Exploration of concerns of relatives during continuous palliative sedation of their family members with cancer

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

BACKGROUND

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

OBJECTIVE

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

METHODS

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

RESULTS

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

CONCLUSION

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

PATIENT OR PUBLIC CONTRIBUTION

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

Good death and bereavement in a lung cancer patient following meaning-centered couples psychotherapy by a cancer nursing specialist

OBJECTIVE

There are many terminally ill cancer patients who are struggling with the meaning of life, but it cannot be said that their concerns are being adequately addressed.

METHOD

From a series of cancer patients undergoing end-of-life care, the case of a patient, who developed incurable lung cancer and, together with his wife, lost the meaning of life and underwent meaning-centered couples psychotherapy once every two weeks to have them consider the meaning of life together, is presented.

RESULTS

The patient was a 70-year-old man who had been diagnosed with lung cancer and pleural dissemination 14 months earlier. The meaning-centered psychotherapy (MCP) sessions were conducted with the patient and his 70-year-old wife by a cancer nursing specialist who had received extensive training in MCP and had also received 7-year on-going supervision from a Japanese MCP-enlightened psychologist. At the same time, palliative treatment of physical distress was performed. The patient was able to discover the meaning of life as a result of MCP performed by a cancer nursing specialist for him and his spouse who had lost any notion of the meaning of life after being informed that he had terminal cancer at the time of the initial diagnosis.

SIGNIFICANCE OF RESULTS

Meaning-centered psychotherapy provided to terminal cancer patients by cancer nurses can help patients and their families express their gratitude, thereby achieving a good death for the bereaved family. Nurses are likely to increasingly perform MCP in the future.

Perception, Beliefs, and Attitudes Regarding Sedation Practices among Palliative Care Nurses and Physicians: A Qualitative Study

Background: Palliative care teams face complex medical situations on a daily basis. These situations require joint reflection and decision making to propose appropriate patient care. Sometimes, sedation is one of the options to be considered. In addition to medical and technical criteria justifying the use of sedation, multiple psychosocial criteria impact the decision making of palliative care teams and guide, give sense to, and legitimize professional practices.

Objective: The main goal of this study was to explore perceptions, experiences, and beliefs of palliative care teams about sedation practices in a legislative context (Claeys–Leonetti law, 2016; France), which authorizes continuous deep sedation (CDS) until death.

Methods: This is a qualitative study using 28 semistructured interviews with physicians and nurses working in a palliative care team in France (PACA region). All verbal productions produced during interviews were fully transcribed and the contents analyzed.

Findings: Content analysis revealed four themes: (1) sedation as a “good death,” (2) emotional experiences of sedations, (3) the practice of CDS, and (4) the ambiguous relationship with the Claeys–Leonetti law.

Conclusions: This qualitative study provides evidence of a form of “naturalization” of the practice of sedation. However, the Claeys–Leonetti law exacerbates differences of opinion between palliative caregivers on sedation and questions the interest of this law for society and palliative care practices.

clinicalTrials.gov identifier: NCT04016038.

Barriers in the Decision Making About and Performance of Continuous Sedation Until Death in Nursing Homes

BACKGROUND AND OBJECTIVES

While decision making about and performance of continuous sedation involve many challenges, they appear to be particularly pervasive in nursing homes. This study aims to identify barriers to the decision making and performance of continuous sedation until death in Flemish nursing homes as experienced by the health care professionals involved.

RESEARCH DESIGN AND METHODS

Ten focus groups were held with 71 health care professionals including 16 palliative care physicians, 42 general practitioners, and 13 nursing home staff. Discussions were transcribed verbatim and analyzed using a constant comparative approach.

RESULTS

Perceived barriers concerned factors prior to and during sedation and were classified according to three types: (a) personal barriers related to knowledge and skills including the lack of clarity on what continuous sedation should be used for (linguistic ambiguity) and when and how it should be used (practical ambiguity); (b) relational barriers concerning communication and collaboration both between health care professionals and with family; (c) organizational barriers related to the organization of care in nursing homes where, for example, there is no on-site physician, or where the recommended medication is not always available.

DISCUSSION AND IMPLICATIONS

The findings suggest there are considerable challenges for sound decision making about and performance of continuous sedation until death in nursing homes. There is a need for multicomponent initiatives that provide guidance in the context of the complexity of a resident's medical situation, the family, and the specific organization of care, which would have the potential to facilitate and improve the decision-making process and performance of continuous sedation in nursing homes.

Differential Family Experience of Palliative Sedation Therapy in Specialized Palliative or Critical Care Units

CONTEXT

No study has examined the varying family experience of palliative sedation therapy (PST) for terminally ill patients in different settings.

OBJECTIVES

To examine and compare family concerns about PST use and its effect on the grief suffered by terminally ill patients' families in palliative care units (PCUs) or intensive care units (ICUs).

METHODS

A total of 154 family members of such patients were recruited in Taiwan, of whom 143 completed the study, with 81 from the PCU and 62 from the ICU. Data were collected on their concerns regarding PST during recruitment. Grief levels were assessed at three days and one month after the patient's death with the Texas Revised Inventory of Grief.

RESULTS

Families' major concern about sedated patients in the PCU was that "there might be other ways to relieve symptoms" (90.2%), whereas families of ICU sedated patients gave the highest ratings to "feeling they still had something more to do" (93.55%), and "the patient's sleeping condition was not dignified" (93.55%). Family members recruited from the ICU tended to experience more grief than those from the PCU (P = 0.005 at Day 3 and < 0.001 at Month 1). PST use predicted higher levels of grief in family members recruited from the PCU (P < 0.001 at Day 3 and Month 1).

CONCLUSION

Family experiences with the use of PST in terminally ill patients varied in different settings. Supportive care should address family concerns about PST use, and regular attention should be paid to the grief of individuals at higher risk.

Suboptimal palliative sedation in primary care: an exploration

OBJECTIVES

Palliative sedation is a therapeutic option to control refractory symptoms in terminal palliative patients. This study aims at describing the occurrence and characteristics of suboptimal palliative sedations in primary care and at exploring the way general practitioners (GPs) experience suboptimal palliative sedation in their practice.

METHODS

We conducted a mixed methods study with a quantitative prospective survey in primary care and qualitative semi-structured interviews with GPs. The research team defined suboptimal palliative sedation as a time interval until deep sleep >1.5 h and/ or >2 awakenings after the start of the unconsciousness. Descriptive statistics were calculated on the quantitative data. Thematic analysis was used to analyse interview transcripts.

RESULTS

We registered 63 palliative sedations in 1181 home deaths, 27 forms were completed. Eleven palliative sedations were suboptimal: eight due to the long time span until deep sleep; three due the number of unintended awakenings. GPs' interview analysis revealed two major themes: the shifting perception of failure and the burden of responsibility.

CONCLUSIONS

Suboptimal palliative sedation occurs frequently in primary palliative care. Efficient communication towards family members is needed to prevent them from having unrealistic expectations and to prevent putting pressure on the GP to hasten the procedure. Sharing the burden of decision-making during the procedure with other health care professionals might diminish the heavy responsibility as perceived by GPs.

Experiences of Family Members of Dying Patients Receiving Palliative Sedation

PURPOSE/OBJECTIVES

To describe the experience of family members of patients receiving palliative sedation at the initiation of treatment and after the patient has died and to compare these experiences over time.
.

DESIGN

Descriptive comparative study.
.

SETTING

Oncology ward at Shaare Zedek Medical Center in Jerusalem, Israel.
.

SAMPLE

A convenience sample of 34 family members of dying patients receiving palliative sedation. 
.

METHODS

A modified version of a questionnaire describing experiences of family members with palliative sedation was administered during palliative sedation and one to four months after the patient died. Descriptive statistics were used to describe the results of the questionnaire, and appropriate statistical analyses were conducted for comparisons over time.
.

MAIN RESEARCH VARIABLES

Experiences of family members and time.
.

FINDINGS

Most relatives were satisfied with the sedation and staff support. Palliative sedation was experienced as an ethical way to relieve suffering. However, one-third felt that it shortened the patient's life. An explanation of the treatment was given less than half of the time and was usually given on the same day treatment was started. This explanation was given by physicians and nurses. Many felt that they were not ready for changes in the patient's condition and wanted increased opportunities to discuss the treatment with oncology care providers. No statistically significant differences in experiences were found over time. 
.

CONCLUSIONS

Relatives' experiences of palliative sedation were generally positive and stable over time. Important experiences included timing of the initiation of sedation, timing and quality of explanations, and communication.
.

IMPLICATIONS FOR NURSING

Nurses should attempt to initiate discussions of the possible role of sedation in the event of refractory symptoms and follow through with continued discussions. The management of refractory symptoms at the end of life, the role of sedation, and communication skills associated with decision making related to palliative sedation should be a part of the core nursing curriculum. Nursing administrators in areas that use palliative sedation should enforce good nursing clinical practice as recommended by international practice guidelines, such as those of the European Association for Palliative Care.

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.

No Negative Impact of Palliative Sedation on Relatives' Experience of the Dying Phase and Their Wellbeing after the Patient's Death: An Observational Study

Background

Palliative sedation is the widely-used intervention of administering sedating agents to induce a state of unconsciousness to take away a dying patient’s perception of otherwise irrelievable symptoms. However, it remains questionable whether this ethically complex intervention is beneficial for patients and whether the associated lack of communication in the last phase of life has a negative impact on relatives’ wellbeing.

Methods

An observational questionnaire study was conducted among relatives of a consecutive sample of patients who died a non-sudden death in the Erasmus MC Cancer Institute or in the hospice ‘Laurens Cadenza’ (both in Rotterdam) between 2010 and 2013.

Results

Relatives filled in questionnaires regarding 151 patients who had been sedated and 90 patients who had not been sedated. The median time since all patients had passed away was 21 (IQR 14–32) months. No significant differences were found in relatives´ assessments of the quality of end-of-life care, patients´ quality of life in the last week before death and their quality of dying, between patients who did and did not receive sedation, or in relatives’ satisfaction with their own life, their general health and their mental wellbeing after the patient’s death.

Conclusions

The use of sedation in these patients appears to have no negative effect on bereaved relatives’ evaluation of the patient’s dying phase, or on their own wellbeing after the patient’s death.

Dutch physicians on the role of the family in continuous sedation

In order to relieve intractable suffering of a terminal patient, doctors may decide to continuously sedate a patient until the end of life. Little research is done on the role the family plays during the process of continuous sedation. This study aims to get a view of doctors' experiences with continuous sedation, and the role of the family throughout that process. We held in-depth interviews with 48 doctors (19 general practitioners, 16 nursing home doctors and 18 medical specialists). Participants were selected varying in experience and opinions concerning end-of-life decisions. Dutch physicians experience the role of family in continuous sedation as important and potentially difficult. Difficulties may rise especially during the final stages when the patient is no longer conscious and family members are waiting for death to come. Disagreement may arise between physician and family, concerning the dignity of the dying process or the question whether the sedated patient is suffering or not. Some physicians report they hastened the dying process, in order to relieve the families' suffering.

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.

End-of-life delirium: issues regarding recognition, optimal management, and the role of sedation in the dying phase

CONTEXT

In end-of-life care, delirium is often not recognized and poses unique management challenges, especially in the case of refractory delirium in the terminal phase.

OBJECTIVES

To review delirium in the terminal phase context, specifically in relation to recognition issues; the decision-making processes and management strategies regarding its reversibility; the potential refractoriness of delirium to symptomatic treatment; and the role of sedation in refractory delirium.

METHODS

We combined multidisciplinary input from delirium researchers and knowledge users at an international delirium study planning meeting and relevant electronic database literature searches (Ovid Medline, Embase, PsycINFO, and CINAHL) to inform this narrative review.

RESULTS

The overall management strategy for delirium at the end of life is directed by the patient's prognosis in association with the patient's goals of care. As symptoms of delirium are often refractory in the terminal phase, especially in the case of agitated delirium, the judicious use of palliative sedation is frequently required. However, there remains a lack of high-level evidence for the management of delirium in the terminal phase, including the role of antipsychotics and optimal sedation strategies. For the family and health-care staff, clear communication, education, and emotional support are vital components to assist with decision making and direct the treatment care plan.

CONCLUSION

Further research on the effectiveness of delirium management strategies in the terminal phase for patients and their families is required. Further validation of assessment tools for diagnostic screening and severity measurement is needed in this patient population.

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.

Approaches to suffering at the end of life: the use of sedation in the USA and Netherlands

BACKGROUND

Studies describing physicians' experiences with sedation at the end of life are indispensible for informed palliative care practice, but they are scarce. We describe the accounts of physicians from the USA and the Netherlands, two countries with different regulations on end-of-life decisions regarding their use of sedation.

METHODS

Qualitative face-to-face interviews were held in 2007-2008 with 36 physicians (18 from the Netherlands, 18 from the USA), including primary care physicians and specialists. We applied purposive sampling and conducted constant comparative analyses.

RESULTS

In both countries, the use of sedation was described in diverse terms, especially in the USA, and was often experienced as emotionally challenging. Respondents stated different and sometimes multiple intentions for their use of sedation. Besides alleviating severe suffering, most Dutch respondents justified its use by stating that it does not hasten death, while most American respondents indicated that it might hasten death but that this was justifiable as long as that was not their primary intention. While many Dutch respondents indicated that they initiated open discussions about sedation proactively to inform patients about their options and to allow planning, the accounts of American respondents showed fewer and less-open discussions, mostly late in the dying process and with the patient's relatives.

CONCLUSIONS

The justification for sedation and the openness with which it is discussed were found to differ in the accounts of respondents from the USA and the Netherlands. Further clarification of practices and research into the effect and effectiveness of the use of sedation is recommended to enhance informed reflection and policy making.

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.

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.

Day-to-day care in palliative sedation: survey of nurses' experiences with decision-making and performance

CONTEXT

Continuous palliative sedation has been the focus of extensive international debates in the field of end-of-life decision making. Although nurses may be important participants in the performance of continuous palliative sedation, research has focused primarily on the role and experience of physicians. Nurses' experiences differ from that of physicians; they more often describe that continuous palliative sedation is used with the intention of hastening death and to have experienced serious emotional burden. Therefore, it is important to understand the experience of nurses in continuous palliative sedation.

OBJECTIVE

To describe nurses' experiences with the decision-making and performance of continuous palliative sedation in terminally ill patients.

METHODS

Cross-sectional study. In 2008, a structured questionnaire was sent to 576 nurses in six professional home care organizations, ten units for palliative care in nursing homes and in-patient hospices and seven hospitals in the western region of the Netherlands. Respondents provided information about the last patient receiving continuous palliative sedation whom they had cared for.

RESULTS

Two-hundred seventy-seven questionnaires were returned and 199 (71.84%) reported a case of continuous palliative sedation. Nurses felt involved in the decision to use sedation in 84% of cases, albeit to a lesser extent in home care (68.75%, p=0.002). They agreed with the performance of continuous palliative sedation in 95.97% of cases and they proposed the use of continuous palliative sedation in 16.16%. Nurses were present at the start of sedation in 81.40% of cases and reported physicians to be present in 45.22%. In 72.77%, arrangements had been made among caregivers about the coordination of health care regarding the sedation.

CONCLUSION

Nurses seem to play an important role in the use of continuous sedation. This role is mainly supportive toward physicians and patients during the decision-making process, but shifts to an active performance of sedation, particularly in settings where they explicitly participate as members of a team. Nurses could develop the practice of palliative sedation by anticipating procedural obstacles in the performance of continuous palliative sedation. We recommend them to become more active participants in the decision-making to improve the care of patients receiving continuous palliative sedation.

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.

Pressure during decision making of continuous sedation in end-of-life situations in Dutch general practice

Background

Little is known about pressure from patients or relatives on physician’s decision making of continuous palliative sedation. We aim to describe experienced pressure by general practitioners (GPs) in cases of continuous sedation after the introduction of the Dutch practice guideline, using a questionnaire survey.

Methods

A sample of 918 Dutch GPs were invited to fill out a questionnaire about their last patient under continuous sedation. Cases in which GPs experienced pressure from the patient, relatives or other persons were compared to those without pressure.

Results

399 of 918 invite GPs (43%) returned the questionnaire and 250 provided detailed information about their most recent case of continuous sedation. Forty-one GPs (16%) indicated to have experienced pressure from the patient, relatives or colleagues. In GPs younger than 50, guideline knowledge was not related to experienced pressure, whereas in older GPs, 15% with and 36% without guideline knowledge reported pressure. GPs experienced pressure more often when patients had psychological symptoms (compared to physical symptoms only) and when patients had a longer estimated life expectancy. A euthanasia request of the patient coincided with a higher prevalence of pressure for GPs without, but not for GPs with previous experience with euthanasia. GPs who experienced pressure had consulted a palliative consultation team more often than GPs who did not experience pressure.

Conclusion

One in six GPs felt pressure from patients or relatives to start sedation. This pressure was related to guideline knowledge, especially in older GPs, longer life expectancy and the presence of a euthanasia request, especially for GPs without previous experience of euthanasia.

The perspectives of clinical staff and bereaved informal care-givers on the use of continuous sedation until death for cancer patients: The study protocol of the UNBIASED study

Background

A significant minority of dying people experience refractory symptoms or extreme distress unresponsive to conventional therapies. In such circumstances, sedation may be used to decrease or remove consciousness until death occurs. This practice is described in a variety of ways, including: 'palliative sedation', 'terminal sedation', 'continuous deep sedation until death', 'proportionate sedation' or 'palliative sedation to unconsciousness'. Surveys show large unexplained variation in incidence of sedation at the end of life across countries and care settings and there are ethical concerns about the use, intentions, risks and significance of the practice in palliative care. There are also questions about how to explain international variation in the use of the practice. This protocol relates to the UNBIASED study (UK Netherlands Belgium International Sedation Study), which comprises three linked studies with separate funding sources in the UK, Belgium and the Netherlands. The aims of the study are to explore decision-making surrounding the application of continuous sedation until death in contemporary clinical practice, and to understand the experiences of clinical staff and decedents' informal care-givers of the use of continuous sedation until death and their perceptions of its contribution to the dying process. The UNBIASED study is part of the European Association for Palliative Care Research Network.

Methods/Design

To realize the study aims, a two-phase study has been designed. The study settings include: the domestic home, hospital and expert palliative care sites. Phase 1 consists of: a) focus groups with health care staff and bereaved informal care-givers; and b) a preliminary case notes review to study the range of sedation therapy provided at the end of life to cancer patients who died within a 12 week period. Phase 2 employs qualitative methods to develop 30 patient-centred case studies in each country. These involve interviews with staff and informal care-givers closely involved in the care of cancer patients who received continuous sedation until death.

Discussion

To our knowledge, this is one of the few studies which seek to take a qualitative perspective on clinical decision making surrounding the use of continuous sedation until death and the only one which includes the perspectives of nurses, physicians, as well as bereaved informal care-givers. It has several potential strengths, weaknesses, opportunities and threats associated with the specific design of the study, as well as with the sensitive nature of the topic and the different frameworks for ethical review in the participating countries.

Impacto familiar de la sedación paliativa en pacientes terminales desde la perspectiva del cuidador principal

Objetivo: Describir el impacto familiar de la sedación paliativa en pacientes con enfermedad avanzada terminal ya fallecidos, desde la percepción del cuidador principal.Método: Estudio cualitativo de enfoque fenomenológico. Se realizaron entrevistas semi-estructuradas a diez cuidadores principales de pacientes con enfermedad terminal fallecidos bajo sedación paliativa, que fueron atendidos por cuidados paliativos en una institución oncológica de Medellín, Colombia entre enero y marzo de 2015. Se analizó la información a partir de categorías preestablecidas: significado, cambios emocionales, cambios estructurales y duelo.Resultado: Los cuidadores no tenían ningún conocimiento previo sobre la sedación. Todos reportan que fueron informados sobre el objetivo y los cambios físicos que podía presentar el paciente; sin embargo, la mitad de ellos refirieron que esta información no fue suficiente para comprender el proceso que enfrentaban. Manifestaron diversos sentimientos (alivio, duda, impotencia, tristeza) antes, durante y después de la sedación. Respecto a los cambios estructurales, la mayoría de las familias se reorganizaron y facilitaron el acompañamiento y cuidado al paciente refiriendo fortalecimiento de las relaciones familiares. Finalmente, se encontró que los cuidadores percibieron que la sedación paliativa facilita el duelo, al aliviar el sufrimiento y permitiendo una buena muerte.Conclusiones: Los cuidadores evalúan la experiencia de sedación como positiva y satisfactoria para aliviar el sufrimiento de su ser querido y el de su familia. Igualmente, facilita el proceso de duelo por la construcción positiva de alivio en torno a la experiencia vivida como familia, fortaleciendo sus relaciones y recordando una buena muerte para su paciente