Ethical issues in caring for people with carotid artery rupture

Ethics of crisis sedation: questions of performance and consent

This paper focuses on the practice of injecting patients who are dying with a relatively high dose of sedatives in response to a catastrophic event that will shortly precipitate death, something that we term 'crisis sedation.' We first present a confabulated case that illustrates the kind of events we have in mind, before offering a more detailed account of the practice. We then comment on some of the ethical issues that crisis sedation might raise. We identify the primary value of crisis sedation as allowing healthcare professionals to provide some degree of reassurance to patients, their families and the professionals who are caring for them. Next we focus on the issue of informed consent. Finally, we ask whether continuous deep sedation might be preferable to crisis sedation in scenarios where potential catastrophic events can be anticipated.

Management of terminal hemorrhage in patients with advanced cancer: a systematic literature review

Although terminal hemorrhage is an infrequent occurrence in advanced cancer patients, it is extremely distressing for patients, their families, and health care professionals when it does occur. By definition, there is a very short time period to support and comfort the patient, and it is vital that the management approach follows the best available evidence base. A systematic literature search was carried out to retrieve relevant publications relating to the management of terminal hemorrhage in patients with advanced cancer in whom invasive or interventional procedures are no longer appropriate. From 3,564 initial citations, 18 were appropriate to include in the final review, many of which focused on patients with head and neck tumors. The reported incidence of significant bleeding in patients with advanced cancer is 6%-14% and incidence of terminal hemorrhage 3%-12%. Key areas arising from the literature were 1) identifying patients at risk, 2) general supportive measures to use, and 3) use of sedative medication. General supportive measures included use of dark towels to camouflage blood loss, use of suction, and applying external pressure. There was variation in the recommended sedative medication (drug, dose, and route). Drugs recommended included diazepam, midazolam, diamorphine, and ketamine at varying doses and routes of administration. Current guidelines are based completely on isolated case reports and expert opinion. Clinical research is needed in this area but is difficult because of practical and ethical limitations.