Higher doses of opioids in patients who need palliative sedation prior to death: Cause or consequence?

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

BACKGROUND

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

METHODS

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

RESULTS

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

CONCLUSIONS

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

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

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

Using sedative substances until death: A mortality follow-back study on the role of healthcare settings

Background:

In the last decade, the use of sedative substances to keep a patient in deep sedation until death increased fourfold in German-speaking Switzerland, where every third patient admitted to hospital, palliative care unit or hospice died continuously deeply sedated.

Aim:

To investigate sedation practices across healthcare settings and to identify their associations with conventional symptom control.

Design:

National mortality follow-back study in Switzerland between 2013 and 2014. Questionnaires on medical end-of-life decisions were sent to attending physicians of a continuous random sample of all registered deaths aged 1 year or older.

Setting/participants:

Of all sampled deaths, 3678 individuals who died non-suddenly and not through an external cause were included.

Results:

Across settings, continuous deep sedation appeared more likely in patients aged younger than 65 years (odds ratio range: 1.53–2.34) and as part of or after intensified alleviation of pain and symptoms (odds ratio range: 1.90–10.27). In hospitals, sedation was less likely for cancer patients (odds ratio: 0.7, 95% confidence interval: 0.5–1.0, p = 0.022). In nursing homes, sedation was more likely for people who were married (odds ratio: 1.8, 95% confidence interval 1.3–2.5, p = 0.001).

Conclusion:

In all settings, sedated patients have significantly more pain problems compared to patients not receiving sedation. Large differences between settings seem to indicate different patient populations, different levels of professionals’ palliative care experience and different availability of treatment options. Our study suggests that certain patient groups who may be as vulnerable to refractory pain and symptoms as others are less likely to receive continuous deep sedation until death when warranted.

Palliative sedation in Germany: factors and treatment practices associated with different sedation rate estimates in palliative and hospice care services

Background

Clinical practice of Palliative Sedation (PS) varies between institutions worldwide and sometimes includes problematic practices. Little available research points at different definitions and frameworks which may contribute to uncertainty of healthcare professionals in the application of PS. This analysis investigates what demographic factors and characteristics of treatment practices differ between institutions with high versus low sedation rates estimates in Palliative and Hospice Care in Germany.

Methods

Data sets from 221 organisations from a prior online survey were separated into two sub-groups divided by their estimated sedation rate A) lower/equal to 16% (n = 187; 90.8%) and B) higher than 16% (n = 19; 9.2%) for secondary analysis. Demographic factors and characteristics of PS treatment practices between the two groups were compared using T-Tests and Chi²/ Fisher Exact Tests and considered significant (*) at two-sided p < .05.

Results

Organisations in group B report that they discuss PS for a higher proportion of patients (38.5%/10.2%, p < 0.000**), rate agitation more often as an indications for PS (78.9%/ 53.5%, p = 0.050*), and are more likely to use Lorazepam (63.2%/ 37.4%, p = 0.047*), Promethazin (26.3%/ 9.6%, p = 0.044*), and (Es-)Ketamin (31.6%/ 12.8%, p = 0.039*) than representatives in group A. Both groups differ significantly in their allocation of three case scenarios to different types of PS.

Conclusions

Both definitions and patterns of clinical practice between palliative and hospice care representatives show divergence, which may be influenced one by another. A comprehensive framework considering conceptual, clinical, ethical, and legal aspects of different definitions of PS could help to better distinguish between different types and nuances of PS.

Population pharmacodynamic modelling of midazolam induced sedation in terminally ill adult patients

Aims

Midazolam is the drug of choice for palliative sedation and is titrated to achieve the desired level of sedation. A previous pharmacokinetic (PK) study showed that variability between patients could be partly explained by renal function and inflammatory status. The goal of this study was to combine this PK information with pharmacodynamic (PD) data, to evaluate the variability in response to midazolam and to find clinically relevant covariates that may predict PD response.

Method

A population PD analysis using nonlinear mixed effect models was performed with data from 43 terminally ill patients. PK profiles were predicted by a previously described PK model and depth of sedation was measured using the Ramsay sedation score. Patient and disease characteristics were evaluated as possible covariates. The final model was evaluated using a visual predictive check.

Results

The effect of midazolam on the sedation level was best described by a differential odds model including a baseline probability, Emax model and interindividual variability on the overall effect. The EC50 value was 68.7 μg l^–1 for a Ramsay score of 3–5 and 117.1 μg l^–1 for a Ramsay score of 6. Comedication with haloperidol was the only significant covariate. The visual predictive check of the final model showed good model predictability.

Conclusion

We were able to describe the clinical response to midazolam accurately. As expected, there was large variability in response to midazolam. The use of haloperidol was associated with a lower probability of sedation. This may be a result of confounding by indication, as haloperidol was used to treat delirium, and deliria has been linked to a more difficult sedation procedure.

Anticholinergic Drug Burden in Noncancer Versus Cancer Patients Near the End of Life

CONTEXT

Anticholinergic drugs can cause several side effects, impairing cognition and quality of life (QOL). Cancer patients are often exposed to increasing cumulative anticholinergic load (ACL) as they approach death, but this burden has not been examined in patients with nonmalignant diseases.

OBJECTIVES

To determine ACL and its impact in noncancer versus cancer palliative care patients.

METHODS

We performed a secondary analysis of 244 subjects enrolled in a randomized controlled trial. ACL was quantified with the Anticholinergic Drug Scale. We used multivariable regression to calculate the effect of ACL on key outcomes, including drowsiness, fatigue, and QOL. Patients were stratified by diagnosis, and drugs were grouped as symptom management (SM) or disease management (DM).

RESULTS

Overall, ACL in cancer and noncancer patients was not significantly different (2.6 vs. 2.4; P = 0.23). SM drugs caused greater anticholinergic exposure than DM drugs in both cancer and noncancer patients (2.3 vs. 0.5, and 1.5 vs. 1.3, respectively; both P < 0.05); however, DM drugs exposed noncancer patients to relatively more ACL than cancer patients (1.2 vs. 0.6, P < 0.0001). ACL was associated with worse fatigue (odds ratio, 1.08; CI, 1.002-1.17) and worse QOL (odds ratio, 0.89; CI, 0.80-0.98).

CONCLUSIONS

ACL is associated with worse fatigue and QOL and may not differ significantly between cancer and noncancer patients nearing end of life. SM drugs are more responsible for ACL in cancer and noncancer patients, although DM drugs contribute significantly to ACL in the latter group. We recommend more attention to reducing anticholinergic use in all patients with life-limiting illness.

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.

Pharmacokinetic considerations and recommendations in palliative care, with focus on morphine, midazolam and haloperidol

INTRODUCTION

A variety of medications are used for symptom control in palliative care, such as morphine, midazolam and haloperidol. The pharmacokinetics of these drugs may be altered in these patients as a result of physiological changes that occur at the end stage of life.

AREAS COVERED

This review gives an overview of how the pharmacokinetics in terminally ill patients may differ from the average population and discusses the effect of terminal illness on each of the four pharmacokinetic processes absorption, distribution, metabolism, and elimination. Specific considerations are also given for three commonly prescribed drugs in palliative care: morphine, midazolam and haloperidol).

EXPERT OPINION

The pharmacokinetics of drugs in terminally ill patients can be complex and limited evidence exists on guided drug use in this population. To improve the quality of life of these patients, more knowledge and more pharmacokinetic/pharmacodynamics studies in terminally ill patients are needed to develop individualised dosing guidelines. Until then knowledge of pharmacokinetics and the physiological changes that occur in the final days of life can provide a base for dosing adjustments that will improve the quality of life of terminally ill patients. As the interaction of drugs with the physiology of dying is complex, pharmacological treatment is probably best assessed in a multi-disciplinary setting and the advice of a pharmacist, or clinical pharmacologist, is highly recommended.

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

OBJECTIVE

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

METHOD

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

RESULTS

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

SIGNIFICANCE OF RESULTS

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

Assessment and Management of Chemical Coping in Patients With Cancer

Chemical coping is a working definition that describes patients' intake of opioids on a scale that spans the range between normal nonaddictive opioid use for pain all the way to opioid addiction. Most patients will fall somewhere between the two extremes in using opioid analgesics to cope with their psychological or spiritual distress. The degree to which patients use their medications in a maladaptive manner will determine their susceptibility to drug toxicity and harm. When there are no obvious cancer-related causes for increased pain intensity, chemical coping and other patient-related factors such as delirium, somatization, and depression should be considered. As part of the initial evaluation of patients with cancer-related pain, a brief screening tool such as the CAGE questionnaire should be used to identify patients who may be at risk for chemical coping. Identifying patients at risk will allow clinicians to avoid unnecessary opioid toxicity, control pain, and improve quality of life. A structured approach for managing opioid use should be adopted, including standardized documentation, opioid treatment agreements, urine drug screens, frequent visits, and restricted quantities of breakthrough opioids. All patients at risk should receive brief motivational interviewing with an objective, nonjudgmental, and empathic style that includes personalized feedback, particularly about markers of risk or harm. For chemical copers approaching the addiction end of the spectrum, with evidence of compulsive use and destructive behavior, referral should be made to substance abuse specialists.