Palliative sedation at the end of life at a tertiary cancer center

Palliative sedation at the end of life: prevalence, characteristics and possible determinants

BACKGROUND

Palliative Sedation (PS) at the end of life is practiced and perceived differently by health professionals depending on the geographical location in which they provide their health care. Taking into account this heterogeneity, it is necessary to expand knowledge and provide data on this clinical practice in different contexts and countries. On the other hand, the identification of factors associated with PS could help healthcare professionals, at an early stage, to identify patients more likely to require sedation. The aim of this study was to describe the prevalence and characteristics related to PS in a specialised Palliative Care setting, as well as to analyse factors that could be associated with this procedure.

METHODS

This was a cross-sectional study including n = 533 patients who died during the study period in a Palliative Care Unit. Clinical and functional (Barthel and Palliative Performance Scale) variables and the level of complexity were collected. For each patient we assessed whether PS had been performed and, if so, we described the type of sedation, continuity and depth, refractory symptoms, medication used, informed consent and place of death. A multivariate logistic regression model was used to analyse the relationship between several independent variables and PS.

RESULTS

The prevalence of PS was 16.7% (n = 82). Most frequent refractory symptoms were delirium (36.1%), pain (31.9%) and dyspnoea (25%). Factors associated with having a higher odds of PS were having already started treatment with strong opioids (OR = 2.10; 95% CI = 1.16-3.90) and a lower dependency for activities of daily living (OR = 0.41; 95% CI = 0.23-0.70) on admission at PC. Informed consent for sedation was given mainly by representation and only in 19% of cases by the patient himself.

CONCLUSIONS

Early opioid use and functional status act as factors associated with PS, becoming as clinical evaluations of particular interest during the disease trajectory, which could help to improve individualised care plans for patients at the end of life.

Comparison of Pharmacological Treatments for Agitated Delirium in the Last Days of Life

CONTEXT

Antipsychotics are often used in managing symptoms of terminal delirium, but evidence is limited.

OBJECTIVES

To explore the comparative effectiveness of haloperidol with as-needed benzodiazepines (HPD) vs. chlorpromazine (CPZ) vs. levomepromazine (LPZ) for agitated delirium in the last days.

METHODS

A prospective observational study was conducted in two palliative care units in Japan. Adult cancer patients who developed agitated delirium with a modified Richmond Agitation-Sedation Scale (RASS-PAL) of one or more were included; palliative care specialist physicians determined that the etiology was irreversible; and estimated survival was 3 weeks or less. Patients treated with HPD, CPZ, or LPZ were analyzed. We measured RASS, NuDESC, Agitation Distress Scale (ADS), and Communication Capacity Scale (CCS) on Days 1 and 3.

RESULTS

A total of 277 patients were enrolled, and 214 were analyzed (112 in HPD, 50 in CPZ, and 52 in LPZ). In all groups, the mean RASS-PAL score significantly decreased on Day 3 (1.37 to -1.01, 1.87 to -1.04, 1.79 to -0.62, respectively; P < 0.001); the NuDESC and ADS scores also significantly decreased. The percentages of patients with moderate to severe agitation and those with full communication capacity on Day 3 were not significantly different. The treatments were well-tolerated. While one-fourth of HPD group changed antipsychotics, 88% or more of CPZ and LPZ groups continued the initial antipsychotics.

CONCLUSION

Haloperidol with as-needed benzodiazepine, chlorpromazine, or levomepromazine may be effective and safe for terminal agitation. Chlorpromazine and levomepromazine may have an advantage of no need to change medications.

Palliative sedation in paediatric solid tumour patients: choosing the best drugs

OBJECTIVES

Cancer remains the leading cause of mortality by disease in childhood in high-income countries. For terminally ill children, care focuses on quality of life, and patient management fundamentally affects grieving families. This paper describes our experience of palliative sedation (PS) for children with refractory symptoms caused by solid tumours, focusing on the drugs involved.

METHODS

We retrospectively collected data on all children treated for cancer who died at the pediatric oncology unit of the Fondazione IRCCS Istituto Nazionale dei Tumori between January 2016 and December 2020.

RESULTS

Of the 29 patients eligible for the study, all but 4 received PS. Midazolam was always used, combined in 16 cases with other drugs (mainly classic neuroleptics, alpha-2 agonists and antihistamines). Throughout the period of PS and on the day of death, patients with sarcoma were given higher doses of midazolam and morphine, and more often received combinations of drugs than patients with brain tumours. Sarcoma causes significant symptoms, while brain tumours require less intensive analgesic-sedative therapies because they already impair a patient's state of consciousness.

CONCLUSIONS

Optimising pharmacological treatments demands a medical team that knows how drugs (often developed for other indications) work. Emotional and relational aspects are important too, and any action to lower a patient's consciousness should be explained to the family and justified. Parents should not feel like helpless witnesses. Guidelines on PS in paediatrics could help, providing they acknowledge that a child's death is always a unique case.

Characterization in end-of-life care of older people attended by geriatricians

BACKGROUND AND OBJECTIVE

Symptom control at the end of life is essential, and palliative sedation is a viable intervention option for the care of terminally ill patients. This study aims to characterize the elderly population receiving end-of-life care plans and their management with palliative sedation in a geriatric unit at a high complexity hospital.

MATERIALS AND METHODS

A cross-sectional study was conducted, and a descriptive analysis was performed. Medical records of 163 patients admitted to a high complexity hospital in Bogota, Colombia between January 2016 and December 2019 were reviewed.

RESULTS

From 163, 141 patients received an end-of-life care plan, and 22 were managed with palliative sedation. The mean age was 84 years, the most frequent cause of death was respiratory infections and 44% of patients had a history of cancer. Prior to admission, functional decline and the presence of moderate to severe dementia were frequently found. About one in ten persons required palliative sedation, which lasted an average of 2.22±5 days. The most common refractory symptom was dyspnea (45.45%), followed by pain (36.36%).

CONCLUSIONS

Palliative sedation is prevalent in the elderly population and characterizing this population can provide increased knowledge to improve end-of-life care.

Palliative sedation for children at end of life: a retrospective cohort study

BACKGROUND

Palliative sedation is consciously reducing the patient's consciousness to alleviate the refractory symptoms. However, studies on palliative sedation for children are scarce. We aimed to survey the symptom control and risks for children with sedative therapy in end of life.

METHOD

This study was a single center retrospective cohort study. Children who died in the Department of Palliative Medicine were divided into palliative sedation (Group A) and non-palliative sedation group (Group B). The symptoms relief, survival time, and last hospitalization time were compared between two groups.

RESULTS

From January 2012 to November 2019, 41 children died in department of palliative care. 24 children were sedated (Group A), meanwhile 17 children were not (Group B). The symptoms in Group A were more complex than Group B (p = 0.013). Overall symptom relief in Group A was higher than that in Group B (24/24, 10/15 p = 0.041). Pain relief rates (7/7, 20/21 p = 0.714), maximum/pre-death opioid dose [30(20, 77.5), 18(9, 45) p = 0.175, 30(20, 60), 18(9, 45) p = 0.208] and pain intensity difference [5(4,6.5), 4(2,6) p = 0.315] did not differ significantly in either groups. After diagnosis, the survival time of the Group A was longer than the Group B (p = 0.047). However, the length of hospitalization before death was similar in two groups (p = 0.385).

CONCLUSION

Palliative sedation controls complicated, painful symptoms at the end of life and does not shorten the hospitalization time in children.

Impact of legalization of Medical Assistance in Dying on the Use of Palliative Sedation in a Tertiary Care Hospital: A Retrospective Chart Review

BACKGROUND

Patients approaching end of life may experience intractable symptoms managed with palliative sedation. The legalization of Medical Assistance in Dying (MAiD) in Canada in 2016 offers a new option for relief of intolerable suffering, and there is limited evidence examining how the use of palliative sedation has evolved with the introduction of MAiD.

OBJECTIVES

To compare rates of palliative sedation at a tertiary care hospital before and after the legalization of MAiD.

METHODS

This study is a retrospective chart analysis of all deaths of patients followed by the palliative care consult team in acute care, or admitted to the palliative care unit. We compared the use of palliative sedation during 1-year periods before and after the legalization of MAiD, and screened charts for MAiD requests during the second time period.

RESULTS

4.7% (n = 25) of patients who died in the palliative care unit pre-legalization of MAiD received palliative sedation compared to 14.6% (n = 82) post-MAiD, with no change in acute care. Post-MAiD, 4.1% of deaths were medically-assisted deaths in the palliative care unit (n = 23) and acute care (n = 14). For patients who requested MAiD but instead received palliative sedation, the primary reason was loss of decisional capacity to consent for MAiD.

CONCLUSION

We believe that the mainstream presence of MAiD has resulted in an increased recognition of MAiD and palliative sedation as distinct entities, and rates of palliative sedation increased post-MAiD due to greater awareness about patient choice and increased comfort with end-of-life options.

Changing Practices in the Use of Continuous Sedation at the End of Life: A Systematic Review of the Literature

CONTEXT

The use of continuous sedation until death (CSD) has been highly debated for many years. It is unknown how the use of CSD evolves over time. Reports suggest that there is an international increase in the use of CSD for terminally ill patients.

OBJECTIVE

To gain insight in developments in the use of CSD in various countries and subpopulations.

METHODS

We performed a search of the literature published between January 2000 and April 2020, in PubMed, Embase, CINAHL, PsycInfo, and the Cochrane Library by using the Preferred reporting items for systematic review and meta-analysis protocols guidelines. The search contained the following terms: continuous sedation, terminal sedation, palliative sedation, deep sedation, end-of-life sedation, sedation practice, and sedation until death.

RESULTS

We found 23 articles on 16 nationwide studies and 38 articles on 37 subpopulation studies. In nationwide studies on frequencies of CSD in deceased persons varied from 3% in Denmark in 2001 to 18% in The Netherlands in 2015. Nationwide studies indicate an increase in the use of CSD. Frequencies of CSD in the different subpopulations varied too widely to observe time trends. Over the years, more studies reported on the use of CSD for nonphysical symptoms including fear, anxiety, and psycho-existential distress. In some studies, there was an increase in requests for sedation of patients from their families.

CONCLUSIONS

The frequency of CSD seems to increase over time, possibly partly because of an extension of indications for sedation, from mainly physical symptoms to also nonphysical symptoms.

Midazolam sedation in palliative medicine: retrospective study in a French center for cancer control

BACKGROUND

French legislation about sedation in palliative medicine evolved in 2016 with the introduction of a right to deep and continuous sedation, maintained until death. The objective was to describe midazolam sedation at the COL (Centre Oscar Lambret [Oscar Lambret Center], French regional center for cancer control), in order to establish a current overview before the final legislative changes.

METHODS

Descriptive, retrospective and single-center study, concerning major patients in palliative care hospitalized from 01/01/2014 to 12/31/2015, who had been sedated by midazolam. The proven sedations (explicitly named) and the probable sedations were distinguished.

RESULTS

A total of 54 sedations were identified (48 proven, 6 probable). Refractory symptoms accounted for 48.1% of indications, complications with immediate risk of death 46.3%, existential suffering 5.6%. Titration was performed in 44.4% of cases. Sedation was continuous until death for 98.1% of the cases. Probable sedation had a higher failure rate than proven sedation. Significant differences existed for the palliative care unit compared to other units regarding information to the patient, their consent, anticipation, mention by correspondence and carrying out titrations. When patients had already been treated with midazolam, the induction doses, initial maintenance doses, and doses at the time of death were significantly higher. For those receiving opioids, the maintenance dose at the time of death was higher. No comparison found a difference in overall survival.

CONCLUSIONS

After a sufficient follow-up has enabled teams to familiarize with this new legislation, reflection on sedation should be conducted to adapt to final recommendations.

Identification and Assessment of Breathlessness in Clinical Practice: A Systematic Review and Narrative Synthesis

CONTEXT

Breathlessness is common in chronic conditions but often goes unidentified by clinicians. It is important to understand how identification and assessment of breathlessness occurs across health care settings, to promote routine outcome assessment and access to treatment.

OBJECTIVE

The objective of this study was to summarize how breathlessness is identified and assessed in adults with chronic conditions across different health care settings.

METHODS

This is a systematic review and descriptive narrative synthesis (PROSPERO registration: CRD42018089782). Searches were conducted on Medline, PsycINFO, Cochrane Library, Embase, and CINAHL (2000-2018) and reference lists. Screening was conducted by two independent reviewers, with access to a third, against inclusion criteria. Data were extracted using a bespoke proforma.

RESULTS

Ninety-seven studies were included, conducted in primary care (n = 9), secondary care (n = 53), and specialist palliative care (n = 35). Twenty-five measures of identification and 41 measures of assessment of breathlessness were used. Primary and secondary care used a range of measures to assess breathlessness severity, cause, and impact for people with chronic obstructive pulmonary disease. Specialist palliative care used measures assessing broader symptom severity and function with less focus on overall quality of life. Few studies were identified from primary care.

CONCLUSION

Various measures were identified, reflective of the setting's purpose. However, this highlights missed opportunities for breathlessness management across settings; primary care is particularly well placed to diagnose and support breathlessness. The chronic obstructive pulmonary disease approach (where symptoms and quality of life are part of disease management) could apply to other conditions. Better documentation of holistic patient-reported measures may drive service improvement in specialist palliative care.

Survey of Palliative Sedation at End of Life in Terminally Ill Heart Failure Patients - A Single-Center Experience of 5-Year Follow-up

BACKGROUND

Little is known about palliative sedation in terminally ill heart failure (HF) patients.

METHODS AND RESULTS

We retrospectively reviewed terminally ill HF patients who received palliative sedation from September 2013 to August 2018. Among 95 terminally ill HF patients, 25 were prescribed dexmedetomidine and 12 were prescribed midazolam at the end of life. Richmond Agitation-Sedation Scale was significantly reduced (P<0.01), but blood pressure and heart rate were unaltered after treatment in both the dexmedetomidine and midazolam groups.

CONCLUSIONS

Prescription of dexmedetomidine and/or midazolam might be feasible in selected terminally ill HF patients.

Palliative care specialists in hospice and hospital/community teams predominantly use low doses of sedative medication at the end of life for patient comfort rather than sedation: Findings from focus groups and patient records for I-CAN-CARE

BACKGROUND

Little research has explored the detail of practice when using sedative medications at the end of life. One work package of the I-CAN-CARE research programme investigates this in UK palliative care.

AIMS

To investigate current practices when using sedative medication at the end of life in London, UK, by (1) qualitatively exploring the understandings of palliative care clinicians, (2) examining documented sedative use in patient records and (3) comparing findings from both investigations.

DESIGN

We conducted focus groups with experienced palliative care physicians and nurses, and simultaneously reviewed deceased patient records.

SETTING/PARTICIPANTS

In total, 10 physicians and 17 senior nurses in London hospice or hospital/community palliative care took part in eight focus groups. Simultaneously, 50 patient records for people who received continuous sedation at end of life in the hospice and hospital were retrieved and reviewed.

RESULTS

Focus group participants all said that they used sedative medication chiefly for managing agitation or distress; selecting drugs and dosages as appropriate for patients' individual needs; and aiming to use the lowest possible dosages for patients to be 'comfortable', 'calm' or 'relaxed'. None used structured observational tools to assess sedative effects, strongly preferring clinical observation and judgement. The patient records' review corroborated these qualitative findings, with the median continuous dose of midazolam administered being 10 mg/24 h (range: 0.4-69.5 mg/24 h).

CONCLUSION

Clinical practice in these London settings broadly aligns with the European Association for Palliative Care framework for using sedation at the end of life, but lacks any objective monitoring of depth of sedation. Our follow-on study explores the utility and feasibility of objectively monitoring sedation in practice.

Breaking Barriers: Prospective Study of a Cohort of Advanced Chronic Obstructive Pulmonary Disease Patients To Describe Their Survival and End-of-Life Palliative Care Requirements

BACKGROUND AND AIM

Consensus has been reached on the need to integrate palliative care in the follow-up examinations of chronic obstructive pulmonary disease (COPD) patients. We analyzed the survival from the initiation of follow-up by a palliative home care team (PHCT) and described the needs and end-of-life process.

SETTING AND DESIGN

This study was a prospective observational cohort study of advanced COPD patients referred to a PHCT. Sociodemographic variables, survival from the start date of follow-up using the Kaplan-Meier model, health resource consumption, perceived quality of life, main symptomatology, opioid use, and advanced care planning (ACP) were analyzed.

RESULTS

Sixty patients were included. The median survival was 8.3 months. Forty-two patients died at the end of the study (85% at home or in palliative care units). The most frequent cause of death was respiratory failure in 39 patients (93%), with 29 of these patients requiring sedation (69%). Dyspnea at rest, with an average of 5 (standard deviation [SD] 2) points, was the main symptom. Fifty-five patients (91%) required opioids for symptom control. The median score in the St. George's Respiratory Questionnaire was 72 (SD 13). The mean number of visits by the home team was 7 (SD 6.5). The mean number of admissions during the monitoring period was 1.5 (SD 0.15).

CONCLUSIONS

The characteristics of the cohort appear suitable for a PHCT. The follow-up care provided by our multidisciplinary unit decreased the number of hospitalizations, favored the development of ACP, and enabled death at home or in palliative care units.

Symptom Burden and End-of-Life Palliative Treatments during the Last Two Weeks of Life in Patients with Advanced Musculoskeletal Sarcoma

Background: Musculoskeletal sarcomas (MSSs) are rare cancers and often aggressive tumors that originate from mesenchymal tissue. Patients with advanced MSS often report difficulties with symptom burden, which can reduce their health-related quality-of-life. Objective: The aim of this study was to describe the patterns of the physical symptoms of MSS patients in the palliative setting and to detail the palliative treatment used in the last two weeks of life. Design: Retrospective study using the electronic patient records from a single institution. Setting/Subjects: A retrospective study was carried out in a sample of 46 consecutive MSS patients with locally advanced/metastatic disease, who were hospitalized and died in our department. The median age of these patients was 56 years at death. Measurements: Symptom burden and medical intervention during the last two weeks of life were collected. Results: The most frequent physical symptoms were pain and dyspnea in 93% and 78% of patients, respectively, while only 17% of patients suffered from nausea. A total of 98% of patients required opioids, and most patients were treated with morphine through either subcutaneous or intravenous continuous injection. Nonsteroidal anti-inflammatory drugs and acetaminophen were administered to 79% of patients. Corticosteroids were administered for the relief of dyspnea to 83% of patients. Of the patients, 46% received palliative chemotherapy within the last two weeks of life, and the oral treatment was continued until a median of 5.6 days before death. In addition, 39% of patients received a sedative treatment during the last two weeks of life for uncontrolled refractory symptoms. Conclusions: The symptom burden experienced by advanced MSS patients is profound at the end of life for all palliative approaches. Therefore, palliative medicine is an important and even crucial component of the continuum of care, allowing for aggressive symptom management with a variety of medical interventions, including palliative sedation.

Clinical Assessment and Management of Delirium in the Palliative Care Setting

Delirium is a neurocognitive syndrome arising from acute global brain dysfunction, and is prevalent in up to 42% of patients admitted to palliative care inpatient units. The symptoms of delirium and its associated communicative impediment invariably generate high levels of patient and family distress. Furthermore, delirium is associated with significant patient morbidity and increased mortality in many patient populations, especially palliative care where refractory delirium is common in the dying phase. As the clinical diagnosis of delirium is frequently missed by the healthcare team, the case for regular screening is arguably very compelling. Depending on its precipitating factors, a delirium episode is often reversible, especially in the earlier stages of a life-threatening illness. Until recently, antipsychotics have played a pivotal role in delirium management, but this role now requires critical re-evaluation in light of recent research that failed to demonstrate their efficacy in mild- to moderate-severity delirium occurring in palliative care patients. Non-pharmacological strategies for the management of delirium play a fundamental role and should be optimized through the collective efforts of the whole interprofessional team. Refractory agitated delirium in the last days or weeks of life may require the use of pharmacological sedation to ameliorate the distress of patients, which is invariably juxtaposed with increasing distress of family members. Further evaluation of multicomponent strategies for delirium prevention and treatment in the palliative care patient population is urgently required.

Palliative Sedation for the Terminally Ill Patient

Palliative sedation (PS) is performed in the terminally ill patient to manage one or more refractory symptoms. Proportional PS, which means that drugs can be titrated to the minimum effective dose, is the form most widely used. From a quarter to a third of all terminally ill patients undergo PS, with a quarter of these requiring continuous deep sedation. The prevalence of PS varies according to the care setting and case mix. The most frequent refractory physical symptoms are delirium and dyspnea, but PS is also considered for existential suffering or psychological distress, which is an extremely difficult and delicate issue to deal with. Active consensus from the patient and advanced care planning is recommended for PS. The decision-making process concerning the continuation or withdrawal of other treatments is not the same as that used for PS. The practice differs totally from euthanasia in its intentions, procedures, and results. The most widely used drugs are midazolam and haloperidol for refractory delirium, but chlorpromazine and other neuroleptics are also effective. In conclusion, some patients experience refractory symptoms during the last hours or days of life and PS is a medical intervention aimed at managing this unbearable suffering. It does not have a detrimental effect on survival.

Palliative Sedation in Terminal Cancer Patients Admitted to Hospice or Home Care Programs: Does the Setting Matter? Results From a National Multicenter Observational Study

CONTEXT

Few studies regarding palliative sedation (PS) have been carried out in home care (HC) setting. A comparison of PS rate and practices between hospice (HS) and HC is also lacking.

OBJECTIVES

Comparing HC and HS settings for PS rate, patient clinical characteristics before and during PS, decision-making process, and clinical aspects of PS.

METHODS

About 38 HC/HS services in Italy participated in a multicenter observational longitudinal study. Consecutive adult cancer patients followed till death during a four-month period and undergoing PS were eligible. Symptom control and level of consciousness were registered every eight hours to death.

RESULTS

About 4276 patients were screened, 2894 followed till death, and 531 (18%) underwent PS. PS rate was 15% in HC and 21% in HS (P < 0.001). Principal refractory symptoms were delirium (54%) and dyspnea (45%), respectively, more common in HC (P < 0.001) and HS (P = 0.03). Informed consent was not obtained in 72% of patients but achieved by 96% of families. Midazolam was the most used drug (94% HS vs. 75% HC; P < 0.001) mainly by continuous infusion (74% HC vs. 89% HS; P < 0.001). PS duration was less than 48 hours in 67% of patients. Hydration during PS was less frequent in HC (27% vs. 49%; P < 0.001). In the eight hours before death, consciousness level was unrousable to mild physical stimulation in 81% and symptom control complete in 89% of cases.

CONCLUSION

Our results show feasibility of PS in HC and HS and suggest setting differences in rates, indications, and practice of PS, possibly related to patients' selection or care organization.

Use of haloperidol versus atypical antipsychotics and risk of in-hospital death in patients with acute myocardial infarction: cohort study

OBJECTIVE

To compare the risk of in-hospital mortality associated with haloperidol compared with atypical antipsychotics in patients admitted to hospital with acute myocardial infarction.

DESIGN

Cohort study using a healthcare database.

SETTING

Nationwide sample of patient data from more than 700 hospitals across the United States.

PARTICIPANTS

6578 medical patients aged more than 18 years who initiated oral haloperidol or oral atypical antipsychotics (olanzapine, quetiapine, risperidone) during a hospital admission with a primary diagnosis of acute myocardial infarction between 2003 and 2014.

MAIN OUTCOME MEASURE

In-hospital mortality during seven days of follow-up from treatment initiation.

RESULTS

Among 6578 patients (mean age 75.2 years) treated with an oral antipsychotic drug, 1668 (25.4%) initiated haloperidol and 4910 (74.6%) initiated atypical antipsychotics. The mean time from admission to start of treatment (5.3 v 5.6 days) and length of stay (12.5 v 13.6 days) were similar, but the mean treatment duration was shorter in patients using haloperidol compared with those using atypical antipsychotics (2.4 v 3.9 days). 1:1 propensity score matching was used to adjust for confounding. In intention to treat analyses with the matched cohort, the absolute rate of death per 100 person days was 1.7 for haloperidol (129 deaths) and 1.1 for atypical antipsychotics (92 deaths) during seven days of follow-up from treatment initiation. The survival probability was 0.93 in patients using haloperidol and 0.94 in those using atypical antipsychotics at day 7, accounting for the loss of follow-up due to hospital discharge. The unadjusted and adjusted hazard ratios of death were 1.51 (95% confidence interval 1.22 to 1.85) and 1.50 (1.14 to 1.96), respectively. The association was strongest during the first four days of follow-up and decreased over time. By day 5, the increased risk was no longer evident (1.12, 0.79 to 1.59). In the as-treated analyses, the unadjusted and adjusted hazard ratios were 1.90 (1.43 to 2.53) and 1.93 (1.34 to 2.76), respectively.

CONCLUSION

The results suggest a small increased risk of death within seven days of initiating haloperidol compared with initiating an atypical antipsychotic in patients with acute myocardial infarction. Although residual confounding cannot be excluded, this finding deserves consideration when haloperidol is used for patients admitted to hospital with cardiac morbidity.

Continuous palliative sedation for patients with advanced cancer at a tertiary care cancer center

Background

Palliative sedation (PS) is an intervention to treat refractory symptoms and to relieve suffering at the end of life. Its prevalence and practice patterns vary widely worldwide. The aim of our study was to evaluate the frequency, clinical indications and outcomes of PS in advanced cancer patients admitted to our tertiary comprehensive cancer center.

Methods

We retrospectively studied the use of PS in advanced cancer patients who died between March 1st, 2012 and December 31st, 2014. PS was defined as the use of continuous infusion of midazolam or neuroleptics for refractory symptoms in the end of life. This study was approved by the Research Ethics Committee of our institution (project number 2481–15).

Results

During the study period, 552 cancer patients died at the institution and 374 met the inclusion criteria for this study. Main reason for exclusion was death in the Intensive Care Unit. Among all included patients, 54.2% (n = 203) received PS. Patients who received PS as compared to those not sedated were younger (67.8 vs. 76.4 years-old, p < 0.001) and more likely to have a diagnosis of lung cancer (23% vs. 14%, p = 0.028). The most common indications for sedation were dyspnea (55%) and delirium (19.7%) and the most common drugs used were midazolam (52.7%) or midazolam and a neuroleptic (39.4%). Median initial midazolam infusion rate was 0.75 mg/h (interquartile range – IQR - 0.6-1.5) and final rate was 1.5 mg/h (IQR 0.9–3.0). Patient survival (length of hospital stay from admission to death) of those who had PS was more than the double of those who did not (33.6 days vs 16 days, p < 0.001). The palliative care team was involved in the care of 12% (n = 25) of sedated patients.

Conclusions

PS is a relatively common practice in the end-of-life of cancer patients at our hospital and it is not associated with shortening of hospital stay. Involvement of a dedicated palliative care team is strongly recommended if this procedure is being considered. Further research is needed to identify factors that may affect the frequency and outcomes associated with PS.

Electronic supplementary material

The online version of this article (10.1186/s12904-017-0264-2) contains supplementary material, which is available to authorized users.

Dyspnea and Delirium at the End of Life

This article focuses on the symptoms of dyspnea and delirium, which can be extremely distressing to patients with cancer at the end of life. Oncology nurses are well suited to detect and treat these symptoms.

.

Clinical Assessment and Management of Delirium in the Palliative Care Setting

Delirium is a neurocognitive syndrome arising from acute global brain dysfunction, and is prevalent in up to 42% of patients admitted to palliative care inpatient units. The symptoms of delirium and its associated communicative impediment invariably generate high levels of patient and family distress. Furthermore, delirium is associated with significant patient morbidity and increased mortality in many patient populations, especially palliative care where refractory delirium is common in the dying phase. As the clinical diagnosis of delirium is frequently missed by the healthcare team, the case for regular screening is arguably very compelling. Depending on its precipitating factors, a delirium episode is often reversible, especially in the earlier stages of a life-threatening illness. Until recently, antipsychotics have played a pivotal role in delirium management, but this role now requires critical re-evaluation in light of recent research that failed to demonstrate their efficacy in mild- to moderate-severity delirium occurring in palliative care patients. Non-pharmacological strategies for the management of delirium play a fundamental role and should be optimized through the collective efforts of the whole interprofessional team. Refractory agitated delirium in the last days or weeks of life may require the use of pharmacological sedation to ameliorate the distress of patients, which is invariably juxtaposed with increasing distress of family members. Further evaluation of multicomponent strategies for delirium prevention and treatment in the palliative care patient population is urgently required.

International variations in clinical practice guidelines for palliative sedation: a systematic review

OBJECTIVES

Palliative sedation is a highly debated medical practice, particularly regarding its proper use in end-of-life care. Worldwide, guidelines are used to standardise care and regulate this practice. In this review, we identify and compare national/regional clinical practice guidelines on palliative sedation against the European Association for Palliative Care (EAPC) palliative sedation Framework and assess the developmental quality of these guidelines using the Appraisal Guideline Research and Evaluation (AGREE II) instrument.

METHODS

Using the PRISMA criteria, we searched multiple databases (PubMed, CancerLit, CINAHL, Cochrane Library, NHS Evidence and Google Scholar) for relevant guidelines, and selected those written in English, Dutch and Italian; published between January 2000 and March 2016.

RESULTS

Of 264 hits, 13 guidelines-Belgium, Canada (3), Ireland, Italy, Japan, the Netherlands, Norway, Spain, Europe, and USA (2) were selected. 8 contained at least 9/10 recommendations published in the EAPC Framework; 9 recommended 'pre-emptive discussion of the potential role of sedation in end-of-life care'; 9 recommended 'nutrition/hydration while performing sedation' and 8 acknowledged the need to 'care for the medical team'. There were striking differences in terminologies used and in life expectancy preceding the practice. Selected guidelines were conceptually similar, comparing closely to the EAPC Framework recommendations, albeit with notable variations.

CONCLUSIONS

Based on AGREE II, 3 guidelines achieved top scores and could therefore be recommended for use in this context. Also, domains 'scope and purpose' and 'editorial independence' ranked highest and lowest, respectively-underscoring the importance of good reportage at the developmental stage.

A Review of Agents for Palliative Sedation/Continuous Deep Sedation: Pharmacology and Practical Applications

Continuous deep sedation at the end of life is a specific form of palliative sedation requiring a care plan that essentially places and maintains the patient in an unresponsive state because their symptoms are refractory to any other interventions. Because this application is uncommon, many providers may lack practical experience in this specialized area and resources they can access are outdated, nonspecific, and/or not comprehensive. The purpose of this review is to provide an evidence- and experience-based reference that specifically addresses those medications and regimens and their practical applications for this very narrow, but vital, aspect of hospice care. Patient goals in a hospital and hospice environments are different, so the manner in which widely used sedatives are dosed and applied can differ greatly as well. Parameters applied in end-of-life care that are based on experience and a thorough understanding of the pharmacology of those medications will differ from those applied in an intensive care unit or other medical environments. By recognizing these different goals and applying well-founded regimens geared specifically for end-of-life sedation, we can address our patients' symptoms in a more timely and efficacious manner.

Continuous Deep Sedation: A Proposal for Performing More Rigorous Empirical Research

Continuous deep sedation until death (CDS) is a type of palliative sedation therapy, and it has recently become a focus of intense debate. Marked inconsistencies in intervention procedures (i.e., what is CDS?) and unstandardized descriptions of patient backgrounds lead to difficulty in comparing the results in the literature. The primary aim of this article was to propose a conceptual framework to perform empirical studies on CDS. We propose the definition of CDS using the intervention protocol. As there are two types of CDS proposed in world-wide literature, we recommend to prepare two types of intervention protocol for CDS: "continuous deep sedation as a result of proportional sedation" (gradual CDS) and "continuous deep sedation to rapidly induce unconsciousness" (rapid CDS). In addition, we recommend that researchers characterize study patients' general condition using a validated prognostic tool, Prognosis in Palliative Care Study predictor model-A. Using this conceptual framework, we can compare the outcomes following the same exposures among homogenous patients throughout the world. This article proposes a provisional definition of two types of CDS. Defining CDS using the intervention protocol and describing patient backgrounds using validated prognostic tools enable comparisons and interpretations of empirical research about CDS. More empirical studies are urgently needed.

[Determining factors in the sedation of geriatric and oncology patients treated at home]

INTRODUCTION

Sedation, used as a therapeutic measure in the field of Palliative Care, continues to present difficulties for many professionals in its management and indications. Is varied existing literature in this regard, often exclusive cancer patients. Our objective is to analyse the characteristics of patients attended by a Home Care Support Team who required sedation compared to non-sedated patients, for possible determining factors for its use that could help in decision-making.

METHOD

A prospective analytical study conducted in Barbastro (Huesca) from September 2007 to February 2011. The study population are patients referred to the Home Care Support Team of Barbastro.

MAIN VARIABLES

Age, sex, medical history, symptoms, previous and current Barthel, Karnofsky, primary caregiver, previous drugs, drugs after intervention, sedation yes/no.

RESULTS

Required sedation 16.6% (n=106) of the cases (N=638). Sedated patients were younger, with no differences in sex, and the large majority (83%) were oncology patients. The presence of metastases showed no differences in need for sedation. Sedated patients have an increased functional impairment, determined by Barthel index decreased and a worse Karnofsky. Sedated patients showed increased frequency of uncontrolled symptoms, except psychomotor agitation, a fact determined by the medications used pre- and post-intervention.

CONCLUSIONS

The presence of neoplastic disease, marked with existence of functional decline, and uncontrolled clinical need for certain medications to control symptoms may determine the need for sedation at the end of the process, above other factors such as patient comorbidity.

Patient-Related Determinants of the Administration of Continuous Palliative Sedation in Hospices and Palliative Care Units: A Prospective, Multicenter, Observational Study

CONTEXT

Knowledge of determinants that are associated with the administration of continuous palliative sedation (CPS) helps physicians identify patients who are at risk of developing refractory symptoms, thereby enabling proactive care planning.

OBJECTIVES

This study aims to explore which patient-related factors at admission are associated with receiving CPS later in the terminal phase of life.

METHODS

A prospective multicenter observational study was performed in six Dutch hospices and three nursing home-based palliative care units. The association between patient-related variables at admission (age, gender, diagnosis, use of opioids or psycholeptics, number of medications, Karnofsky Performance Status scale score, Edmonton Symptom Assessment System distress score, and Glasgow Coma Scale score) and the administration of CPS at the end of life was analyzed.

RESULTS

A total of 467 patients died during the study period, of whom 130 received CPS. In univariate analysis, statistically significant differences were noted between the sedated and nonsedated patients with respect to younger age (P = 0.009), malignancy as a diagnosis (P = 0.05), higher Karnofsky Performance Status score (P = 0.03), the use of opioids (P < 0.001), the use of psycholeptics (P = 0.003), and higher Edmonton Symptom Assessment System distress score (P = 0.05). Multivariate logistic regression analysis showed that only the use of opioids at admission (odds ratio 1.90; 95% confidence interval 1.18-3.05) was significantly associated with the administration of CPS.

CONCLUSION

Physicians should be aware that patients who use opioids at admission have an increased risk for the administration of CPS at the end of life. In this group of patients, a comprehensive personalized care plan starting at admission is mandatory to try to prevent the development of refractory symptoms. Further research is recommended, to identify other determinants of the administration of CPS and to investigate which early interventions will be effective to prevent the need for CPS in patients at high risk.

Intensive symptom control of opioid-refractory dyspnea in congestive heart failure: Role of milrinone in the palliative care unit

OBJECTIVE

We describe an exemplary case of congestive heart failure (CHF) symptoms controlled with milrinone. We also analyze the benefits and risks of milrinone administration in an unmonitored setting.

METHOD

We describe the case of a patient with refractory leukemia and end-stage CHF who developed severe dyspnea after discontinuation of milrinone. At that point, despite starting opioids, she had been severely dyspneic and anxious, requiring admission to the palliative care unit (PCU) for symptom control. After negotiation with hospital administrators, milrinone was administered in an unmonitored setting such as the PCU. A multidisciplinary team approach was also provided.

RESULTS

Milrinone produced a dramatic improvement in the patient's symptom scores and performance status. The patient was eventually discharged to home hospice on a milrinone infusion with excellent symptom control.

SIGNIFICANCE OF RESULTS

This case suggests that milrinone may be of benefit for short-term inpatient administration for dyspnea management, even in unmonitored settings and consequently during hospice in do-not-resuscitate (DNR) patients. This strategy may reduce costs and readmissions to the hospital related to end-stage CHF.

[Analysis of palliative sedation in hospitalised elderly patients: Effectiveness of a protocol]

OBJECTIVE

To measure changes in the practice of palliative sedation during agony in hospitalised elderly patients before and after the implementation of a palliative sedation protocol.

MATERIAL AND METHODS

A retrospective before-after study was performed in hospitalised patients over 65 years old who received midazolam during hospital admission and died in the hospital in two 3-month periods, before and after the implementation of the protocol. Non-sedative uses of midazolam and patients in intensive care were excluded. Patient and admission characteristics, the consent process, withdrawal of life-sustaining treatments, and the sedation process (refractory symptom treated, drug doses, assessment and use of other drugs) were recorded. Association was analysed using the Chi(2) and Student t tests.

RESULTS

A total of 143 patients were included, with no significant differences between groups in demographic characteristics or symptoms. Do not resuscitate (DNR) orders were recorded in approximately 70% of the subjects of each group, and informed consent for sedation was recorded in 91% before vs. 84% after the protocol. Induction and maintenance doses of midazolam followed protocol recommendations in 1.3% before vs 10.4% after the protocol was implemented (P=.02) and adequate rescue doses were used in 1.3% vs 11.9% respectively (P=.01). Midazolam doses were significantly lower (9.86mg vs 18.67mg, P<.001) when the protocol was used than when it was not used. Ramsay sedation score was used in 8% vs. 12% and the Palliative Care Team was involved in 35.5% and 16.4% of the cases (P=.008) before and after the protocol, respectively.

CONCLUSIONS

Use of midazolam slightly improved after the implementation of a hospital protocol on palliative sedation. The percentage of adequate sedations and the general process of sedation were mostly unchanged by the protocol. More education and further assessment is needed to gauge the effect of these measures in the future.

In-service documentation tools and statements on palliative sedation in Germany--do they meet the EAPC framework recommendations? A qualitative document analysis

BACKGROUND

Numerous (inter-)national guidelines and frameworks have been developed to provide recommendations for the application of palliative sedation (PS). However, they are still not widely known, and large variations in PS clinical practice can be found.

AIM

This study aims to collect and describe contents from documents used in clinical practice and to compare to what extent they match the European Association for Palliative Care (EAPC) framework recommendations.

DESIGN AND METHODS

In a national survey on PS in Germany 2012, participants were asked to upload their in-service templates, assessment tools, specific protocols, and in-service statements for the application and documentation of PS. These documents are analyzed by using systematic structured content analysis.

RESULTS

Three hundred seven content units of 52 provided documents were coded. The analyzed templates are very heterogeneous and also contain items not mentioned in the EAPC framework. Among 11 scales for the evaluation of sedation level, the Ramsey Sedation Score (n = 5) and the Richmond-Agitation-Sedation-Scale (n = 2) were found most often. For symptom assessment, three different scales were provided one time respectively. In all six PS statements, the common core elements were possible indications for PS, instructions on dose titration, patient monitoring, and care. Wide congruency exists for physical and psychological indications. Most documents coincide on midazolam as a preferred drug and basic monitoring in regular intervals. Aspects such as pre-emptive discussion of the potential role of sedation, informational needs of relatives, and care for the medical professionals are mentioned rarely.

CONCLUSIONS

The analyzed templates do neglect some points of the EAPC recommendations. However, they expand the ten-point scheme of the framework in some details. The findings may facilitate the development of standardized consensus documentation and monitoring draft as an operational statement.

Palliative pharmacological sedation for terminally ill adults

BACKGROUND

Terminally ill people experience a variety of symptoms in the last hours and days of life, including delirium, agitation, anxiety, terminal restlessness, dyspnoea, pain, vomiting, and psychological and physical distress. In the terminal phase of life, these symptoms may become refractory, and unable to be controlled by supportive and palliative therapies specifically targeted to these symptoms. Palliative sedation therapy is one potential solution to providing relief from these refractory symptoms. Sedation in terminally ill people is intended to provide relief from refractory symptoms that are not controlled by other methods. Sedative drugs such as benzodiazepines are titrated to achieve the desired level of sedation; the level of sedation can be easily maintained and the effect is reversible.

OBJECTIVES

To assess the evidence for the benefit of palliative pharmacological sedation on quality of life, survival, and specific refractory symptoms in terminally ill adults during their last few days of life.

SEARCH METHODS

We searched the Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials (CENTRAL; 2014, Issue 11), MEDLINE (1946 to November 2014), and EMBASE (1974 to December 2014), using search terms representing the sedative drug names and classes, disease stage, and study designs.

SELECTION CRITERIA

We included randomised controlled trials (RCTs), quasi-RCTs, non-RCTs, and observational studies (e.g. before-and-after, interrupted-time-series) with quantitative outcomes. We excluded studies with only qualitative outcomes or that had no comparison (i.e. no control group or no within-group comparison) (e.g. single arm case series).

DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS

Two review authors independently screened titles and abstracts of citations, and full text of potentially eligible studies. Two review authors independently carried out data extraction using standard data extraction forms. A third review author acted as arbiter for both stages. We carried out no meta-analyses due to insufficient data for pooling on any outcome; therefore, we reported outcomes narratively.

MAIN RESULTS

The searches resulted in 14 included studies, involving 4167 adults, of whom 1137 received palliative sedation. More than 95% of people had cancer. No studies were randomised or quasi-randomised. All were consecutive case series, with only three having prospective data collection. Risk of bias was high, due to lack of randomisation. No studies measured quality of life or participant well-being, which was the primary outcome of the review. Five studies measured symptom control, using four different methods, so pooling was not possible. The results demonstrated that despite sedation, delirium and dyspnoea were still troublesome symptoms in these people in the last few days of life. Control of other symptoms appeared to be similar in sedated and non-sedated people. Only one study measured unintended adverse effects of sedative drugs and found no major events; however, four of 70 participants appeared to have drug-induced delirium. The study noticed no respiratory suppression. Thirteen of the 14 studies measured survival time from admission or referral to death, and all demonstrated no statistically significant difference between sedated and non-sedated groups.

AUTHORS' CONCLUSIONS

There was insufficient evidence about the efficacy of palliative sedation in terms of a person's quality of life or symptom control. There was evidence that palliative sedation did not hasten death, which has been a concern of physicians and families in prescribing this treatment. However, this evidence comes from low quality studies, so should be interpreted with caution. Further studies that specifically measure the efficacy and quality of life in sedated people, compared with non-sedated people, and quantify adverse effects are required.

Towards a standardised approach for evaluating guidelines and guidance documents on palliative sedation: study protocol

Background

Sedation in palliative care has received growing attention in recent years; and so have guidelines, position statements, and related literature that provide recommendations for its practice. Yet little is known collectively about the content, scope and methodological quality of these materials.

According to research, there are large variations in palliative sedation practice, depending on the definition and methodology used. However, a standardised approach to comparing and contrasting related documents, across countries, associations and governmental bodies is lacking. This paper reports on a protocol designed to enable thorough and systematic comparison of guidelines and guidance documents on palliative sedation.

Methods and design

A multidisciplinary and international group of palliative care researchers, identified themes and clinical issues on palliative sedation based on expert consultations and evidence drawn from the EAPC (European Association of Palliative Care) framework for palliative sedation and AGREE II (Appraisal Guideline Research and Evaluation) instrument for guideline assessment. The most relevant themes were selected and built into a comprehensive checklist. This was tested on people working closely with practitioners and patients, for user-friendliness and comprehensibility, and modified where necessary. Next, a systematic search was conducted for guidelines in English, Dutch, Flemish, or Italian. The search was performed in multiple databases (PubMed, CancerLit, CNAHL, Cochrane Library, NHS Evidence and Google Scholar), and via other Internet resources. Hereafter, the final version of the checklist will be used to extract data from selected literature, and the same will be compiled, entered into SPSS, cleaned and analysed systematically for publication.

Discussion

We have together developed a comprehensive checklist in a scientifically rigorous manner to allow standardised and systematic comparison. The protocol is applicable to all guidelines on palliative sedation, and the approach will contribute to rigorous and systematic comparison of international guidelines on any challenging topic such as this. Results from the study will provide valuable insights into common core elements and differences between the selected guidelines, and the extent to which recommendations are derived from, or match those in the EAPC framework. The outcomes of the study will be disseminated via peer-reviewed journals and directly to appropriate audiences.

Seventeen years of progress for supportive care services: A resurvey of National Cancer Institute-designated comprehensive cancer centers

OBJECTIVE

We replicated a 1994 study that surveyed the state of supportive care services due to changes in the field and the increased need for such services. We provide an updated assessment, comparing the changes that have occurred and describing the current status of supportive care services in comprehensive cancer settings.

METHOD

We used Coluzzi and colleague's 60-question survey from their 1995 Journal of Clinical Oncology article to frame the 98-question survey employed in the current study. Medical and palliative care directors for the 2011 National Cancer Institute (NCI) comprehensive cancer centers were surveyed regarding their supportive care services and their subjective review of the overall effectiveness of the services provided.

RESULTS

We achieved a 76% response rate (n = 31). The data revealed increases in the number of cancer beds in the hospitals, the degree of integration of supportive care services, the availability of complementary services, and the number of pain and palliative care services offered. There was also an overall shift toward centers becoming more patient centered, as 65% reported now having a patient and family advisory council. Our findings revealed a growing trend to offer distress screening for both outpatients and inpatients. Medical and palliative care directors' evaluations of the supportive care services they offered also significantly improved. However, the results revealed an ongoing gap in services for end-of-life care and timely referrals for hospice services.

SIGNIFICANCE OF RESULTS

Overall, both the quantity and quality of supportive care services in the surveyed NCI-designated cancer centers has improved.

The complexity of nurses' attitudes and practice of sedation at the end of life: a systematic literature review

CONTEXT

Sedation is administered to some palliative care patients at the end of their life. Nurses play an important role in this practice.

OBJECTIVES

To systematically review the evidence on nurses' attitudes and practice of end-of-life sedation.

METHODS

We searched eight electronic databases, four key palliative care journals, and reference lists for empirical studies published in English, between 1990 and 2012, on nurses and their attitudes toward and practice of sedation until a patient's death. A total of 10 studies met the inclusion criteria.

RESULTS

Data were generated from 7515 nurses in four main settings (specialized palliative care unit, home, nursing home, and acute hospital) from seven countries (Belgium, Canada, Japan, The Netherlands, Norway, U.K., and U.S.). On average, the quality of the evidence was good; hence, we analyzed all selected studies. Based on the findings from a previous review, we categorized the emerging themes into: 1) important factors leading to the patient receiving palliative sedation (PS), 2) nurses' attitudes toward PS, and 3) nurses' experience of PS at the end of a patient's life. In general, nurses had a positive but cautious attitude toward the practice of PS. Most saw it as a last resort treatment for relieving suffering and refractory symptoms, and its practice was often influenced by their level of education, expertise, and the roles they played per setting.

CONCLUSION

Most nurses administered sedation until death only within the given circumstances because of the anticipatory benefits in controlling refractory symptoms and suffering. Some of them experienced burdens during PS delivery; these could be supported by operational guidelines and task-related training.

Palliative sedation in end-of-life care

PURPOSE OF REVIEW

The aim of this review was to present and comment on recent data published on palliative sedation in palliative and end-of-life care. Palliative sedation is a medical procedure used to deal with the refractory symptoms occurring in the advanced stages of cancer. It has clinical, nursing, relational and ethical implications, making it a highly sensitive issue.

RECENT FINDINGS

Over the last 12 months, a number of authors have published interesting new findings on different areas of palliative sedation, that is prevalence, indications, monitoring, duration and choice of drugs. In particular, a clear definition of palliative sedation and of its more pronounced form, deep continuous sedation (DCS), has emerged. It has been confirmed that, when performed in the correct way and with the right aims, palliative sedation does not have a detrimental impact on survival.

SUMMARY

Recent findings confirm that palliative sedation is an integral part of a medical palliative care approach and is needed in certain clinical situations. It is a legitimate clinical practice from any ethical point of view. While oncologists should have a basic knowledge of the procedure, its in depth study is a core competency for palliative care physicians.

High-Dose Neuroleptics and Neuroleptic Rotation for Agitated Delirium Near the End of Life

Reason for the study:

Agitated delirium presents unique challenges for hospice and palliative care clinicians. Haloperidol, the recommended neuroleptic, may be ineffective at low dose, or poorly tolerated at higher doses.

Main Findings:

This article reports on two patients with refractory agitated delirium. Both developed extrapyramidal symptoms from haloperidol and required rotation to an alternate neuroleptic. Patient #1 received 2000 mg/day oral chlorpromazine. Patient #2 received greater than 200 mg/day sublingual olanzapine. Control of agitation was achieved, though the doses were substantially higher than has previously reported in the literature. Each patient experienced considerable sedation, though this was an acceptable side effect for the family. Each patient was transferred from the acute care hospital to a location of family preference. There they died within a week of transfer.

Conclusions:

Agitated delirium is a palliative care emergency. High doses of neuroleptic medications, with rotation to an alternate neuroleptic when side effects occur with standard haloperidol, may effectively palliate agitated delirium. This remedy can provide the patient with a peaceful dying in a place of their choosing.

Delirium in adult patients receiving palliative care: a systematic review of the literature

Delirium in palliative care patients is common and its diagnosis and treatment is a major challenge. Our objective was to perform a literature analysis in two phases on the recent scientific evidence (2007-2012) on the diagnosis and treatment of delirium in adults receiving palliative care. In phase 1 (descriptive studies and narrative reviews) 133 relevant articles were identified: 73 addressed the issue of delirium secondarily, and 60 articles as the main topic. However, only 4 prospective observational studies in which delirium was central were identified. Of 135 articles analysed in phase 2 (clinical trials or descriptive studies on treatment of delirium in palliative care patients), only 3 were about prevention or treatment: 2 retrospective studies and one clinical trial on multicomponent prevention in cancer patients. Much of the recent literature is related to reviews on studies conducted more than a decade ago and on patients different to those receiving palliative care. In conclusion, recent scientific evidence on delirium in palliative care is limited and suboptimal. Prospective studies are urgently needed that focus specifically on this highly vulnerable population.

Research priorities in geriatric palliative care: nonpain symptoms

Research addressing the burden, assessment, and management of nonpain symptoms associated with advanced illness in older adults is limited. While nonpain symptoms such as fatigue, sleep, dyspnea, anxiety, depression, cognitive impairment, nausea, and anorexia-cachexia are commonly noted by patients and clinicians, research quantifying their effects on quality of life, function, and other outcomes are lacking and there is scant evidence regarding management. Most available studies have focused on relatively narrow conditions (e.g., chemotherapy-induced nausea) and there are almost no data relevant to patients with multiple morbidities or multiple concurrent symptoms. Assessment and treatment of nonpain symptoms in older adults with serious illness and multiple comorbidities is compromised by the lack of data relevant to their care. Recommended research priorities address the documented high prevalence of distressing symptoms in older adults with serious illness, the unique needs of this population due to coexistence of multiple chronic conditions along with physiologic changes related to aging, the lack of evidence for effective pharmacologic and nonpharmacologic interventions, and the need for validated measures that are relevant across multiple care settings.