A comparison of the use of sedatives in a hospital support team and in a hospice

Continuous Sedation in Palliative Care in Portugal: A Prospective Multicentric Study

Objective: This study aimed to survey the practice of palliative sedation in Portugal, where data on this subject were lacking. Methods: This was a prospective multicentric study that included all patients admitted to each team that agreed to participate. Patients were followed until death, discharge, or after 3 months of follow-up. Results: The study included 8 teams: 4 as palliative care units (PCU), 1 as a hospital palliative care team (HPCT), 2 as home care (HC), and 1 as HPCT and HC. Of the 361 patients enrolled, 52% were male, the median age was 76 years, and 285 (79%) had cancer. Continuous sedation was undergone by 49 (14%) patients: 26 (53%) were male, and the median age was 76. Most patients, 46 (94%), had an oncological diagnosis. Only in a minority of cases, the family, 16 (33%), or the patient, 5 (10%), participated in the decision to sedate. Delirium was the most frequent symptom leading to sedation. The medication most used was midazolam (65%). In the multivariable analysis, only age and the combined score were independently associated with sedation; patients <76 years and those with higher levels of suffering had a higher probability of being sedated. Conclusions: The practice of continuous palliative sedation in Portugal is within the range reported in other studies. One particularly relevant point was the low participation of patients and their families in the decision-making process. Each team must have a deep discussion on this aspect.

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.

Should Benzodiazepines be Used for Reducing Dyspnea in Patients with Advanced Illnesses?

Dyspnea is a common and highly distressing symptom in patients with advanced illnesses. Many patients continue to experience chronic dyspnea despite optimal management of underlying disease(s) and various non-pharmacologic interventions, necessitating the consideration of pharmacologic therapies for palliation of dyspnea. One commonly asked question by clinicians is whether benzodiazepines have a role in the palliation of dyspnea. In this "Controversies in Palliative Care" article, three groups of thought leaders independently answer this question. Specifically, each group provides a synopsis of the key studies that inform their thought processes, share practical advice on their clinical approach, and highlight the opportunities for future research. All three groups suggest that benzodiazepines alone do not confer a benefit for dyspnea in advanced illnesses based on existing data. They also expressed concerns about the potential adverse effects such as delirium and drowsiness and recommended against benzodiazepines as first line pharmacologic therapy. Some groups suggest that benzodiazepines may be used in highly selected patients with severe anxiety associated with dyspnea. Some investigators may also consider the adjunctive use of benzodiazepines in patients with severe dyspnea despite opioids, particularly if life expectancy is limited. Benzodiazepines also have a role in palliative sedation for refractory dyspnea in the last days of life. More research is needed to confirm the benefit of benzodiazepines in these populations.

Intercountry and intracountry variations in opinions of palliative care specialist physicians in Germany, Italy, Japan and UK about continuous use of sedatives: an international cross-sectional survey

OBJECTIVES

To explore intercountry and intracountry differences in physician opinions about continuous use of sedatives (CUS), and factors associated with their approval of CUS.

SETTINGS

Secondary analysis of a questionnaire study.

PARTICIPANTS

Palliative care physicians in Germany (N=273), Italy (N=198), Japan (N=334) and the UK (N=111).

PRIMARY AND SECONDARY OUTCOME MEASURES

Physician approval for CUS in four situations, intention and treatment goal, how to use sedatives and beliefs about CUS.

RESULTS

There were no significant intercountry or intracountry differences in the degree of agreement with statements that (1) CUS is not necessary as suffering can always be relieved with other measures (mostly disagree); (2) intention of CUS is to alleviate suffering and (3) shortening the dying process is not intended. However, there were significant intercountry differences in agreement with statements that (1) CUS is acceptable for patients with longer survival or psychoexistential suffering; (2) decrease in consciousness is intended and (3) choice of neuroleptics or opioids. Acceptability of CUS for patients with longer survival or psychoexistential suffering and whether decrease in consciousness is intended also showed wide intracountry differences. Also, the proportion of physicians who agreed versus disagreed with the statement that CUS may not alleviate suffering adequately even in unresponsive patients, was approximately equal. Regression analyses revealed that both physician-related and country-related factors were independently associated with physicians' approval of CUS.

CONCLUSION

Variations in use of sedatives is due to both physician- and country-related factors, but palliative care physicians consistently agree on the value of sedatives to aid symptom control. Future research should focus on (1) whether sedatives should be used in patients with longer survival or with primarily psychoexistential suffering, (2) understanding physicians' intentions and treatment goals, (3) efficacy of different drugs and (4) understanding the actual experiences of patients receiving CUS.

Sedatives and Sedation at the End of Life in Nursing Homes: A Retrospective Multicenter Cohort Study

OBJECTIVES

There is scarce information about sedation in nursing homes at the end of life. We aimed to assess (1) the use of sedatives generally and "sedatives with continuous effect," based on objective operational criteria, within the last week of life in nursing homes and (2) factors associated with this treatment.

DESIGN

Retrospective cohort study, using the nursing homes' medical records.

SETTING AND PARTICIPANTS

Residents who died in 4 German nursing homes from January 2015 to December 2017 and whose medical records were available (n = 512).

METHODS

Sedatives analyzed were those recommended by guidelines for "palliative sedation": benzodiazepines, levomepromazine, haloperidol (≥5 mg/d), and propofol. The definition of "sedatives with continuous effect" and doses judged as at least moderately sedating were consented by palliative care clinicians and pharmacists, based on the literature. Descriptive statistics and multivariate logistic regression analysis were performed (R version 3.6.1).

RESULTS

Overall, 110/512 (21%) deceased residents received a sedative at least once during the last week of life, 46/512 (9%) "sedatives with continuous effect." Oral lorazepam was used most frequently. Eleven of 512 (2%) residents received doses judged as at least moderately sedating. The term sedation was not used. Most frequent indications were agitation (58/110; 53%) and anxiety (35/110; 32%); no indication was noted for 36/110 (33%) residents. The resident's involvement in the decision for sedatives was documented in 3/110 (3%). Multivariate logistic regression analysis showed significant associations between use of sedatives and age (OR = 0.94, P < .001) as well as institution (P < .001).

CONCLUSIONS AND IMPLICATIONS

Our data indicate a lower prevalence of sedation compared to international data and considerable differences regarding prevalence between institutions. These differences, potential setting-specific challenges, and need for support measures for consistent best practice of sedation in nursing homes should be further explored.

Association between continuous deep sedation and survival time in terminally ill cancer patients

PURPOSE

Our study aimed to evaluate the association between CDS and survival time using the likelihood of receiving CDS to select a matched non-CDS group through an accurate measurement of survival time based on initiation of CDS.

METHODS

A retrospective cohort study was performed using an electronic database to collect data regarding terminally ill cancer patients admitted to a specialized palliative care unit from January 2012 to December 2016. We first used a Cox proportional hazard model with receiving CDS as the outcome to identify individuals with the highest plausibility of receiving CDS among the non-CDS group (n = 663). We then performed a multiple regression analysis comparing the CDS group (n = 311) and weighted non-CDS group (n = 311), using initiation of CDS (actual for the CDS group; estimated for the non-CDS group) as the starting time-point for measuring survival time.

RESULTS

Approximately 32% of participants received CDS. The most common indications were delirium or agitation (58.2%), intractable pain (28.9%), and dyspnea (10.6%). Final multiple regression analysis revealed that survival time was longer in the CDS group than in the non-CDS group (Exp(β), 1.41; P < 0.001). Longer survival with CDS was more prominent in females, patients with renal dysfunction, and individuals with low C-reactive protein (CRP) or ferritin, compared with their counterpart subgroup.

CONCLUSIONS

CDS was not associated with shortened survival; instead, it was associated with longer survival in our terminally ill cancer patients. Further studies in other populations are required to confirm or refute these findings.

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.

The Association Between Benzodiazepines and Survival in Patients With Cancer: A Systematic Review

CONTEXT

Patients with cancer often experience distressing symptoms such as anxiety or dyspnea, which can be managed with benzodiazepines; however, concerns regarding the impact of these drugs on survival may dissuade prescribing and compliance.

OBJECTIVES

We aimed to identify and appraise studies examining benzodiazepine use and survival in adults with cancer, to investigate the relationship and context of use.

METHODS

Systematic review of the international literature prepared according to preferred reporting items for systematic reviews. Comprehensive searches of the MEDLINE, Embase, PsycINFO, Cochrane Library, and AMED databases using medical subject heading and free-text search combinations with no date or language restrictions were undertook. Handsearching of references was conducted. Risk of bias of the included studies was assessed using Grading of Recommendations Assessment, Development, and Evaluation criteria.

RESULTS

Two thousand two hundred fifty-seven unique records were identified, with 18 meeting inclusion criteria, representing 4117 patients. All studies were very low quality. No study found an increase in mortality in association with benzodiazepine use, whereas two demonstrated an increase.

CONCLUSION

Existing evidence shows no association between benzodiazepine use in patients with cancer and decreased survival. None of the studies evaluated the association between benzodiazepine use and survival in earlier stages of cancer, and the quality of studies retrieved signifies a need for further robust studies to draw more definitive conclusions. Further investigation in patients with cancer using well-designed, high-quality research with survival as a primary outcome should be conducted.

Sedation for Delirium and Other Symptoms in Terminally Ill Patients in Edmonton

The use of sedation and the management of delirium and other difficult symptoms in terminally ill patients in Edmonton has been reported previously. The focus of this study was to assess the prevalence in the Edmonton region of difficult symptoms requiring sedation at the end of life. Data were collected for 50 consecutive patients at each of (a) the tertiary palliative care unit, (b) the consulting palliative care program at the Royal Alexandra Hospital (acute care), and (c) three hospice inpatient units in the city. Patients on the tertiary palliative care unit were significantly younger. Assessments confirmed the more problematic physical and psychosocial issues of patients in the tertiary palliative care unit. These patients had more difficult pain syndromes and required significantly higher doses of daily opioids. Approximately 80% of patients in all three settings developed delirium prior to death. Pharmacological management of this problem was needed by 40% in the acute care setting, and by 80% in the tertiary palliative care unit. The patients sedated varied from 4% in the hospice setting to 10% in the tertiary palliative care unit. Of the 150 patients, nine were sedated for delirium, one for dyspnea. The prevalence of delirium and other symptoms requiring sedation in our area is relatively low compared to others reported in the literature. Demographic variability between the three Edmonton settings highlights the need for caution in comparing results of different palliative care groups. It is possible that some variability in the use of sedation internationally is due to cultural differences. The infrequent deliberate use of sedation in Edmonton suggests that improved management has resulted in fewer distressing symptoms at the end of life. This is of benefit to patients and to family members who are with them during this time.

'Palliative sedation'? A retrospective cohort study on the use and labelling of continuously administered sedatives on a palliative care unit

BACKGROUND

Sedatives are frequently used towards the end of life. However, there is scarce information when their use is labelled as 'palliative sedation'.

AIM

To assess the use and labelling of 'continuous administration of sedatives within the last 7 days of life', based on objective operational criteria, on a palliative care unit.

DESIGN

Retrospective cohort study, using medical records. Explorative statistical analysis (SPSS 23).

SETTING/PARTICIPANTS

Patients who died on a palliative care unit from August 2014 to July 2015. Sedatives recorded were benzodiazepines, levomepromazine, haloperidol ⩾5 mg/day and propofol.

RESULTS

Of the 192 patients, 149 (78%) patients received continuous sedatives within the last week of life. The prevalence of delirium/agitation was significantly higher in patients with continuous sedatives compared to those without continuous sedatives at admission to the unit (35% vs 16%, p = 0.02) and on the day before death (58% vs 40%, p = 0.04). The term '(palliative) sedation' was used in the records for 22 of 149 (15%) patients with continuous sedatives. These patients had significantly higher total daily midazolam doses 2 days before death (median (range), 15.0 (6.0-185.0) mg vs 11.5 (1.0-70.0) mg, p = 0.04) and on the day of death (median (range), 19.5 (7.5-240.0) mg vs 12.5 (2.0-65.0) mg, p = 0.01). The dose range was large in both groups.

CONCLUSION

The prevalence of delirium/agitation was associated with the administration of continuous sedatives. There was no consistent pattern regarding labelling the use of continuous sedatives as '(palliative) sedation'. Multicentre mixed-methods research is needed for a better characterization of sedation practices in palliative care.

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.

Walking the line. Palliative sedation for existential distress: still a controversial issue?

Adequate symptom relief is a central aspect of medical care of all patients especially in those with an incurable disease. However, as an illness progresses and the end of life approaches, physical or psychoexistential symptoms may remain uncontrollable requiring palliative sedation. Although palliative sedation has become an increasingly implemented practice in the care of terminally ill patients, sedation in the management of refractory psychological symptoms and existential distress is still a controversial issue and much debated. This case report presents a patient who received palliative sedation for the treatment of existential distress and discusses considerations that may arise from such a therapeutic approach.

[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.

Palliative sedation for terminally ill cancer patients in a tertiary cancer center in Shanghai, China

Background

There are a number of studies dedicated to characteristics of sedation, but these studies are mostly bound to western country practices. The aim of this study is to describe the characteristics of patients who suffered from cancer and who had been sedated until their death in Shanghai, China.

Methods

Retrospective medical data of 244 terminally ill cancer patients including 82 sedated patients were collected. Data collected included demographic characteristics, disease-related characteristics and details of the sedation.

Results

In sedated cases, patients and/or caregivers gave the consent to start palliative sedation due to unmanageable symptoms. On average, sedation was performed 24.65(±1.78)hours before death. Agitated delirium and dyspnea were the most frequent indications for palliative sedation. There was no significant difference in survival time from admission till death between sedated and non-sedated patients (p > 0.05).

Conclusions

Palliative sedation is effective for reducing terminally ill cancer patients’ suffering without hastening death. Prospective research is needed to determine the optimal conditions for Chinese patients including indications, decision making process, informed consent, cultural and ethical issues, type of sedation and drugs.

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.

Use of Opioids and Sedatives at End-of-Life

Despite their proven efficacy and safety, opioid and sedative use for palliation in patients afflicted with cancer in Singapore have been shown to be a fraction of that in other countries. This paper explores the various psychosocial and system-related factors that appear to propagate this conservative approach to care in what is largely a western-influenced care practice. A search for publications relating to sedative and opioid usage in Asia was performed on PubMed, Google, Google Scholar, World Health Organization, and Singapore's government agency websites using search terms such as "opioids," "sedatives," "palliation," "end-of-life-care," "pain management," "palliative care," "cancer pain," "Asia," "Singapore," and "morphine." Findings were classified into three broad groups - system-related, physician-related, and patient-related factors. A cautious medico-legal climate, shortage of physicians trained in palliative care, and lack of instruments for symptom assessment of patients at the end of life contribute to system-related barriers. Physician-related barriers include delayed access to palliative care due to late referrals, knowledge deficits in non-palliative medicine physicians, and sub-optimal care provided by palliative physicians. Patients' under-reporting of symptoms and fear of addiction, tolerance, and side effects of opioids and sedatives may lead to conservative opioid use in palliative care as well. System-related, physician-related, and patient-related factors play crucial roles in steering the management of palliative patients. Addressing and increasing the awareness of these factors may help ensure patients receive adequate relief and control of distressing symptoms.

Making sense of continuous sedation in end-of-life care for cancer patients: an interview study with bereaved relatives in three European countries

PURPOSE

The purpose of the study was to explore relatives' descriptions and experiences of continuous sedation in end-of-life care for cancer patients and to identify and explain differences between respondents from the Netherlands, Belgium, and the UK.

METHODS

In-depth interviews were held between January 2011 and May 2012 with 38 relatives of 32 cancer patients who received continuous sedation until death in hospitals, the community, and hospices/palliative care units.

RESULTS

Relatives' descriptions of the practice referred to the outcome, to practical aspects, and to the goals of sedation. While most relatives believed sedation had contributed to a 'good death' for the patient, yet many expressed concerns. These related to anxieties about the patient's wellbeing, their own wellbeing, and questions about whether continuous sedation had shortened the patient's life (mostly UK), or whether an alternative approach would have been better. Such concerns seemed to have been prompted by relatives witnessing unexpected events such as the patient coming to awareness during sedation. In the Netherlands and in Belgium, several relatives reported that the start of the sedation allowed for a planned moment of 'saying goodbye'. In contrast, UK relatives discerned neither an explicit point at which sedation was started nor a specific moment of farewell.

CONCLUSIONS

Relatives believed that sedation contributed to the patient having a good death. Nevertheless, they also expressed concerns that may have been provoked by unexpected events for which they were unprepared. There seems to exist differences in the process of saying goodbye between the NL/BE and the UK.

Dying with dementia: symptoms, treatment, and quality of life in the last week of life

CONTEXT

Burdensome symptoms present frequently in dementia at the end of life, but we know little about the symptom control provided, such as type and dosage of medication.

OBJECTIVES

To investigate symptom prevalence and prescribed treatment, explore associations with quality of life (QOL) in the last week of life, and examine symptom prevalence by cause of death of nursing home residents with dementia.

METHODS

Within two weeks after death, physicians completed questionnaires about symptoms and treatment in the last week for 330 nursing home residents with dementia in the Dutch End of Life in Dementia study (2007-2011). We used linear regression to assess associations with QOL, measured by the Quality of Life in Late-Stage Dementia scale. Causes of death were abstracted from death certificates.

RESULTS

Pain was the most common symptom (52%), followed by agitation (35%) and shortness of breath (35%). Pain and shortness of breath were mostly treated with opioids and agitation mainly with anxiolytics. At the day of death, 77% received opioids, with a median of 90 mg/24 hours (oral equivalents), and 21% received palliative sedation. Pain and agitation were associated with a lower QOL. Death from respiratory infection was associated with the largest symptom burden.

CONCLUSION

Symptoms are common in dementia at the end of life, despite the large majority of residents receiving opioids. Dosages may be suboptimal with regard to weighing of effects and side effects. Future research may employ observation on a day-to-day basis to better assess effectiveness of symptom control and possible side effects.

[Palliative sedation: Current situation and areas of improvement]

OBJECTIVE

To determine the prevalence, epidemiology and registration status of palliative sedation (PS) prevalence in a teaching hospital, and to establish areas for improvement.

METHODS

A descriptive retrospective analysis was designed using the records from cancer patients who died between October and December 2010. The variables included were: epidemiological, inpatient unit, refractory symptom, drugs and dosages, and patient participation in the decision making process. The qualitative analysis followed a Delphi process: each participant received the overall performance of the group referred to as mean, median, 25th and 75th percentile. Items selected were those in which there was total or a high consensus.

RESULTS

A total of 53 deaths were identified. Just over half (51.92%) received PS. The mean age was 67.46 and 64% were males. The most frequent diagnosis was lung cancer (32.14%). Fifteen of the patient patients were in the Oncology ward, 7 in Hematology, and 4 at the Emergency Department. The PC team took part in 14 of the sedations performed. A refractory symptom was identified in 20. There were 11 cases of dyspnea and 5 cases of delirium. The mean time between admission and PS was 9.5 days. The mean duration of PS was 1.2 days, with a mean number of 2.6 drugs used. There were 20 informed consents which were all verbal. The mean time from last chemotherapy to death was 82 days. For the Delphi process, 12 oncology or palliative care health professionals were included. A consensus was reached on the minimum data to be recorded in case of PS. This list includes: selection criteria, decision-making process and the sedation evolution.

CONCLUSIONS

PS was applied in half of the patients who died due to dyspnea or delirium. Selection criteria were identified, as well as the type of PS and patient involvement in decision making process. A consensus was also reached on a minimum dataset that would help the clinician to record relevant information in PS.

From sedation to continuous sedation until death: how has the conceptual basis of sedation in end-of-life care changed over time?

CONTEXT

Numerous attempts have been made to describe and define sedation in end-of-life care over time. However, confusion and inconsistency in the use of terms and definitions persevere in the literature, making interpretation, comparison, and extrapolation of many studies and case analyses problematic.

OBJECTIVES

This evidence review aims to address and account for the conceptual debate over the terminology and definitions ascribed to sedation at the end of life over time.

METHODS

Six electronic databases (MEDLINE, PubMed, Embase, AMED, CINAHL, and PsycINFO) and two high-impact journals (New England Journal of Medicine and the British Medical Journal) were searched for indexed materials published between 1945 and 2011. This search resulted in bibliographic data of 328 published outputs. Terms and definitions were manually scanned, coded, and linguistically analyzed by means of term description criteria and discourse analysis.

RESULTS

The review shows that terminology has evolved from simple to complex terms with definitions varying in length, comprising different aspects of sedation such as indications for use, pharmacology, patient symptomatology, target population, time of initiation, and ethical considerations, in combinations of a minimum of two or more of these aspects.

CONCLUSION

There is a pressing need to resolve the conceptual confusion that currently exists in the literature to bring clarity to the dialogue and build a base of commonality on which to design research and enhance the practice of sedation in end-of-life care.

Continuous sedation (CS) until death: mapping the literature by bibliometric analysis

CONTEXT

Sedation at the end of life, regardless of the nomenclature, is an increasingly debated practice at both clinical and bioethical levels. However, little is known about the characteristics and trends in scientific publications in this field of study.

OBJECTIVES

This article presents a bibliometric analysis of the scientific publications on continuous sedation until death.

METHODS

Four electronic databases (MEDLINE, PubMed, Embase, and PsycINFO®) were searched for the indexed material published between 1945 and 2011. This search resulted in bibliographic data of 273 published outputs that were analyzed using bibliometric techniques.

RESULTS

Data revealed a trend of increased scientific publication from the early 1990s. Published outputs, diverse in type (comments/letters, articles, reviews, case reports, editorials), were widely distributed across 94 journals of varying scientific disciplines (medicine, nursing, palliative care, law, ethics). Most journals (72.3%) were classified under Medical and Health Sciences, with the Journal of Pain and Symptom Management identified as the major journal in the field covering 12.1% of the total publications. Empirical research articles, mostly of a quantitative design, originated from 17 countries. Although Japan and The Netherlands were found to be the leaders in research article productivity, it was the U.K. and the U.S. that ranked top in terms of the quantity of published outputs.

CONCLUSION

This is the first bibliometric analysis on continuous sedation until death that can be used to inform future studies. Further research is needed to refine controversies on terminology and ethical acceptability of the practice, as well as conditions and modalities of its use.

Palliative sedation: a focus group study on the experiences of relatives

BACKGROUND

Most studies that have investigated the practice of palliative sedation have focused on physicians' practices and attitudes.

OBJECTIVE

The aim of this study was to explore relatives' experiences with palliative sedation and to gain more insight in positive and negative elements in their evaluation of palliative sedation.

DESIGN

Focus groups and individual interviews.

SETTING

Various care settings in the Netherlands.

SUBJECTS

A total of 14 relatives of patients who received palliative sedation until death participated.

RESULTS

Most relatives evaluated the provision of palliative sedation of their dying family member positively. Positive experiences were related to: the beneficial impact of palliative sedation on the patient's suffering, the opportunity that was offered to prepare for the patient's death, their involvement in the decision-making and care for the patient, and the pleasant care environment. However, the majority of the relatives were unsatisfied with one or more aspects of how information was being provided for. Some relatives were frustrated about the fact that nurses were not authorized to make decisions about the care for the patient and about the absence of physicians during weekends. None of the relatives mentioned the loss of the ability to communicate with the patient during the sedation and the possibility of "hastening death" as disadvantages of palliative sedation.

CONCLUSION

Relatives tend to evaluate the provision of palliative sedation to their severely suffering family member positively because it contributes to a peaceful dying process. However, relatives indicated discontent with how information was being provided and with the communication in general.

Evidence for the use of Levomepromazine for symptom control in the palliative care setting: a systematic review

BACKGROUND

Levomepromazine is an antipsychotic drug that is used clinically for a variety of distressing symptoms in palliative and end-of-life care. We undertook a systematic review based on the question "What is the published evidence for the use of levomepromazine in palliative symptom control?".

METHODS

To determine the level of evidence for the use of levomepromazine in palliative symptom control, and to discover gaps in evidence, relevant studies were identified using a detailed, multi-step search strategy. Emerging data was then scrutinized using appropriate assessment tools, and the strength of evidence systematically graded in accordance with the Oxford Centre for Evidence-Based Medicine's 'levels of evidence' tool. The electronic databases Medline, Embase, Cochrane, PsychInfo and Ovid Nursing, together with hand-searching and cross-referencing provided the full research platform on which the review is based.

RESULTS

33 articles including 9 systematic reviews met the inclusion criteria: 15 on palliative sedation, 8 regarding nausea and three on delirium and restlessness, one on pain and six with other foci. The studies varied greatly in both design and sample size. Levels of evidence ranged from level 2b to level 5, with the majority being level 3 (non-randomized, non-consecutive or cohort studies n = 22), with the quality of reporting for the included studies being only low to medium.

CONCLUSION

Levomepromazine is widely used in palliative care as antipsychotic, anxiolytic, antiemetic and sedative drug. However, the supporting evidence is limited to open series and case reports. Thus prospective randomized trials are needed to support evidence-based guidelines.

Palliative Sedation

Palliative sedation (PS) is a treatment option in case of refractory symptoms at the end of life. The emotional impact on nurses and doctors has been widely studied. We explore the experience of family members during a PS procedure. Method: An anonymous questionnaire was sent to the closest family members (n = 17) of patients who died while receiving palliative sedation. Results: The response rate was 59% (10 of 17). Nine relatives were sufficiently informed about PS. In all, 70% evaluated the chosen moment for initiation of PS as adequate. All the relatives noticed a significant improvement in the refractory symptom with a mean reduction in the estimated suffering of 6.25 points on a visual analog scale. Conclusions: Palliative sedation should be performed in the best possible way for the patient and his family in order to efficiently reduce a refractory symptom.

Palliative Sedation in Advanced Cancer Patients: Does it Shorten Survival Time? - A Systematic Review

BACKGROUND

Patients with advanced cancer often suffer from multiple refractory symptoms in the terminal phase of their life. Palliative sedation is one of the few ways to relieve this refractory suffering.

OBJECTIVES

This systematic review investigated the effect of palliative sedation on survival time in terminally ill cancer patients.

MATERIALS AND METHODS

Six electronic databases were searched for both prospective and retrospective studies which evaluated the effect of palliative sedation on survival time. Only those studies which had a comparison group that did not receive palliative sedation were selected for the review. Abstracts of all retrieved studies were screened to include the most relevant studies and only studies which met inclusion criteria were selected. References of all retrieved studies were also screened for relevant studies. Selected studies were assessed for quality and data extraction was done using the structured data extraction form.

RESULTS

Eleven studies including four prospective and seven retrospective studies were identified. Mean survival time (MST) was measured as the time from last admission until death. A careful analysis of the results of all the 11 studies indicated that MST of sedated and non-sedated group was not statistically different in any of the studies.

CONCLUSION

This systematic review supports the fact that palliative sedation does not shorten survival in terminally ill cancer patients. However, this conclusion needs to be taken with consideration of the methodology, study design, and the population studied of the included studies in this review.

Flemish palliative-care nurses’ attitudes to palliative sedation

Palliative sedation is an option of last resort to control refractory suffering. In order to better understand palliative-care nurses’ attitudes to palliative sedation, an anonymous questionnaire was sent to all nurses (589) employed in palliative care in Flanders (Belgium). In all, 70.5% of the nurses ( n = 415) responded. A large majority did not agree that euthanasia is preferable to palliative sedation, were against non-voluntary euthanasia in the case of a deeply and continuously sedated patient and considered it generally better not to administer artificial floods or fluids to such a patient. Two clusters were found: 58.5% belonged to the cluster of advocates of deep and continuous sedation and 41.5% belonged to the cluster of nurses restricting the application of deep and continuous sedation. These differences notwithstanding, overall the attitudes of the nurses are in accordance with the practice and policy of palliative sedation in Flemish palliative-care units.

The experiences of relatives with the practice of palliative sedation: a systematic review

CONTEXT

Guidelines about palliative sedation typically include recommendations to protect the well-being of relatives.

OBJECTIVES

The aim of this study was to systematically review evidence on the experiences of relatives with the practice of palliative sedation.

METHODS

PubMed, Embase, Web of Science, PsycINFO, and CINAHL were searched for empirical studies on relatives' experiences with palliative sedation. We investigated relatives' involvement in the decision-making and sedation processes, whether they received adequate information and support, and relatives' emotions.

RESULTS

Of the 564 studies identified, 39 were included. The studies (30 quantitative, six qualitative, and three mixed methods) were conducted in 16 countries; three studies were based on relatives' reports, 26 on physicians' and nurses' proxy reports, seven on medical records, and three combined different sources. The 39 studies yielded a combined total of 8791 respondents or studied cases. Caregivers involved relatives in the decision making in 69%-100% of all cases (19 quantitative studies), and in 60%-100% of all cases, relatives were reported to have received adequate information (five quantitative studies). Only two quantitative studies reported on relatives' involvement in the provision of sedation. Despite the fact that the majority of relatives were reported to be comfortable with the use of palliative sedation (seven quantitative studies, four qualitative studies), several studies found that relatives were distressed by the use of sedation (five quantitative studies, five qualitative studies). No studies reported specifically about the support provided to the relatives.

CONCLUSION

Relatives' experiences with palliative sedation are mainly studied from the perspective of proxies, mostly professional caregivers. The majority of relatives seems to be comfortable with the use of palliative sedation; however, they may experience substantial distress by the use of sedation.

Palliative sedation in end-of-life care and survival: a systematic review

PURPOSE

Palliative sedation is a clinical procedure aimed at relieving refractory symptoms in patients with advanced cancer. It has been suggested that sedative drugs may shorten life, but few studies exist comparing the survival of sedated and nonsedated patients. We present a systematic review of literature on the clinical practice of palliative sedation to assess the effect, if any, on survival.

METHODS

A systematic review of literature published between January 1980 and December 2010 was performed using MEDLINE and EMBASE databases. Search terms included palliative sedation, terminal sedation, refractory symptoms, cancer, neoplasm, palliative care, terminally ill, end-of-life care, and survival. A manual search of the bibliographies of electronically identified articles was also performed.

RESULTS

Eleven published articles were identified describing 1,807 consecutive patients in 10 retrospective or prospective nonrandomized studies, 621 (34.4%) of whom were sedated. One case-control study was excluded from prevalence analysis. The most frequent reason for sedation was delirium in the terminal stages of illness (median, 57.1%; range, 13.8% to 91.3%). Benzodiazepines were the most common drug category prescribed. Comparing survival of sedated and nonsedated patients, the sedation approach was not shown to be associated with worse survival.

CONCLUSION

Even if there is no direct evidence from randomized clinical trials, palliative sedation, when appropriately indicated and correctly used to relieve unbearable suffering, does not seem to have any detrimental effect on survival of patients with terminal cancer. In this setting, palliative sedation is a medical intervention that must be considered as part of a continuum of palliative care.

[Principle of double effect and sedation for intractable distress: reflexion on survival in sedated patients]

The effect of sedation for intractable distress on survival in terminally ill patients is a debated question. For certain people, this would limit the physician's intervention to the detriment of symptom alleviation for patients. The principle of double effect is traditionally used to overcome this ethical conflict. Studies conducted between 1990 and 2009 fail to show that the death of patients undergoing sedation for intractable distress is hastened. Some authors conclude that sedation does not hasten death and claim that principle of double effect is unnecessary in this debate. In our view, caution is required in the interpretation of studies results and absence of evidence of sedation effects on survival cannot be considered as an evidence of absence of sedation effects on survival. Furthermore, we consider obtaining a definitive answer as impossible in the future, as the required cannot be conducted for ethical reasons. Caution, we think, is necessary, especially as sedation is sometimes used with explicit intention of hastening the end of life. Physician's intention, key point of the principle of double effect, comes back into the foreground of ethical debate on sedation for intractable distress. Far from limiting the physician's action, the principle of double effect, which requires us to clarify our intentions, should allow us to make the distinction between sedation for intractable distress and euthanasia.

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

PURPOSE

The aim of this study was to describe the use of palliative sedation (PS) its indications and outcomes in patients followed up till death by an inpatient palliative care consult team (PCCT) at a tertiary cancer center.

METHODS

All patients referred for 5 years to the PCCT and followed up till death were eligible for the study. Both PCCT recordings and hospital charts were reviewed and a codified assessment was performed.

RESULTS

Over a total of 2,033 consecutive consults, 129 patients died during admission and were eligible. Eighty-three had the indication to PS, 4% of all consults (95% confidence interval [95%CI], 3% to 5%) and 64% of eligible patients (95%CI, 56% to 73%). PS was more frequently indicated in males and in patients with recurrent dyspnea and recurrent agitation, while it was less frequently indicated in older people and in patients with cerebral metastases and recurrent drowsiness. The most frequent indications to PS were dyspnea (37%) and delirium (31%) alone or combined with other symptoms. PS was successfully achieved in 69 patients; the drugs most frequently used for PS were midazolam (46%), haloperidol (35%), and chlorpromazine (32%) and opioid dose escalation was higher in sedated patients (P < 0.01).

CONCLUSIONS

PS is an important intervention in the management of terminal disease by a consulting palliative care team. Improved collaboration and communication between the hospital staff and the PCCT should be offered to meet patients' needs when PS is required.

The Attitudes of Indian Palliative-care Nurses and Physicians to Pain Control and Palliative Sedation

Aim:

We wanted to assess Indian palliative-care nurses and physicians’ attitudes toward pain control and palliative sedation.

Materials and Methods:

From May to September 2008, we interviewed 14 physicians and 13 nurses working in different palliative-care programs in New Delhi, using a semi-structured questionnaire, and following grounded-theory methodology (Glaser and Strauss).

Results:

The interviewees did not consider administration of painkillers in large doses an ethical problem, provided the pain killers are properly titrated. Mild palliative sedation was considered acceptable. The interviewees disagreed whether palliative sedation can also be deep and continuous. Arguments mentioned against deep continuous palliative sedation were the conviction that it may cause unacceptable side effects, and impedes basic daily activities and social contacts. A few interviewees said that palliative sedation may hasten death.

Conclusion:

Due to fears and doubts regarding deep continuous palliative sedation, it may sometimes be too easily discarded as a treatment option for refractory symptoms.

Palliative sedation, not slow euthanasia: a prospective, longitudinal study of sedation in Flemish palliative care units

CONTEXT

Palliative sedation remains a much debated and controversial issue. The limited literature on the topic often fails to answer ethical questions concerning this practice.

OBJECTIVES

The aim of this study was to describe the characteristics of patients who are being sedated for refractory symptoms in palliative care units (PCUs) from the time of admission until the day of death.

METHODS

A prospective, longitudinal, descriptive design was used to assess data in eight PCUs. The total sample consisted of 266 patients. Information on demographics, medication, food and fluid intake, decision making, level of consciousness, and symptom experience were gathered by nurses and researchers three times a week. If patients received palliative sedation, extra information was gathered.

RESULTS

Of all included patients (n=266), 7.5% received palliative sedation. Sedation started, on average, 2.5 days before death and for half of these patients, the form of sedation changed over time. At the start of sedation, patients were in the end stage of their illness and needed total care. Patients were fully conscious and had very limited oral food or fluid intake. Only three patients received artificial fluids at the start of sedation. Patients reported, on average, two refractory symptoms, the most important ones being pain, fatigue, depression, drowsiness, and loss of feeling of well-being. In all cases, the patient gave consent to start palliative sedation because of increased suffering.

CONCLUSION

This study revealed that palliative sedation is only administered in exceptional cases where refractory suffering is evident and for those patients who are close to the ends of their lives. Moreover, this study supports the argument that palliative sedation has no life-shortening effect.

How does culture show? A case study of an international and interprofessional course in palliative care

Research shows slow improvement of the care of dying persons and their significant others. One of the reasons for that is the lack of palliative care education as an integral part of health professionals' undergraduate education. The paper discusses an attempt to develop innovative forms of palliative care education: an international, interprofessional and IT-supported undergraduate course for Swedish and Slovenian students of nursing, medicine, occupational therapy, physiotherapy, psychology and social work, which has been developed jointly by the two authors. One of the aims of the course has been to address differences in professional and national cultures relevant to quality in palliative care. The development and pilot implementation phases of the course were analysed qualitatively, using evaluation materials from students and teachers and from an external evaluation study. The results show that the interprofessional approach in the course enabled students to get to know other professions, as well as enabling them to work together as a team and resolve conflicts. Cultural differences between Sweden and Slovenia were not very pronounced, yet they came to the fore regarding teamwork and relationships between professions, as well as in respect of the "right thing" to do in relation to patient' problems.

European Association for Palliative Care (EAPC) recommended framework for the use of sedation in palliative care

The European Association for Palliative Care (EAPC) considers sedation to be an important and necessary therapy in the care of selected palliative care patients with otherwise refractory distress. Prudent application of this approach requires due caution and good clinical practice. Inattention to potential risks and problematic practices can lead to harmful and unethical practice which may undermine the credibility and reputation of responsible clinicians and institutions as well as the discipline of palliative medicine more generally. Procedural guidelines are helpful to educate medical providers, set standards for best practice, promote optimal care and convey the important message to staff, patients and families that palliative sedation is an accepted, ethical practice when used in appropriate situations. EAPC aims to facilitate the development of such guidelines by presenting a 10-point framework that is based on the pre-existing guidelines and literature and extensive peer review.