Uniformly defining continuous deep sedation

Clinical Practice Guidelines on Palliative Sedation Around the World: A Systematic Review

Objective: The principal aim of this study was to identify, systematically and transparently, clinical practice guidelines (CPGs) on palliative sedation from around the world. Methods: A systematic search was performed using 5 databases, grey literature search tools, citation tracking, and contact with palliative care experts across the world. Current CPGs accredited by an international, national, or regional authority, published in English, German, French, or Italian, were subjected to content analysis. Results: In total, 35 CPGs from 14 countries and 1 international CPG were included in the analysis. The CPGs had diverse formal characteristics. Their thematic scope was difficult to analyze and compare because of differences in the terms and definitions of palliative sedation in those texts. We identified 3 main situations: (1) CPGs with a fully explicit thematic scope; (2) CPGs with a partially explicit thematic scope; and (3) CPGs without an explicit thematic scope. Several CPGs explicitly stated what forms of sedation were excluded from the text. However, this presentation was often confusing. Conclusion: Our review provides several pieces of information that could guide international reflections in this field, and be used to develop or update CPGs at all levels. Efforts should be made to clarify the thematic scope of each CPG on palliative sedation, in order to generate an understanding of the forms of this therapy addressed in the text.

Terminological Confusion About Sedation in Palliative Care: Results of an International Online Vignette Survey

Background: Terminological problems concerning sedation in palliative care and consequences for research and clinical decision making have been reported frequently. Objectives: To gather data on the application of definitions of sedation practices in palliative care to clinical cases and to analyze implications for high-quality definitions. Design: We conducted an online survey with a convenience sample of international experts involved in the development of guidelines on sedation in palliative care and members of the European Association for Palliative Care (EAPC). Participants were asked to apply four published definitions to four case vignettes. Data were analyzed using descriptive statistics. Results: A total of 32 experts and 271 EAPC members completed the survey. The definitions were applied correctly in n = 2200/4848 cases (45.4%). The mean number of correct applications of the definitions (4 points max.) was 2.2 ± 1.14 for the definition of the SedPall study group, 1.8 ± 1.03 for the EAPC definition, 1.7 ± 0.98 for the definition of the Norwegian Medical Association, and 1.6 ± 1.01 for the definition of the Japanese Society of Palliative Medicine. The rate of correct applications for the 16 vignette-definition pairs varied between 70/303 (23.1%) and 227/303 (74.9%). The content of definitions and vignettes together with free-text comments explains participants' decisions and misunderstandings. Conclusions: Definitions of sedation in palliative care are frequently incorrectly applied to clinical case scenarios under simplified conditions. This suggests that clinical communication and research might be negatively influenced by misunderstandings and inconsistent labeling or reporting of data. Clinical Trial Registration Number: DRKS00015047.

Continuous deep sedation at the end of life: a qualitative interview-study among health care providers on an evolving practice

BACKGROUND

Continuous deep sedation (CDS) can be used for patients at the end of life who suffer intolerably from severe symptoms that cannot be relieved otherwise. In the Netherlands, the use of CDS is guided by an national guideline since 2005. The percentage of patients for whom CDS is used increased from 8% of all patients who died in 2005 to 18% in 2015. The aim of this study is to explore potential causes of the rise in the use of CDS in the Netherlands according to health care providers who have been participating in this practice.

METHODS

Semi-structured interviews were conducted and thematically analysed. Participants were Dutch health care providers (HCPs), working at patients' homes, hospices, elderly care facilities and in hospitals and experienced in providing CDS, who were recruited via purposeful sampling.

RESULTS

41 Health care providers participated in an interview. For these HCPs the reason to start CDS is often a combination of symptoms resulting in a refractory state. HCPs indicated that symptoms of non-physical origin are increasingly important in the decision to start CDS. Most HCPs felt that suffering at the end of life is less tolerated by patients, their relatives, and sometimes by HCPs; they report more requests to relieve suffering by using CDS. Some HCPs in our study have experienced increasing pressure to perform CDS. Some HCPs stated that they more often used intermittent sedation, sometimes resulting in CDS.

CONCLUSIONS

This study provides insight into how participating HCPs perceive that their practice of CDS changed over time. The combination of a broader interpretation of refractory suffering by HCPs and a decreased tolerance of suffering at the end of life by patients, their relatives and HCPs, may have led to a lower threshold to start CDS.

TRIAL REGISTRATION

The Research Ethics Committee of University Medical Center Utrecht assessed that the study was exempt from ethical review according to Dutch law (Protocol number 19-435/C).

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.

A qualitative study on continuous deep sedation until death as an alternative to assisted suicide in Switzerland

BACKGROUND

According to the European Association for Palliative Care, decisions regarding palliative sedation should not be made in response to requests for assisted dying, such as euthanasia or assisted suicide. However, several studies show that continuous deep sedation until death (CDSUD) - a particular form of sedation - has been considered as an alternative to these practices in some countries. In Switzerland, where assisted suicide is decriminalized and CDSUD is not legally regulated, no studies have comprehensively investigated their relation. Our study aimed to identify and describe the experience among palliative care physicians of CDSUD as a potential alternative to assisted suicide in the French-speaking part of Switzerland.

METHODS

We performed an exploratory multicentre qualitative study based on interviews with palliative care physicians in the French-speaking part of Switzerland and conducted linguistic and thematic analysis of all interview transcripts. The study is described in accordance with COREQ guidelines.

RESULTS

We included 10 interviews conducted in four palliative care units. Our linguistic analysis shows four main types of sedation, which we called 'rapid CDSUD', 'gradual CDSUD', 'temporary sedation' and 'intermittent sedation'. CDSUD (rapid or gradual) was not considered an alternative to assisted suicide, even if a single situation has been reported. In contrast, 'temporary' or 'intermittent sedation', although not medically indicated, was sometimes introduced in response to a request for assisted suicide. This was the fact when there were barriers to an assisted suicide at home (e.g., when transfer home was impossible or the patient wished not to burden the family).

CONCLUSION

These preliminary results can guide clinical, ethical, linguistic and legal reflection in this field and be used to explore this question more deeply at the national and international levels in a comparative, interdisciplinary and multiprofessional approach. They can also be useful to update Swiss clinical guidelines on palliative sedation in order to include specific frameworks on various sedation protocols and sedation as an alternative to assisted suicide. Potential negative impacts of considering palliative sedation as an alternative to assisted suicide should be nuanced by open and honest societal debate.

« Sédation » ou « pratiques sédatives à visée palliative en fin de vie » ? Une étude linguistique des recommandations francophones en matière de sédation en soins palliatifs chez l’adulte

Introduction : Despite the number and importance of French-language guidelines related to palliative sedation for adults, these texts have never been the subject of a linguistic analysis.Objectives : This study aimed to explore and analyze the terms used for sedation and their definitions in Belgian, French, Quebec, and Swiss guidelines.Methods : Current documents were subjected to textual, terminological, and conceptual analysis.Results : Belgian, Quebec, and Swiss guidelines use the same term to refer to sedation, without, however, conceptualizing it in a consistent way. By contrast, guidelines developed in France use various terms but define sedation in a similar (but not identical) way. Cultural specificities linked to end-of-life legislation in those countries and region were identified as a potential causal factor.Discussion and conclusion : The diversity of terms and definitions inevitably reinforces the imprecision of the medical language, and the terminology in particular. This is likely to have a negative impact on communication between healthcare professionals, patients, and their families. Efforts should be made to homogenize the terminology and definitions used in guidelines.

Pharmacology of Common Analgesic and Sedative Drugs Used in the Neonatal Intensive Care Unit

In this review of analgesic and sedation medication in neonates, important classes of old and newer medications commonly used in the neonatal intensive care unit setting are discussed. In addition to drug metabolism, efficacy, and safety for individual drugs, new insights into multimodal analgesic approaches suggest ways in which multiple analgesic drug classes can be combined to maximize efficacy and minimize toxicity. Opiate pharmacogenetics and the potential for a precision therapeutics approach is explored, with a final description of gaps in knowledge and a call for future research of pain and sedation control in the neonatal population.

Reflections on palliative sedation

'Palliation sedation' is a widely used term to describe the intentional administration of sedatives to reduce a dying person's consciousness to relieve intolerable suffering from refractory symptoms. Research studies generally focus on either 'continuous sedation until death' or 'continuous deep sedation'. It is not always clear whether instances of secondary sedation (i.e. caused by specific symptom management) have been excluded. Continuous deep sedation is controversial because it ends a person's 'biographical life' (the ability to interact meaningfully with other people) and shortens 'biological life'. Ethically, continuous deep sedation is an exceptional last resort measure. Studies suggest that continuous deep sedation has become 'normalized' in some countries and some palliative care services. Of concern is the dissonance between guidelines and practice. At the extreme, there are reports of continuous deep sedation which are best described as non-voluntary (unrequested) euthanasia. Other major concerns relate to its use for solely non-physical (existential) reasons, the under-diagnosis of delirium and its mistreatment, and not appreciating that unresponsiveness is not the same as unconsciousness (unawareness). Ideally, a multiprofessional palliative care team should be involved before proceeding to continuous deep sedation. Good palliative care greatly reduces the need for continuous deep sedation.

Pressure Injury Progression and Factors Associated With Different End-Points in a Home Palliative Care Setting: A Retrospective Chart Review Study

CONTEXT

Patients with advanced illnesses show the highest prevalence for pressure injuries. In the palliative care setting, the ultimate goal is injury healing, but equally important is wound maintenance, wound palliation (wound-related pain and symptom management), and primary and secondary wound prevention.

OBJECTIVES

To describe the course of healing for pressure injuries in a home palliative care setting according to different end-points, and to explore patient and caregiver characteristics and specific care activities associated with their achievement.

METHODS

Four-year retrospective chart review of 669 patients cared for in a home palliative care service, of those 124 patients (18.5%) had at least one pressure injury with a survival rate less than or equal to six months.

RESULTS

The proportion of healed pressure injuries was 24.4%. Of the injuries not healed, 34.0% were in a maintenance phase, whereas 63.6% were in a process of deterioration. Body mass index (P = 0.0014), artificial nutrition (P = 0.002), and age <70 years (P = 0.022) emerged as predictive factors of pressure injury complete healing. Artificial nutrition, age, male caregiver (P = 0.034), and spouse (P = 0.036) were factors significantly associated with a more rapid pressure injury healing. Continuous deep sedation was a predictive factor for pressure injury deterioration and significantly associated with a more rapid worsening.

CONCLUSION

Pressure injury healing is a realistic aim in home palliative care, particularly for injuries not exceeding Stage II occurring at least two weeks before death. When assessing pressure injuries, our results highlight the need to also pay attention to artificial nutrition, continuous deep sedation, and the caregiver's role and gender.

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.

A Survey of Hospice and Palliative Care Clinicians' Experiences and Attitudes Regarding the Use of Palliative Sedation

BACKGROUND

A variety of terms and attitudes surround palliative sedation (PS) with little research devoted to hospice and palliative care (HPC) clinicians' perceptions and experiences with PS. These factors may contribute to the wide variability in the reported prevalence of PS.

OBJECTIVE

This study was designed to better identify hospice and palliative care (HPC) clinician attitudes toward, and clinical experiences with palliative sedation (PS).

METHODS

A 32-question survey was distributed to members of the American Academy of Hospice and Palliative Medicine (n = 4678). The questions explored the language clinicians use for PS, and their experiences with PS.

RESULTS

Nine hundred thirty-six (20% response rate) responded to the survey. About 83.21% preferred the terminology of PS compared with other terms. A majority felt that PS is a bioethically appropriate treatment for refractory physical and nonphysical symptoms in dying patients. Most felt PS was not an appropriate term in clinical scenarios when sedation occurred as an unintended side effect from standard treatments. Hospice clinicians use PS more consistently and with less distress than nonhospice clinician respondents. Benzodiazepines (63.1%) and barbiturates (18.9%) are most commonly prescribed for PS.

CONCLUSION

PS is the preferred term among HPC clinicians for the proportionate use of pharmacotherapies to intentionally lower awareness for refractory symptoms in dying patients. PS is a bioethically appropriate treatment for refractory symptoms in dying patients. However, there is a lack of clear agreement about what is included in PS and how the practice of PS should be best delivered in different clinical scenarios. Future efforts to investigate PS should focus on describing the clinical scenarios in which PS is utilized and on the level of intended sedation necessary, in an effort to better unify the practice of PS.