of an auditor is not acknowledged in the United Kingdom, the Netherlands and Germany. In those countries the purpose of audited statements is to fulfil the auditor's duty to the shareholders collectively and not to the stockholders as individual parties or third parties. In Germany, the Netherlands and the United Kingdom, an auditor has to encompass a special duty of care towards the third party to be liable. Only a special relationship of the auditor towards a third party could imply auditor's liability toward those parties. This element wasn't discussed in the London Economics Study. However, these findings could have a major impact on the debate to harmonize an auditor's liability cap because the more parties can pursue an auditor, the more damage can be claimed and the higher the liability cap needs to be fixed. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Background: The Surprise Question ('Would I be surprised if this patient died within 12 months?') identifies patients in the last year of life. It is unclear if 'surprised' means the same for each clinician, and whether their responses are internally consistent. Aim: To determine the consistency with which the Surprise Question is used. Design: A cross-sectional online study of participants located in Belgium, Germany, Italy, The Netherlands, Switzerland and UK. Participants completed 20 hypothetical patient summaries ('vignettes'). Primary outcome measure: continuous estimate of probability of death within 12 months (0% [certain survival]–100% [certain death]). A threshold (probability estimate above which Surprise Question responses were consistently 'no') and an inconsistency range (range of probability estimates where respondents vacillated between responses) were calculated. Univariable and multivariable linear regression explored differences in consistency. Trial registration: NCT03697213. Setting/participants: Registered General Practitioners (GPs). Of the 307 GPs who started the study, 250 completed 15 or more vignettes. Results: Participants had a consistency threshold of 49.8% (SD 22.7) and inconsistency range of 17% (SD 22.4). Italy had a significantly higher threshold than other countries (p = 0.002). There was also a difference in threshold levels depending on age of clinician, for every yearly increase, participants had a higher threshold. There was no difference in inconsistency between countries (p = 0.53). Conclusions: There is variation between clinicians regarding the use of the Surprise Question. Over half of GPs were not internally consistent in their responses to the Surprise Question. Future research with standardised terms and real patients is warranted. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Persons with profound intellectual disability (PID) are mostly not able to use assistive technology (AT) independently. Caregivers play an important mediating role in implementing AT in the daily life of persons with PID. Both first-order barriers, extrinsic to caregivers, and second-order barriers, intrinsic to caregivers, influence the attitudes and behaviors of caregivers with regard to AT-use. It could be asked if increased knowledge on and experience with AT may impact the effect of first- and second-order barriers. This study investigated how knowledge and experience influence the professional caregivers' beliefs about which factors may impact the AT use in persons with PID and their intentions to use AT for persons with PID. A questionnaire on the experienced limitations and successes in using AT was developed. The questionnaire was send to professionals working with or responsible for persons with PID in various countries in Europe. In total the answers of 195 respondents were included in this study. This study's results demonstrate that AT is used for various reasons in persons with PID, mostly to support communication and interaction or for fun or relaxation. Based on the answers of the respondents can be concluded that both experience and knowledge of caregivers seem to influence first- and second-order barriers. Besides, a possibility to overcome the second-order barriers is to provide professionals with possibilities to increase their knowledge and experience. AT for persons with PID is mostly used for communication and interaction or for fun and relaxation. Professional caregivers belief that AT-use may positively influence various aspects in the life of persons with PID, especially communication and interaction, active engagement and participation in activities, and self-esteem of the person. Caregivers need to have sufficient experience in order to rate the barriers of AT-use as less limited in the group of persons with PID. In order to overcome the barriers experienced in implementing AT in persons with PID, knowledge of caregivers is essential. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

This article puts contemporary debates about the relationship between immigration policy and the welfare state in historical perspective. Relying on new historical data, the article examines the relationship between immigration policy and social policy in Western Europe in the late 19th and early 20th centuries, when the modern welfare state emerged. Germany already had comparably strict immigration policies when the German Empire introduced the world's first national social insurances in the 1880s. Denmark, another early social-policy adopter, also pursued restrictive immigration policies early on. Almost all other countries in Western Europe started out with more liberal immigration policies than Germany's and Denmark's, but then adopted more restrictive immigration policies and more generous social policies concurrently. There are two exceptions, Belgium and Italy, which are discussed in the article. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

To estimate the proportion of nurses in Hungary who intend to change their profession or want to migrate abroad; to compare the proportion of nurses who intend to leave nursing in Hungary and in selected European countries; and to describe factors that predict nurses' intent to work in their current job another year. An exploratory research design with subsequent comparison was used, and a cross-sectional mail survey was implemented. Measures of intent to leave, to work another year as well as indicators of push and pull factors were identified and adopted from a literature review. One thousand nurses were randomly selected and mailed a questionnaire. Comparison was made with the results from the NEXT study. For statistical analyses, linear and logistic regression was used to predict nurses' intention to leave and proportional z-test for making comparisons. Nurses ( n = 754) responded the questionnaire. Approximately half of the sample did not consider changing to another health care job or leaving the profession. Compared with Hungary, the proportion of nurses who intended to leave nursing was significantly lower in Belgium and the Netherlands but was greater or the same in the rest of the European countries. Speaking a foreign language was the most significant predictor of working abroad for Hungarian nurses. Number of shifts, satisfaction with flexible scheduling and managerial support were all relevant predictors of working another year as a nurse. Both the intent to leave nursing and migrating abroad were prevalent issues in Hungary. Working conditions and social/managerial support were key factors identified as strong predictors of stay in the same job for another year. Compared with other European countries, Hungary was not in a worse position in the proportion of nurses wanting to leave nursing. All hospital managers and head nurses should be aware of their role in keeping nurses in the clinical practice and avoid staff nurses migration from the Hungarian health care system. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]