Deep and continuous palliative sedation (terminal sedation): clinical-ethical and philosophical aspects

How should respiratory depression and loss of airway patency be handled during initiation of palliative sedation?

BACKGROUND

Loss of airway patency has been reported during initiation of palliative sedation. In present guidelines the loss of airway patency during initiation of palliative sedation is not addressed. Airway patency can be restored by jaw thrust/chin lift or placing the patient in the recovery position.

AIM

A structured ethical analysis of how respiratory depression and loss of airway patency during initiation of palliative sedation should be handled. The essence of the dilemma is whether it is appropriate to apply simple non-invasive methods to restore airway patency in order to avoid the patient's immediate death.

DESIGN

A structured analysis based on the four principles of healthcare ethics and stakeholders' interests.

RESULTS

Beneficence and autonomy support a decision not to regain airway patency whereas non-maleficence lends weight to a decision to restore airway patency. Whether the proportionality criterion of the principle of double effect is met depends on the features of the individual case. The ethical problem appears to be a genuine dilemma where important values and arguments point to different conclusions.

CONCLUSION

Whether to restore airway patency when the airway is obstructed during initiation of palliative sedation will ultimately be based on clinical judgment taking into account both any known patient preferences and relevant clinical information. There are strong arguments favoring both options in this clinical and ethical dilemma. The fact that a clear and universal recommendation cannot be made does not imply indifference regarding what is the clinically and ethically best option for each individual patient.

Tension between continuous and deep sedation and assistance in dying: a national survey of intensive care professionals' perceptions

INTRODUCTION

The situation in France is unique, having a legal framework for continuous and deep sedation (CDS). However, its use in intensive care units (ICU), combined with the withdrawal of life-sustaining therapies, still raises ethical issues, particularly its potential to hasten death. The legalization of assistance in dying, i.e., assisted suicide or euthanasia at the patient's request, is currently under discussion in France. The objectives of this national survey were first, to assess whether ICU professionals perceive CDS administered to ICU patients as a practice that hastens death, in addition to relieving unbearable suffering, and second, to assess ICU professionals' perceptions of assistance in dying.

METHODS

A national survey with online questionnaires for ICU physicians and nursesaddressed through the French Society of Anesthesiology and Critical Care Medicine.

RESULTS

A total of 956 ICU professionals responded to the survey (38% physicians and 62% nurses). Of these, 22% of physicians and 12% of nurses (p < 0.001) felt that the purpose of CDS was to hasten death. For 20% of physicians, CDS combined with terminal extubation was considered an assistance in dying. For 52% of ICU professionals, the current framework did not sufficiently cover the range of situations that occur in the ICU. A favorable opinion on the potential legalization of assistance in dying was observed in 83% of nurses and 71% of physicians (p < 0.001), with no preference between assisted suicide and euthanasia.

CONCLUSION

Our findings highlight the tension between CDS and assisted suicide/euthanasia in the specific context of intensive care and suggest that ICU professionals would be supportive of a legislative evolution.

Experiences and perceptions of continuous deep sedation: An interview study among Dutch patients and relatives

BACKGROUND

The incidence of continuous deep sedation (CDS) has more than doubled over the last decade in The Netherlands, while reasons for this increase are not fully understood. Patients and relatives have an essential role in deciding on CDS. We hypothesize that the increase in CDS practice is related to the changing role of patients and relatives in deciding on CDS.

OBJECTIVE

To describe perceptions and experiences of patients and relatives with regard to CDS. This insight may help professionals and policymakers to better understand and respond to the evolving practice of CDS.

METHODS

Qualitative interviews were held with patients and relatives who had either personal experience with CDS as a relative or had contemplated CDS for themselves.

RESULTS

The vast majority of respondents appreciated CDS as a palliative care option, and none of the respondents reported (moral) objections to CDS. The majority of respondents prioritized avoiding suffering at the end of life. The patients and families generally considered CDS a palliative care option for which they can choose. Likewise, according to our respondents, the decision to start CDS was made by them, instead of the physician. Negative experiences with CDS care were mostly related to loss of sense of agency, due to insufficient communication or information provision by healthcare professionals. Lack of continuity of care was also a source of distress. We observed a variety in the respondents' understanding of the distinction between CDS and other end-of-life care decisions, including euthanasia. Some perceived CDS as hastening death.

CONCLUSION

The traditional view of CDS as a last resort option for a physician to relieve a patient's suffering at the end of life is not explicit among patients and relatives. Instead, our results show that they perceive CDS as a regular palliative care option. Along with this normalization of CDS, patients and relatives claim a substantial say in the decision-making and are mainly motivated by a wish to avoid suffering and exercise control at the end of life. These distinct views on CDS of patients, their relatives and healthcare providers should be reconciled in guidelines and protocols for CDS.

PATIENT OR PUBLIC CONTRIBUTION

One of the authors in our team (G. H.) has experience with CDS as a relative and ensured that the patient/relative viewpoint was adequately reflected in the design and conduct of our study. In the preliminary phase of our study, G. H. adjusted the topic list so it was better adapted to the current practice of CDS. During the data analysis, G. H. read several interviews and took part in the open and critical discussion on central themes and core concepts as an important member of the author team, thereby guaranteeing the central position of the patient/relative perspective in our final research outcome.

Ought the level of sedation to be reduced during deep palliative sedation? A clinical and ethical analysis

BACKGROUND

Deep palliative sedation (DPS) is applied as a response to refractory suffering at the end of life when symptoms cannot be relieved in an awake state. DPS entails a dilemma of whether to provide uninterrupted sedation-in which case DPS would turn into deep and continuous palliative sedation (DCPS) -to minimise the risk that any further intolerable suffering will occur or whether to pause sedation to avoid unnecessary sedation. DPS is problematic in that it leaves the patient 'socially dead' by eradicating their autonomy and conscious experiences.

AIM

To perform a normative ethical analysis of whether guidelines should recommend attempting to elevate consciousness during DPS.

DESIGN

A structured analysis based on the four principles of healthcare ethics and consideration of stakeholders' interests.

RESULTS

When DPS is initiated it reflects that symptom relief is valued above the patient's ability to exercise autonomy and experience social interaction. However, if a decrease in symptom burden occurs, waking could be performed without patients experiencing suffering. Such pausing of deep sedation would satisfy the principles of autonomy and beneficence. Certain patients require substantial dose increases to maintain sedation. Waking such patients risks causing distressing symptoms. This does not happen if deep sedation is kept uninterrupted. Thus, the principle of non-maleficence points towards not pausing sedation. The authors' clinical ethics analysis demonstrates why other stakeholders' interests do not appear to override arguments in favour of providing uninterrupted sedation.

CONCLUSION

Stopping or pausing DPS should always be considered, but should not be routinely attempted.

Continuous and deep sedation until death after a decision to withdraw life-sustaining therapies in intensive care units: A national survey

BACKGROUND

Continuous and deep sedation until death is a much highly debated end-of-life practice. France is unique in having a regulatory framework for it. However, there are no data on its practice in intensive care units (ICUs).

AIM

The aim is to describe continuous and deep sedation in relation to the framework in the specific context of withdrawal of life-sustaining therapies in ICUs, that is, its decision-making process and its practice compared to other end-of-life practices in this setting.

DESIGN AND SETTING

French multicenter observational study. Consecutive ICU patients who died after a decision to withdraw life-sustaining therapies.

RESULTS

A total of 343 patients in 57 ICUs, 208 (60%) with continuous and deep sedation. A formalized procedure for continuous and deep sedation was available in 32% of the ICUs. Continuous and deep sedation was not the result of a collegial decision-making process in 17% of cases, and did not involve consultation with an external physician in 29% of cases. The most commonly used sedative medicines were midazolam (10 [5-18] mg h-1) and propofol (200 [120-250] mg h -1). The Richmond Agitation Sedation Scale (RASS) was -5 in 60% of cases. Analgesia was associated with sedation in 94% of cases. Compared with other end-of-life sedative practices (n = 98), medicines doses were higher with no difference in the depth of sedation.

CONCLUSIONS

This study shows a poor compliance with the framework for continuous and deep sedation. It highlights the need to formalize it to improve the decision-making process and the match between the intent, the practice and the actual effect.

Deep continuous patient-requested sedation until death: a multicentric study

OBJECTIVES

In 2016, a new law was adopted in France granting patients the right, under specific conditions, to continuous deep sedation until death (CDSUD). The goal of this study was to measure the frequency of requests for CDSUD from patients in palliative care.

METHODS

The data collected from the medical records of patients in palliative care units (PCU) or followed by palliative care support teams (PCST) in the Rhône-Alpes area, who died after CDSUD, focused on the patient's characteristics, the drugs used (and compliance with regulatory processes).

RESULTS

All 12 PCU and 12 of the 24 PCST were included. Among the 8500 patients followed, 42 (0.5%) requested CDSUD until death. The patients were: 65.7 (SD=13.7) years old, highly educated (69%), had cancer (81%), refractory symptoms (98%) and mostly psychoexistential distress (69%). The request was rejected for 2 (5%) patients and delayed for 31 (74%) patients. After a delay of a mean 8 days, 13 (31%) patients were granted CDSUD. The drug used was midazolam at 115 mg/24 hours (15-480), during a mean of 3 days. PCUs used lower dosages than PCSTs (83 vs 147), with significantly lower initial doses (39 mg vs 132 mg, p=0.01). A life-threatening condition was recorded in 13 cases (31%) and a collegial decision was taken in 25 cases (60%).

CONCLUSION

This study highlights the low rate of request and the even lower rate of CDSUD in specialised palliative care. However, the sedation for psychoexistential distress and the lack of procedure records raise ethical questions.

Association of Antipsychotic Dose With Survival of Advanced Cancer Patients With Delirium

CONTEXT

Delirium is common in patients with advanced cancer, and antipsychotics are widely used for its management.

OBJECTIVES

We aimed to explore the association of the antipsychotic dose with survival of terminally ill cancer patients with delirium.

METHODS

A secondary analysis of a multicenter prospective observational study was conducted. We enrolled adult advanced cancer patients who developed delirium and received antipsychotics at 14 palliative care units in Japan between September 2015 and May 2016. Hazard ratios of survival after starting antipsychotics between groups with different oral chlorpromazine equivalent doses: low: <100 mg, moderate: 100-200 mg, high: ≥200 mg, were calculated with adjustment for potential confounders using Cox regression. The antipsychotic dose-specific mortality risk was estimated with smooth splines.

RESULTS

Of 453 patients enrolled, 422 patients were analyzed. The median antipsychotic dose was 92.6 mg: low-dose (N = 231), moderate-dose (122), and high-dose (69). The median survival of all patients was 11 days. Compared with the low-dose group, the high-dose group showed a significantly shorter survival (HR: 1.46, 95%CI: 1.08-1.98). Smooth splines demonstrated that HR continuously increased as the antipsychotic dose increased. In patients treated with atypical antipsychotics, the high-dose group showed a significantly shorter survival than the low-dose group (HR: 2.86), while in patients treated with typical antipsychotics, survival was not significantly different (0.99).

CONCLUSIONS

Higher doses of antipsychotics were associated with increased mortality in terminally ill cancer patients with delirium. To minimize the potential mortality risk, antipsychotics should be started at low doses and titrated carefully.

Effect of paracentesis on the survival of patients with terminal cancer and ascites: a propensity score-weighted analysis of the East Asian Collaborative Cross-cultural Study to Elucidate the Dying Process

PURPOSE

Paracentesis is among the most widely utilized treatments for malignant ascites (MA). However, paracentesis in patients with MA has the potential to be associated with life-shortening effects. Thus, this study aimed to investigate whether paracentesis affected the duration of survival in such patients.

METHODS

We performed a post hoc analysis of a prospective multicenter observational study investigating the dying process and end-of-life care in patients with terminal cancer, admitted to 23 palliative care units in Japan. Survival duration was compared between patients who did (paracentesis group) and did not undergo paracentesis (non-paracentesis group). We used inverse probability of treatment weighting (IPTW) to control for baseline covariates between groups.

RESULTS

Among the 1896 initially enrolled patients, 568 with ascites were included in the study cohort. Eighty-five (15.0%) patients underwent paracentesis. The primary tumor site was the pancreas (51.9%, n = 295), followed by the gastrointestinal tract (22.7%, n = 129). Non-adjusted median durations of survival were 22 days (95% confidence interval [CI]: 16-25) and 12 days (95% CI: 11-13) in the paracentesis and non-paracentesis groups, respectively (hazard ratio [HR]: 0.69, 95% CI: 0.54-0.88; p = 0.003). The IPTW-adjusted median survival durations were 22 (95% CI: 16-25) and 16 days (95% CI: 12-22) in the paracentesis and non-paracentesis groups, respectively (HR: 0.89, 95% CI: 0.64-1.24; p = 0.492). No serious adverse events occurred in the paracentesis group.

CONCLUSIONS

Paracentesis does not negatively affect the survival of patients with cancer and MA and can be a standard treatment in palliative care settings.

The Decision-Making Process for Palliative Sedation for Patients with Advanced Cancer-Analysis from a Systematic Review of Prospective Studies

BACKGROUND

The involvement of patients in decision making about their healthcare plans is being emphasized. In the context of palliative sedation, it is unclear how these decisions are made and who are involved in. The aim of the study is to understand how this decision-making is taken.

METHOD

Information from a systematic review on clinical aspects of palliative sedation prospective studies were included. PubMed, CINAHL, Cochrane, MEDLINE, and EMBASE were searched (January 2014-December 2019). Data extraction and analysis regarded: (a) When and by whom the decision-making process is initiated; (b) patient involvement; (c) family involvement and (d) healthcare involvement.

RESULTS

Data about decision making were reported in 8/10 included articles. Palliative sedation was reported in 1137 patients (only 16 of them were non-cancer). Palliative sedation was introduced by the palliative care team during the disease process, at admission, or when patients experienced refractory symptoms. Only two studies explicitly mentioned the involvement of patients in decision making. Co-decision between families and the regular health care professionals was usual, and the health care professionals involved had been working in palliative care services.

CONCLUSION

Patient participation in decision making appeared to be compromised by limited physical or cognitive capacity and family participation is described. The possibility of palliative sedation should be discussed earlier in the disease process.

Effect of continuous deep sedation on survival in the last days of life of cancer patients: A multicenter prospective cohort study

BACKGROUND

Continuous deep sedation is ethically controversial with respect to whether it shortens a patient's life.

AIM

To examine whether continuous deep sedation shortens patient survival from the day of Palliative Performance Scale decline to 20 (PPS20).

DESIGN

A part of a multicenter prospective cohort study (EASED study).

SETTING/PARTICIPANTS

We recruited consecutive adult patients with advanced cancer admitted to 23 participating palliative care units in 2017 in Japan. We compared survival from PPS20 between those who did and did not receive continuous deep sedation. Continuous deep sedation was defined as the continuous administration of sedative medication with the intention to keep a patient continuously unconscious to alleviate otherwise uncontrollable symptoms, but the dose of sedatives was adjusted to achieve adequate symptom relief for each patient. The propensity score-weighting method was used to control for potential confounders, and five sensitivity analyses were performed.

RESULTS

A total of 1926 patients were enrolled. Patients discharged alive were excluded, and we analyzed 1625 patients of whom 156 (9.6%) received continuous deep sedation. Median survival from PPS20 of 1625 patients was 81 h (95% CI: 77-88). The RASS scores decreased to ⩽-4 was 66% at 24 h. Continuous deep sedation was not associated with a significant survival risk (adjusted hazard ratio: 1.06, 95% CI: 0.85-1.33). All sensitivity analyses, including continuous deep sedation defined as the RASS score was ⩽-4 achieved the essentially the same results.

CONCLUSIONS

Continuous deep sedation with careful dose adjustment was not associated with shorter survival in the last days of life in patients with advanced cancer.

Development of a Scoring System to Determine Proportional Appropriateness of Continuous Deep Sedation: A Concept-of-Proof Study

Context: Some patients require continuous deep sedation (CDS) for refractory symptoms despite intensive palliative care. The principle of proportionality is proposed on the basis of clinical decisions, but no validated tools to assist such decision making are available. Aim: To develop a scoring system to determine whether CDS is proportionally appropriate. Subjects and Methods: A secondary analysis of a nationwide questionnaire survey of Japanese palliative care specialists was performed. Physicians were asked to rate the degree that they believed CDS to be appropriate in a total of 27 scenarios based on a combination of 3 factors with 3 levels: (1) the estimated survival (days, weeks, and months), (2) the patient's wish (clear and consistent, somewhat unclear and/or inconsistent, and unclear or inconsistent), and (3) confidence in refractoriness of the symptom (definite, probable, and unsure). Based on logistic regression analyses, a scoring system with two formulas (the proportionality score to determine that continuous deep sedation is appropriate [ProScoreCDS-appropriate] and proportionality score to determine that continuous deep sedation is inappropriate [ProScoreCDS-inappropriate]) to predict specialists' decision that CDS is appropriate or inappropriate was developed. The accuracy of the formulas was investigated. Results: Among 695 palliative care specialists, 469 returned the questionnaire (response rate, 69%) and 440 were analyzed. Logistic regression analyses identified that all three factors were significantly associated with physicians' decisions about the appropriateness of performing CDS. Using weighted value, the total score ranged from 3 to 67 for ProScoreCDS-appropriate, and 3 to 27 for ProScoreCDS-inappropriate. The area under the curve (AUC) values of ProScoreCDS-appropriate and ProScoreCDS-inappropriate were 0.88 (95% confidence interval [CI], 0.87-0.89) and 0.81 (95% CI, 0.81-0.82), respectively. Using cutoff points of 41 and 14, sensitivity and specificity were 68.6% and 88.9% for ProScoreCDS-appropriate and 67.7% and 76.0% for ProScoreCDS-inappropriate, respectively. Conclusion: A scoring system to determine whether CDS is proportionally appropriate can be constructed, and a further study to develop a clinical tool is promising.

General anaesthesia in end-of-life care: extending the indications for anaesthesia beyond surgery

In this article, we describe an extension of general anaesthesia – beyond facilitating surgery – to the relief of suffering during dying. Some refractory symptoms at the end of life (pain, delirium, distress, dyspnoea) might be managed by analgesia, but in high doses, adverse effects (e.g. respiratory depression) can hasten death. Sedation may be needed for agitation or distress and can be administered as continuous deep sedation (also referred to as terminal or palliative sedation) generally using benzodiazepines. However, for some patients these interventions are not enough, and others may express a clear desire to be completely unconscious as they die. We summarise the historical background of an established practice that we refer to as ‘general anaesthesia in end‐of‐life care’. We discuss its contexts and some ethical and legal issues that it raises, arguing that these are largely similar issues to those already raised by continuous deep sedation. To be a valid option, general anaesthesia in end‐of‐life care will require a clear multidisciplinary framework and consensus practice guidelines. We see these as an impending development for which the specialty should prepare. General anaesthesia in end‐of‐life care raises an important debate about the possible role of anaesthesia in the relief of suffering beyond the context of surgical/diagnostic interventions.

A systematic review of quality improvement initiatives for continuous sedation until death

BACKGROUND

Extensive debate surrounds the practice of continuous sedation until death within end-of-life care.

AIM

To provide insight into existing initiatives to support the practice of continuous sedation until death and assess their feasibility and effectiveness.

DESIGN

Systematic review and narrative synthesis, registered on PROSPERO (CRD42020149630).

DATA SOURCES

Records were searched through MEDLINE, EMBASE, CENTRAL, CINAHL, and Web of Science from inception to April 16 2020. Peer-reviewed studies reporting original data on initiatives to support the practice of continuous sedation were included for review.

RESULTS

Twenty-one studies met the criteria and were included. Initiatives were focused on assessment tools of consciousness and discomfort (9), the use of guidelines and protocols (8), and expert consultation (3). All initiatives were reported as useful, acceptable, and feasible. Studies on the use of monitoring devices showed that a small proportion of patients were found to be awake, despite the patient being unresponsive according to the observer-based sedation scales. However, the wide range of values of these monitoring devices for comfortable and adequately sedated patients seems to hamper its overall implementation in daily clinical practice. Physicians reported changes in practice conform to guideline recommendations but the shift was modest at best. Expert consultation was regarded as supportive when sufficient expertise is lacking and helpful in avoiding possibly unnecessary sedations.

CONCLUSIONS

The reviewed initiatives may contribute to improvement of continuous sedation until death, though their evidence base is rather limited. More insight is needed into their feasibility, preconditions for effective implementation and impact in actual practice.

Medicalisation, suffering and control at the end of life: The interplay of deep continuous palliative sedation and assisted dying

Medicalisation is a pervasive feature of contemporary end of life and dying in Western Europe and North America. In this article, we focus on the relationship between two specific aspects of the medicalisation of dying: deep continuous palliative sedation until death and assisted dying. We draw upon a qualitative interview study with 29 health professionals from three jurisdictions where assisted dying is lawful: Flanders, Belgium; Oregon, USA; and Quebec, Canada. Our findings demonstrate that the relationship between palliative sedation and assisted dying is often perceived as fluid and complex. This is inconsistent with current laws as well as with ethical and clinical guidelines according to which the two are categorically distinct. The article contributes to the literature examining health professionals’ opinions and experiences. Moreover, our findings inform a discussion about emergent themes: suffering, timing, autonomy and control – which appear central in the wider discourse in which both palliative sedation and assisted dying are situated, and which in turn relate to the wider ideas about what constitutes a ‘good death’.

Death without distress? The taboo of suffering in palliative care

Palliative care (PC) names as one of its central aims to prevent and relieve suffering. Following the concept of "total pain", which was first introduced by Cicely Saunders, PC not only focuses on the physical dimension of pain but also addresses the patient's psychological, social, and spiritual suffering. However, the goal to relieve suffering can paradoxically lead to a taboo of suffering and imply adverse consequences. Two scenarios are presented: First, PC providers sometimes might fail their own ambitions. If all other means prove ineffective terminal sedation can still be applied as a last resort, though. However, it may be asked whether sedating a dying patient comes close to eliminating suffering by eliminating the sufferer and hereby resembles physician-assisted suicide (PAS), or euthanasia. As an alternative, PC providers could continue treatment, even if it so far prove unsuccessful. In that case, either futility results or the patient might even suffer from the perpetuated, albeit fruitless interventions. Second, some patients possibly prefer to endure suffering instead of being relieved from it. Hence, they want to forgo the various bio-psycho-socio-spiritual interventions. PC providers' efforts then lead to paradoxical consequences: Feeling harassed by PC, patients could suffer even more and not less. In both scenarios, suffering is placed under a taboo and is thereby conceptualised as not being tolerable in general. However, to consider suffering essentially unbearable might promote assisted dying not only on an individual but also on a societal level insofar as unbearable suffering is considered a criterion for euthanasia or PAS.

Ethical end-of-life palliative care: response to Riisfeldt

In a recent article, ¹ Riisfeldt attempts to show that the principle of double effect (PDE) is unsound as an ethical principle and problematic in its application to palliative opioid and sedative use in end-of-life care. Specifically, he claims that (1) routine, non-lethal opioid and sedative administration may be "intrinsically bad" by PDE's standards, (2) continuous deep palliative sedation (or "terminal sedation") should be treated as a bad effect akin to death for purposes of PDE, (3) PDE cannot coherently be applied in cases where death "indirectly" furthers an agent's intended end of pain relief via medically appropriate palliative care, and (4) application of PDE requires sacrificing common beliefs about the sanctity of human life. I respond by showing that Riisfeldt's understanding of PDE is seriously mistaken: he misattributes Kantian and Millian reasoning to the principle and conflates acts' intrinsic properties with their effects. Further, a corrected understanding of PDE can address Riisfeldt's case-specific objections.

Distinction between euthanasia and palliative sedation is clear-cut

This article is a response to Thomas David Riisfeldt's paper entitled 'Weakening the ethical distinction between euthanasia, palliative opioid use and palliative sedation'. It is shown that as far as euthanasia and palliative sedation are concerned, Riisfeldt has not established that a common ground, or a similarity, between the two is the relief of suffering. Quite the contrary, this is not characteristic of euthanasia, neither by definition nor from a clinical point of view. Hence, the argument hinges on a conceptually and empirically erroneous premise and is accordingly a non-starter.

Palliative sedation and medical assistance in dying: Distinctly different or simply semantics?

Medical assistance in dying (MAiD) and palliative sedation (PS) are both legal options in Canada that may be considered by patients experiencing intolerable and unmanageable suffering. A contentious, lively debate has been ongoing in the literature regarding the similarities and differences between MAiD and PS. The aim of this paper is to explore the propositions that MAiD and PS are essentially similar and conversely that MAiD and PS are distinctly different. The relevance of such a debate is apparent for clinicians and patients alike. Understanding the complex and multi‐faceted nuances between PS and MAiD allows patients and caregivers to make more informed decisions pertaining to end‐of‐life care. It is hoped that this paper will also serve to foster further debate and consideration of the issues associated with PS and MAiD with a view to improve patient care and the quality of both living and dying in Canada.

The spectrum of end of life care: an argument for access to medical assistance in dying for vulnerable populations

Medical assistance in dying (MAiD) was legalized by the Supreme Court of Canada in June 2016 and became a legal, viable end of life care (EOLC) option for Canadians with irremediable illness and suffering. Much attention has been paid to the balance between physicians' willingness to provide MAiD and patients' legal right to request medically assisted death in certain circumstances. In contrast, very little attention has been paid to the challenge of making MAiD accessible to vulnerable populations. The purpose of this paper was to examine the extant literature and resources that are available on the provision of MAiD in Canada. We found that the provision of EOLC in Canada offers insufficient access to palliative and EOLC options for Canadians and that vulnerable Canadians experience disproportional barriers to accessing these already limited resources. Consequently, we argue that palliative care, hospice care and MAiD must be considered a spectrum of EOLC that is inclusive and accessible to all Canadians. We conclude by imploring Canadian healthcare professionals, policy makers and legislators to consider MAiD as a viable EOLC option for all Canadians.

Palliative Sedation for Existential Suffering: A Systematic Review of Argument-Based Ethics Literature

CONTEXT

Although unanimity exists on using palliative sedation (PS) for controlling refractory physical suffering in end-of-life situations, using it for controlling refractory existential suffering (PS-ES) is controversial. Complicating the debate is that definitions and terminology for existential suffering are unclear, ambiguous, and imprecise, leading to a lack of consensus for clinical practice.

OBJECTIVES

To systematically identify, describe, analyze, and discuss ethical arguments and concepts underpinning the argument-based bioethics literature on PS-ES.

METHODS

We conducted a systematic search of the argument-based bioethics literature in PubMed, CINAHL, Embase^®, The Philosopher's Index, PsycINFO^®, PsycARTICLES^®, Scopus, ScienceDirect, Web of Science, Pascal-Francis, and Cairn. We included articles published in peer-reviewed journals till December 31, 2016, written in English or French, which focused on ethical arguments related to PS-ES. We used Peer Review of Electronic Search Strategies protocol, Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses, and The Qualitative Analysis Guide of Leuven for data extraction and synthesis of themes.

RESULTS

We identified 18 articles that met the inclusion criteria. Our analysis revealed mind-body dualism, existential suffering, refractoriness, terminal condition, and imminent death as relevant concepts in the ethical debate on PS-ES. The ethical principles of double effect, proportionality, and the four principles of biomedical ethics were used in argumentations in the PS-ES debate.

CONCLUSION

There is a clear need to better define the terminology used in discussions of PS-ES and to ground ethical arguments in a more effective way. Anthropological presuppositions such as mind-body dualism underpin the debate and need to be more clearly elucidated using an interdisciplinary approach.

Does the doctrine of double effect apply to the prescription of barbiturates? Syme vs the Medical Board of Australia

The doctrine of double effect (DDE) is a principle of crucial importance in law and medicine. In medicine, the principle is generally accepted to apply in cases where the treatment necessary to relieve pain and physical suffering runs the risk of hastening the patient's death. More controversially, it has also been used as a justification for withdrawal of treatment from living individuals and physician-assisted suicide. In this paper, I will critique the findings of the controversial Victorian Civil and Administrative Tribunal (VCAT) hearing Syme vs the Medical Board of Australia In that hearing, Dr Rodney Syme, a urologist and euthanasia advocate, was defending his practice of prescribing barbiturates to terminally ill patients. Syme claimed that he prescribed the drugs with the intention of relieving their existential suffering and not to assist in suicide; he argued that the DDE could be applied. Pace VCAT, I argue that this is an illegitimate application of DDE. I argue that a close scrutiny of Syme's actions reveals that, at the very least, he intended to give patients the option of suicide. He furthermore used what on a traditional definition of DDE would be considered a 'bad' means-the prescription of Nembutal-to achieve a 'good' end-the relief of suffering. The case demonstrates the crucial importance of analysing an agent's 'intention' and the 'effects' of their actions when applying DDE. Ethicists and, indeed, the judiciary need to attend to the ethical complexities of DDE when they assess the applicability of DDE to end of life care. If they fail to do this, the doctrine risks losing its legitimacy as an ethical principle.

A Nationwide Survey About Palliative Sedation Involving Japanese Palliative Care Specialists: Intentions and Key Factors Used to Determine Sedation as Proportionally Appropriate

CONTEXT

Although there has long been debate about physicians' intentions and what physicians consider to be proportionally appropriate when performing palliative sedation, few large studies have been performed.

OBJECTIVES

To identify physicians' intentions when starting continuous deep sedation and to clarify what factors determine whether physicians regard sedation as proportionally appropriate in relation to expected survival, the patients' wishes, and refractoriness.

METHODS

A nationwide questionnaire survey of Japanese palliative care specialists was performed from August to December 2016. We defined continuous deep sedation as the continuous use of sedatives to relieve intolerable and refractory symptoms with the loss of consciousness until death.

RESULTS

Of the 695 palliative care specialists enrolled, 440 were analyzed (response rate, 69%). A total of 95% and 87% of the physicians reported that they explicitly intended to perform symptom palliation and decrease consciousness levels, respectively. Moreover, 38% answered that they explicitly intended to maintain unconsciousness until death, and 11% reported that they intended to shorten survival to some extent. The respondents considered that continuous deep sedation is more appropriate when the predicted survival is shorter, the patients' wishes are consistent and clear, and confidence in the refractoriness of symptoms is higher.

CONCLUSIONS

Japanese palliative care specialists explicitly intend to control symptoms and reduce the level of consciousness when performing continuous deep sedation, but there are differences in their intentions with regard to maintaining unconsciousness until death. Predicted survival, patients' wishes, and confidence in refractoriness are associated with physicians' judgment that sedation is proportionally appropriate.

Medically Timed Death as an Enactment of Good Death: An Ethnographic Study of Three European Intensive Care Units

The article is based on ethnographic observation and semistructured interviews with personnel in three European adult intensive care units. Intensive care is a domain of contemporary biomedicine centered on invasive and intense efforts to save lives in acute, critical conditions. It echoes our culture's values of longevity. Nevertheless, mortality rates are elevated. Many deaths follow from nontreatment decisions. Medicalized dying in technological medical settings are often presented as unnatural, impersonal, and undesirable ways of dying. How does this affect the way in which death is experienced by intensive care professionals? What might the enactment of dying in intensive care reveal about our cultural values of good and bad dying?

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.

Medical murder in Belgium and the Netherlands

This article is a response to Raphael Cohen-Almagor's paper entitled 'First do no harm: intentionally shortening lives of patients without their explicit request in Belgium'. His paper deals with very important matters of life and death, however its concept usage is in part misleading. For instance, the fact that medical murder takes place both in Belgium and the Netherlands is missed. Cohen-Almagor calls such acts 'worrying' and considers them to be 'abuse'. However, it remains an open question whether or not there can be such a thing as legitimate murder in a medical context. From the combined perspectives of justice and the duty to end unbearable suffering, there might be. Thus, key arguments for euthanasia are also prominent in an argument for medical murder.

Physicians in Postgraduate Training Characteristics and Support of Palliative Sedation for Existential Distress

INTRODUCTION

Palliative sedation for refractory existential distress (PS-ED) is ethically troubling but potentially critical to quality end-of-life (EOL) care. Physicians' in postgraduate training support toward PS-ED is unknown nor is it known how empathy, hope, optimism, or intrinsic religious motivation (IRM) affect their support. These knowledge gaps hinder efforts to support physicians who struggle with patients' EOL care preferences.

METHODS

One hundred thirty-four postgraduate physicians rated their support of PS for refractory physical pain (PS-PP) or PS-ED, ranked the importance of patient preferences in ethically challenging situations, and completed measures of empathy, hope, optimism, and IRM. Predictors of PS-ED and PS-PP support were examined using binary and multinomial logistic regression.

RESULTS

Only 22.7% of residents were very supportive of PS-ED, and 82.0% were very supportive of PS-PP. Support for PS-PP or PS-ED did not correlate with levels of empathy, hope, optimism, or IRM; however, for residents with lower IRM, greater optimism was associated with greater PS-ED support. In contrast, among residents with higher IRM, optimism was not associated with PS-ED support.

CONCLUSIONS

Comparing current results to published surveys, a similar proportion of residents and practicing physicians support PS-ED and PS-PP. In contrast to practicing physicians, however, IRM does not directly influence residents' supportiveness. The interaction between optimism and IRM suggests residents' beliefs and characteristics are salient to their EOL decisions. End-of-life curricula should provide physicians opportunities to reflect on the personal and ethical factors that influence their support for PS-ED.

Ethical dilemmas faced by hospice nurses when administering palliative sedation to patients with terminal cancer

OBJECTIVE

Palliative sedation is a method of symptom management frequently used in hospices to treat uncontrolled symptoms at the end of life. There is a substantial body of literature on this subject; however, there has been little research into the experiences of hospice nurses when administering palliative sedation in an attempt to manage the terminal restlessness experienced by cancer patients.

METHOD

Semistructured interviews were conducted with a purposive sample of seven hospice nurses who had cared for at least one patient who had undergone palliative sedation within the past year in a hospice in the south of England in the United Kingdom. A phenomenological approach and Colaizzi's stages of analysis were employed to develop themes from the data.

RESULTS

Facilitating a "peaceful death" was the primary goal of the nurses, where through the administration of palliative sedation they sought to enable and support patients to be "comfortable," "relaxed," and "calm" at the terminal stage of their illness. Ethical dilemmas related to decision making were a factor in achieving this. These were: medication decisions, "juggling the drugs," "causing the death," sedating young people, the family "requesting" sedation, and believing that hospice is a place where death is hastened.

SIGNIFICANCE OF RESULTS

Hospice nurses in the U.K. frequently encounter ethical and emotional dilemmas when administering palliative sedation. Making such decisions about using palliative sedation causes general discomfort for them. Undertaking this aspect of care requires confidence and competence on the part of nurses, and working within a supportive hospice team is of fundamental importance in supporting this practice.

How defining clinical practices may influence their evaluation: the case of continuous sedation at the end of life

RATIONALE, AIMS AND OBJECTIVES

Continuous sedation at the end of life is an end-of-life practice that has gained considerable attention in the international literature. Nevertheless, significant confusion persists, even on how to label or define the practice. Several different terms and definitions exist, and these are often non-neutral and indicative of one's normative position on sedation at the end of life. This is problematic for two reasons. First, the use of such value-laden terms or definitions of continuous sedation may make it difficult, if not impossible, to agree on the facts surrounding continuous sedation. Second, including normative criteria in a definition can lead one to make disguised circular or tautological statements.

METHODS

This paper identifies commonly used terms and definitions and demonstrates how particular elements present in these are value-laden and can influence the ethical evaluation of continuous sedation at the end of life.

RESULTS

Two commonly used terms, 'palliative sedation' and 'terminal sedation', have been strongly criticized. We propose to use another, more descriptive term, namely 'continuous sedation at the end of life'. As regards the different definitions of sedation, some are general, but most contain very specific elements, thereby clearly limiting the number of cases that are covered by the definition. Some definitions of sedation include the intention one should (not) have, the possible indications for the practice, and the type of patients the practice should be reserved for.

CONCLUSION

Including value-laden elements in the very definition of a clinical practice runs the risk of pre-empting a proper normative debate about the practice. We explain why this is the case and why it is problematic, and we propose an alternative, descriptive, definition that seeks to avoid these problems.

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.

[New Act concerning end of life: Impact for medical practice?]

New French 2016' Act recognizes 3 new rights for patients at the end of their life: right to dead without futilities, right to have their wishes respected and right to be comfortable in all circumstances. Medical acts must not be continued in an unreasonable way. Futility is defined by useless, disproportionate or without another aim that an artificial life sustaining acts. For patients who cannot tell their wishes, a withdrawing or withholding decision of life sustaining treatments can be taken with a collegiate process. Doctors must always care about patient comfort with palliative care. Artificial hydration and nutrition can be considered as futile. Patients can write advanced directives or design confidence person to attest their wishes if they should be unable to do it. Doctors must respect advanced directives, except in emergency cases or if there are inappropriate. In such cases, the decision not to respect advanced directives must be taken collegially. Sedation is a therapeutic solution to alleviate refractory suffering for patients at the end of life, even if there is a risk to shorten their life, if the aim is to make patient comfortable and if it is the only way to achieve this goal. A specific right to deep and continuous sedation until death is created, only for patients with a short life prognosis (forhours to days). It is an exceptional practice with very strict conditions including a collegiate deliberation including non-medical team members. If they wish, patients at the end of life should be cared at home with comfort treatments if needed. Referent doctor must inform patients about their rights. An initial and continuous formation on this field is required. For every decision, it is important to keep a record in the patient chart. If not, it will be a fault.

Addressing the Concerns Surrounding Continuous Deep Sedation in Singapore and Southeast Asia: A Palliative Care Approach

The application of continuous deep sedation (CDS) in the treatment of intractable suffering at the end of life continues to be tied to a number of concerns that have negated its use in palliative care. Part of the resistance towards use of this treatment option of last resort has been the continued association of CDS with physician-associated suicide and/or euthanasia (PAS/E), which is compounded by a lack clinical guidelines and a failure to cite this treatment under the aegis of a palliative care approach. I argue that reinstituting a palliative care-inspired approach that includes a holistic review of the patient's situation and the engagement of a multidisciplinary team (MDT) guided by clearly defined practice requirements that have been lacking amongst many prevailing guidelines will overcome prevailing objections to this practice and allow for the legitimization of this process.

Palliative sedation for intolerable suffering

PURPOSE OF REVIEW

The purpose of this review is to provide an update on palliative sedation in palliative and end-of-life care. Palliative sedation is the medical procedure used to deal with refractory symptoms in advanced cancer patients when all other specific approaches have failed.

RECENT FINDINGS

Palliative sedation, in the strictest sense of the term, is a proportionate (proportionate palliative sedation, PPS) and intrinsically variable procedure used on an individual basis to relieve refractory symptoms in terminally ill patients, without the intention of hastening death. Completely separate from any other end-of-life decision and not intended to hasten death, palliative sedation has been shown not to have a detrimental impact on survival.

SUMMARY

To maintain palliative sedation as a legitimate clinical procedure from any ethical or clinical point of view, it must be limited to the restricted area for which it was conceived, that is, relief from refractory suffering as deemed necessary by a patient and by an experienced palliative care team. In this way, there is no risk of associating palliative sedation with other end-of-life decisions. Close collaboration is needed between oncologists and palliative care physicians for this clinical procedure.

Accounting for personhood in palliative sedation: the Ring Theory of Personhood

Application of sedation at the end of life has been fraught with ethical and clinical concerns, primarily focused on its potential to hasten death. However, in the face of clinical data that assuage most of these concerns, a new threat to this treatment of last resort has arisen. Concern now pivots on its effects on the personhood of the patient, underpinned by the manner in which personhood has been conceptualised. For many authors, it is consciousness that is seen to be the seat of personhood, thus its loss is seen to rob a patient of their moral and ethical worth, leaving them in a state that cannot ethically be differentiated from death. Here I proffer a clinically based alternative to this view, the Ring Theory of Personhood, which dispels these concerns about sedation at the end of life. The Ring Theory envisages personhood as a coadunation of three domains of concern: the innate, the individual and the relational elements of personhood. The innate element of personhood is held to be present among all humans by virtue of their links with the Divine and or their human characteristics. The individual elements of personhood pivot on the presence of consciousness-dependent features such as self-awareness, self-determination and personality traits. The relational component of personhood envisages an individual as being 'socially embedded' replete with social and familial ties. It is these three equally important inter-related domains that define personhood.

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-still a complex clinical issue!

It is my anecdotal impression that, in reviewing the recent contents of palliative care journals, it is hard not to find an article on palliative sedation [...]

Physician assisted suicide: the great Canadian euthanasia debate

A substantial majority of Canadians favours a change to the Criminal Code which would make it legally permissible, subject to careful regulation, for patients suffering from incurable physical illness to opt for either physician assisted suicide (PAS) or voluntary active euthanasia (VAE). This discussion will focus primarily on the arguments for and against decriminalizing physician assisted suicide, with special reference to the British Columbia case of Lee Carter vs. Attorney General of Canada. The aim is to critique the arguments and at the same time to describe the contours of the current Canadian debate. Both ethical and legal issues raised by PAS are clarified. Empirical evidence available from jurisdictions which have followed the regulatory route is presented and its relevance to the slippery slope argument is considered. The arguments presented by both sides are critically assessed. The conclusion suggested is that evidence of harms to vulnerable individuals or to society, consequent upon legalization, is insufficient to support continued denial of freedom to those competent adults who seek physician assistance in hastening their death.

French Swiss physicians' attitude toward palliative sedation: Influence of prognosis and type of suffering

OBJECTIVE

Palliative sedation is a last resort medical act aimed at relieving intolerable suffering induced by intractable symptoms in patients at the end-of-life. This act is generally accepted as being medically indicated under certain circumstances. A controversy remains in the literature as to its ethical validity. There is a certain vagueness in the literature regarding the legitimacy of palliative sedation in cases of non-physical refractory symptoms, especially "existential suffering." This pilot study aims to measure the influence of two independent variables (short/long prognosis and physical/existential suffering) on the physicians' attitudes toward palliative sedation (dependent variable).

METHODS

We used a 2 × 2 experimental design as described by Blondeau et al. Four clinical vignettes were developed (vignette 1: short prognosis/existential suffering; vignette 2: long prognosis/existential suffering; vignette 3: short prognosis/physical suffering; vignette 4: long prognosis/physical suffering). Each vignette presented a terminally ill patient with a summary description of his physical and psychological condition, medication, and family situation. The respondents' attitude towards sedation was assessed with a six-point Likert scale. A total of 240 vignettes were sent to selected Swiss physicians.

RESULTS

74 vignettes were completed (36%). The means scores for attitudes were 2.62 ± 2.06 (v1), 1.88 ± 1.54 (v2), 4.54 ± 1.67 (v3), and 4.75 ± 1.71 (v4). General linear model analyses indicated that only the type of suffering had a significant impact on the attitude towards sedation (F = 33.92, df = 1, p = 0.000). Significance of the results: The French Swiss physicians' attitude toward palliative sedation is more favorable in case of physical suffering than in existential suffering. These results are in line with those found in the study of Blondeau et al. with Canadian physicians and will be discussed in light of the arguments given by physicians to explain their decisions.