BackgroundUnhealthy lifestyles in early childhood are a major global health challenge. These lifestyles often persist from generation to generation and contribute to a vicious cycle of health-related and social problems. This design article presents a study evaluating the effects of two novel healthy school interventions. The main outcome measure will be changes in children’s body mass index (BMI). In addition, lifestyle behaviours, academic achievement, child well-being, socio-economic differences, and societal costs will be examined.MethodsIn close collaboration with various stakeholders, a quasi-experimental study was developed, for which children of four intervention schools (n = 1200) in the southern part of the Netherlands are compared with children of four control schools (n = 1200) in the same region. The interventions started in November 2015. In two of the four intervention schools, a whole-school approach named ‘The Healthy Primary School of the Future’, is implemented with the aim of improving physical activity and dietary behaviour. For this intervention, pupils are offered an extended curriculum, including a healthy lunch, more physical exercises, and social and educational activities, next to the regular school curriculum. In the two other intervention schools, a physical-activity school approach called ‘The Physical Activity School’, is implemented, which is essentially similar to the other intervention, except that no lunch is provided. The interventions proceed during a period of 4 years. Apart from the effectiveness of both interventions, the process, the cost-effectiveness, and the expected legal implications are studied. Data collection is conducted within the school system. The baseline measurements started in September 2015 and yearly follow-up measurements are taking place until 2019.DiscussionA whole-school approach is a new concept in the Netherlands. Due to its innovative, multifaceted nature and sound scientific foundation, these integrated programmes have the potential to form a template for primary schools worldwide. The effects of this approach may extend further than the outcomes associated with well-being and academic achievement, potentially impacting legal and cultural aspects in our society.Trial registrationThe study protocol was registered in the database ClinicalTrials.gov on 14-06-2016 with the reference number NCT02800616.

Organ donation after euthanasia has been performed more than 40 times in Belgium and the Netherlands together. Preliminary results of procedures that have been performed until now demonstrate that this leads to good medical results in the recipient of the organs. Several legal aspects could be changed to further facilitate the combination of organ donation and euthanasia. On the ethical side, several controversies remain, giving rise to an ongoing, but necessary and useful debate. Further experiences will clarify whether both procedures should be strictly separated and whether the dead donor rule should be strictly applied. Opinions still differ on whether the patient's physician should address the possibility of organ donation after euthanasia, which laws should be adapted and which preparatory acts should be performed. These and other procedural issues potentially conflict with the patient's request for organ donation or the circumstances in which euthanasia (without subsequent organ donation) traditionally occurs.

Many physicians and patients do not realize that it is legally and medically possible to donate organs after euthanasia. The combination of euthanasia and organ donation is not a common practice, often limited by the patient's underlying pathology, but nevertheless has been performed >40 times in Belgium and the Netherlands since 2005. In anticipation of patients' requests for organ donation after euthanasia and contributing to awareness of the possibility of this combination among general practitioners and medical specialists, the Maastricht University Medical Center and the Erasmus University Medical Center Rotterdam have developed a multidisciplinary practical manual in which the organizational steps regarding this combined procedure are described and explained. This practical manual lists the various criteria to fulfill and the rules and regulations the different stakeholders involved need to comply with to meet all due diligence requirements. Although an ethicist was involved in writing this paper, this report is not specifically meant to comprehensively address the ethical issues surrounding the topic. This paper is focused on the operational aspects of the protocol.

Organ donation after euthanasia involves patients whose request to undergo euthanasia has been granted and who voluntarily want to donate their organs after death. It requires patients to undergo euthanasia in the hospital, and organ donation is performed after circulatory death. The practice is controversial and currently only allowed in Belgium and the Netherlands. Even in these countries, it is rarely performed; as of August 2016, 43 patients undergoing euthanasia had donated organs. 1 Organ donation after euthanasia has been described in a practical manual, which addresses the medical, ethical, and legal aspects of performing euthanasia and donation after circulatory death. 2 Donation after euthanasia could potentially help ease the shortage of organs for transplantation. It is unknown how many of these patients would be medically suitable to donate organs. 3 We examined the number of patients undergoing euthanasia in Belgium who could potentially donate at least 1 organ.

Euthanasia is categorically prohibited in almost all countries throughout the world. In Belgium and the Netherlands, combining euthanasia and subsequent organ donation in a so-called donation after circulatory-death (DCD) procedure is feasible on legal and medical grounds, and is increasingly gaining social and ethical acceptance. However, heart transplantation after DCD is currently not performed in Belgium and the Netherlands after euthanasia due to concerns surrounding the prolonged warm ischemia time associated with DCD and its effect on subsequent heart function. A number of patients who undergo euthanasia explicitly express their wish to donate their organs in a "living organ donation" procedure, which then causes death. Assuming that euthanasia is permitted, as expressed in Dutch and Belgian legislation, this exploratory article addresses whether it is legally and ethically sound to donate organs, especially the heart, as a living donor and to perform euthanasia in the same procedure in a patient who fulfills the due diligence requirements for euthanasia. Organ donation euthanasia (ODE) would then cause death by the associated surgical procedure, and in addition would improve the quality of the other donated organs, a procedure that would fully respect the patient's autonomy.