Palliative sedation in patients with advanced cancer followed at home: a prospective study

Dexmedetomidine Versus Midazolam for End-of-Life Sedation and Agitation: Protocol for a Randomized Controlled Trial (The DREAMS Trial)

BACKGROUND

Sedation at the end of life is used to relieve distressing symptoms including agitation and delirium. Standard care may include infused benzodiazepines or antipsychotics. These agents often result in deep sedation with loss of interaction with loved ones, which may be distressing.

OBJECTIVE

The DREAMS (Dexmedetomidine for the Reduction of End-of-life Agitation and for optiMised Sedation) trial aimed to compare the sedative and antidelirium effects of the alpha-2 agonist dexmedetomidine, a novel palliative care sedative, compared with midazolam, a benzodiazepine when administered by subcutaneous infusion at the end of life, with doses of both agents targeting lighter, or potentially interactive sedation.

METHODS

Participants were recruited from adult inpatients admitted for end-of-life care under a palliative care team in regional New South Wales, Australia. Inclusion criteria included patients older than 18 years, with a preference for lighter sedation at the end of life. Exclusion criteria included severe cardiac dysfunction (contraindication to dexmedetomidine). Participants consented and were placed on a treatment-pending list. Upon experiencing terminal deterioration, patients were randomized to either arm 1 (dexmedetomidine) or arm 2 (midazolam) as their treatment arm. These treatments were administered by continuous subcutaneous infusion. The level of consciousness and agitation of the patients were measured by the Richmond Agitation-Sedation Scale-Palliative version and the Memorial Delirium Assessment Score. Richmond Agitation-Sedation Scale-Palliative version assessments were performed by both nursing and medical staff, while Memorial Delirium Assessment Score assessments were carried out by medical staff only. Families and patients were asked to complete, as able, a patient comfort assessment form, to gauge perceptions of distress. Data were collected and matched with the breakthrough medication doses administered, along with qualitative comments in the medical record. In addition, the study tracked symptoms and patient functional status that were recorded as part of the Palliative Care Outcomes Collaborative, a national tracking project for monitoring symptom outcomes in palliative care.

RESULTS

The DREAMS trial was funded in May 2020, approved by the ethics committee in November 2020, and started recruiting participants in May 2021. Data collection commenced in May 2021 and is anticipated to continue until December 2024. Publication of results is anticipated from 2024 to 2026.

CONCLUSIONS

The evidence base for sedative dosing in palliative care for distress and agitation is not robust, with standard care based primarily on clinical experience and not robust scientific evidence. This study is important because it will compare a standard and a novel sedative used in end-of-life treatment. By assessing the potential efficacy and benefits of both, it seeks to optimize the quality of dying by providing targeted sedation that can improve the communication between dying patients and their loved ones.

TRIAL REGISTRATION

Australia New Zealand Clinical Trials Register ACTRN12621000052831; https://uat.anzctr.org.au/Trial/Registration/TrialReview.aspx?id=380889.

INTERNATIONAL REGISTERED REPORT IDENTIFIER (IRRID)

DERR1-10.2196/55129.

Palliative sedation and time to death in home palliative care: retrospective analysis

OBJECTIVES

We described time to death and rates of palliative sedation during home palliative care leveraging a retrospective cohort of patients with advanced cancer.

METHODS

The cohort consists of 143 patients with solid or haematological malignancies admitted to home palliative care in the Tuscany region in central Italy. Only patients for whom a date of death was available were included. The outcome measures were time from admission to home palliative care to death and receipt of palliative sedation.

RESULTS

143 patients were included in this report. Lower Eastern Cooperative Oncology Group (ECOG) performance status (PS) scores were significantly associated with anticancer treatment at admission, as was younger age. Increasing ECOG PS scores were associated with lower survival time. Women and patients on anticancer treatment had longer survival time. Thirty-eight per cent of patients underwent palliative sedation at home; palliative sedation was more frequent among younger patients and among patients with brain or lung cancer. The most common reasons for palliative sedation were delirium and dyspnoea.

CONCLUSIONS

ECOG PS, sex and anticancer treatment had a significant impact on survival time. Thirty-eight per cent of patients in our cohort underwent home palliative sedation for refractory symptoms, most often delirium and dyspnoea.

Documentation of Sedation in Palliative Care: A Scoping Review of Requirements, Recommendations, and Templates

Objective: To identify and describe requirements, recommendations, and templates for the documentation of sedation in adult palliative care. Introduction: International literature shows inconsistency in clinical practice regarding sedation in palliative care accompanied by legal, ethical, and medical uncertainties. Documentation in general serves as proof for previous treatments. In the context of intentional sedation to relieve suffering at the end of life, documentation provides a clear demarcation against practices of euthanasia. Inclusion Criteria: Articles with full-text version published in English or German since 2000, covering documentation requirements, recommendations, monitoring parameters or templates for sedation in adult palliative care were included. Methods: Scoping review following the JBI methodology. Search in online databases, websites of professional associations in palliative care, reference lists of relevant publications, the archive of the German "Journal of Palliative Medicine" and databases for unpublished literature were used. Search terms included "palliative care,' "sedation," and "documentation." The search was conducted from January 2022 to April 2022 with an initial hand search in November 2021. Data were screened and charted by one reviewer after conducting a pilot test of the criteria. Results: From the initial 390 articles (database search), 22 articles were included. In addition, 15 articles were integrated from the hand search. The results can be clustered in two sets of items, regarding either the documentation before or during sedation. The documentation requirements referred both to inpatient and homecare settings but in many cases, a clear assignment was missing. Conclusions: The guidelines analyzed in this study rarely cover setting-specific differences in documentation and often treat documentation as minor topic. Further research is needed addressing legal and ethical concerns of health care teams and, therefore, help to improve treatment of patients suffering from otherwise intractable burden at the end of life.

Palliative Sedation at Home: A Scoping Review

Palliative Sedation (PS) is an effective measure for the relief of refractory symptoms in end-of-life patients. This intervention can be performed at home, respecting the patients' and their families' decisions. A scoping review was performed to map the available evidence in the literature on the performance of PS at home. This review included 23 studies. Most were conducted in European countries with adult cancer patients. Patients, family members and healthcare providers participated in the decision making regarding the use of PS at home. PS was used primarily to manage refractory symptoms (pain, delirium, dyspnea, and others), and in 1 of the studies PS was mentioned as a possible intervention for shortening life. The most commonly used medication was midazolam and the average duration ranged from 4 h to 7 days. There are few reports on adverse events related to PS. This intervention seems to be a feasible possibility for the management of refractory symptoms in patients at the end of life, despite the fact that it can represent specific challenges for healthcare providers, patients and families. However, the literature is limited regarding PS in children and in people with diseases other than cancer, as well as on the evaluation of possible adverse effects related to this intervention. Furthermore, it is essential to have a broad ethical, clinical and legal debate on whether to consider the use of PS for the purpose of shortening life in specific cases.

Prevalence of Delirium in Advance Cancer Patients Admitted in Hospice Centre and Outcome after Palliative Intervention

Objectives

The assessment of prevalence of delirium in advanced cancer patients admitted in hospice centre and outcome after palliative intervention. The possible related risk factors for development of delirium.

Material and Methods

This was prospective analytic study done at hospice centre attached with tertiary cancer hospital in Ahmedabad during August 2019 - July 2021. This study was approved by the Institutional Review Committee. We selected patients according to following inclusion criteria (all patient admitted to hospice centre above 18 years, with advance cancer disease and on best supportive care) and exclusion criteria (Lack of informed consent, Inability to participate in study due to mentally retard or coma). The following information were collected: age, gender, address, type of cancer, comorbidities, history of substance abuse, history of (h/o) palliative chemotherapy or radiotherapy within last 3month, general condition, ESAS (Edmonton symptom assessment scale), ECOG (Eastern cooperative oncology group), PaP score (palliative prognostic score), medication including opioids, NSAIDs (Non-steroidal anti-inflammatory drugs), steroids, antibiotic, adjuvant analgesic, PPI (Proton pump inhibitor), anti-emetic etc. Delirium diagnosis was based on diagnostic criterion of DSM-IV text revised and MDAS.

Results

In our study we found prevalence of delirium was 31.29% in advanced cancer patients admitted to hospice centre. We found most common type of delirium is hypoactive (34.7%) and mixed subtype (34.7%) followed by hyperactive (30.4%) delirium. Resolution of delirium was higher among hyperactive delirium (78.57%) followed by mixed subtype (50%) and hypoactive (12.5%). Mortality was higher among patient with hypoactive subtype (81.25%) followed by mixed (43.75%) and hyperactive delirium (14.28%).

Conclusion

An identification and assessment of delirium is vital for acceptable end of life care within the palliative care in light of the fact that the presence of delirium is related with morbidity, mortality, prolonged ICU hospitalization, expanded time on a ventilator, and by and large more prominent medical services costs. Clinicians should utilize one of a few approved delirium assessment tools to help evaluate and archive cognitive function. Prevention and recognizing the clinical reason for delirium are generally the best method for diminishing the morbidity from delirium. The study results demonstrate that multi component delirium management or projects are generally proficient to lessen the prevalence and negative outcomes of delirium. It was found that palliative care intervention has quite a positive outcome as it not only focus on the mental health of the patients but also of family members who go through the same amount of distress and also help them to communicate properly and manage to settle the mental state and end the life without pain and distress.

"It's pretty much flying blind in the home care setting": A qualitative study on the influence of home care specific circumstances on sedation in specialist palliative home care

BACKGROUND

Existing data on sedation at the end of life indicate challenges in the home care setting, leading to deviations from guidelines or non-provision of sedation.

AIM

As part of the "SedPall" study, we aimed to explore circumstances in specialist palliative home care, which influence the practice of sedation.

DESIGN

Semi-structured qualitative interviews (n = 59) and two focus groups (n = 4, n = 5). Recruitment took place via contact persons. We thematically analyzed the transcripts with the Framework Approach, using MAXQDA 2018.2.

SETTING/PARTICIPANTS

Physicians, nurses, and other members of the multiprofessional team from 10 palliative care units and seven home care teams.

RESULTS

Participants reported home care specific circumstances that can be categorized into three interrelated topics. (1) Lack of 24/7 on-site availability, (2) active involvement of the family, (3) challenges regarding teamwork and multidisciplinarity. Participants drew different conclusions from the reported circumstances regarding the feasibility of different types of sedation at home: While some reported to generally use all types of sedation, others stated that some types of sedation are not feasible in home care, for example deep sedation until death. Most participants questioned the applicability of existing sedation guidelines in the home care setting.

CONCLUSION

Our data indicate that sedation practices might currently follow the healthcare professional's attitude or service policy rather than the patient's need. To avoid hospital admission in manageable cases and ensure that home care specific best practice standards are met, existing guideline recommendations have to be adapted and supplemented by additional supporting measures specific for the home care setting.

Sedation in specialized palliative care: A cross-sectional study

Background

Palliative sedation is used to relieve refractory symptoms and is part of clinical practice in Sweden. Yet we do not know how frequently this practice occurs, how decision-making takes place, or even which medications are preferentially used.

Objectives

To understand the current practice of palliative sedation in Sweden.

Methods

We conducted a retrospective cross-sectional medical record-based study. For 690 consecutive deceased patients from 11 of 12 specialized palliative care units in the southernmost region of Sweden who underwent palliative sedation during 2016, we collected data on whether the patient died during sedation and, for sedated patients, the decision-making process, medication used, and depth of sedation.

Results

Eight percent of patients were sedated. Almost all (94%) were given midazolam, sometimes in combination with propofol. The proportions of sedation were similar in the patient groups with and without cancer. The largest proportion of the sedated patients died in inpatient care, but 23% died at home, with specialized palliative home care. Among the patients with a decision to sedate, 42% died deeply unconscious, while for those without such a decision the corresponding figure was 16%. In only one case was there more than one physician involved in the decision to use palliative sedation.

Conclusion

8% of patients in specialized palliative care received palliative sedation, which is lower than international measures but much increased compared to an earlier Swedish assessment. The level of consciousness achieved often did not correspond to the planned level; this, together with indications of a scattered decision process, shows a need for clear guidelines.

Association of the RASS Score with Intensity of Symptoms, Discomfort, and Communication Capacity in Terminally Ill Cancer Patients Receiving Palliative Sedation: Is RASS an Appropriate Outcome Measure?

Background:

Palliative sedation is sometimes needed for refractory symptoms, and the Richmond Agitation–Sedation Scale (RASS) is one of the key measures. The primary aim of this study was to explore the association between RASS and degree of distress quantified by other measures: Item “symptom control” of Support Team Assessment Schedule (STAS, item 2), Discomfort Scale for Dementia of Alzheimer Type (Discomfort Scale), and Noncommunicative Patient's Pain Assessment Instrument (NOPPAIN), as well as a communication capacity measured by the Communication Capacity Scale (CCS), item 4.

Methods:

This was a prospective observational study on terminally ill cancer patients with palliative sedation in a palliative care unit of a designated cancer hospital. Primarily responsible palliative care physicians rated RASS, Discomfort Scale, NOPPAIN, and CCS just before sedation and 1, 4, 24, and 48 hours after, and ward nurses rated STAS at the same time. Since the ward nurses evaluated STAS during palliative sedation, we regarded STAS as a standard of distress measure.

Results:

A total of 249 assessments were performed for 55 patients. RASS was moderately to highly associated with symptom intensity measured by STAS, discomfort measured by the Discomfort Scale, and pain measured by NOPPAIN (r = 0.63 to 0.73). But communication capacity measured by CCS is not parallel with RASS and demonstrated a valley shape. In 82 assessments with an RASS score of −1 to −3, 11 patients (13%) had physical symptoms of STAS of 2 or more.

Conclusions:

RASS can roughly estimate physical distress in patients with palliative sedation, but a measure to more precisely quantify the symptom experience is needed.

The Impact of Aging on Symptom Prevalence and Management in Terminally ill Patients With Cancer

CONTEXT

With global population aging, the number of older patients with cancer is increasing. However, few data are available on palliative care for these patients.

OBJECTIVES

To evaluate differences in symptom prevalence and the need for medical interventions among patients of different ages in a palliative care unit.

METHODS

In this retrospective analysis, a consecutive sample of 1032 terminally ill patients with cancer were categorized into the following age ranges: <70, 70-79, 80-89, and ≥90 years. We evaluated symptom prevalence, the need for palliative medicines, opioid dose on the day before death, and the need for palliative sedation. Trend tests were used to examine whether the prevalence of findings increased or decreased with age.

RESULTS

As age increased, significant decreasing trends were observed in the prevalence of pain, dyspnea, fatigue, constipation, nausea, drowsiness, difficulty sleeping, anxiety, and dysuria but not in appetite loss, edema, sputum production, or delirium. As age increased, significant decreasing trends were also observed in the need for opioids, benzodiazepines, antiemetics, and anticholinergics. The median opioid doses in the <70, 70-79, 80-89, and ≥90 years age groups were 118, 72, 48, and 48 mg oral morphine equivalents/day, respectively (P < 0.0001). The need for palliative sedation showed a significant decreasing trend as age increased (P < 0.0001).

CONCLUSION

We found age to be inversely related to symptom prevalence and medical interventions among terminally ill patients with cancer, contributing to the understanding of the experience of older patients with cancer.

The Decision-Making Process for Palliative Sedation for Patients with Advanced Cancer-Analysis from a Systematic Review of Prospective Studies

BACKGROUND

The involvement of patients in decision making about their healthcare plans is being emphasized. In the context of palliative sedation, it is unclear how these decisions are made and who are involved in. The aim of the study is to understand how this decision-making is taken.

METHOD

Information from a systematic review on clinical aspects of palliative sedation prospective studies were included. PubMed, CINAHL, Cochrane, MEDLINE, and EMBASE were searched (January 2014-December 2019). Data extraction and analysis regarded: (a) When and by whom the decision-making process is initiated; (b) patient involvement; (c) family involvement and (d) healthcare involvement.

RESULTS

Data about decision making were reported in 8/10 included articles. Palliative sedation was reported in 1137 patients (only 16 of them were non-cancer). Palliative sedation was introduced by the palliative care team during the disease process, at admission, or when patients experienced refractory symptoms. Only two studies explicitly mentioned the involvement of patients in decision making. Co-decision between families and the regular health care professionals was usual, and the health care professionals involved had been working in palliative care services.

CONCLUSION

Patient participation in decision making appeared to be compromised by limited physical or cognitive capacity and family participation is described. The possibility of palliative sedation should be discussed earlier in the disease process.

Factors Influencing Pain Expression in Patients with Cancer: An Expert Opinion

Pain is a multidimensional experience that requires an appropriate assessment, and simple numbering may not be enough for the different components that are involved in the clinical expression. In consideration of the subjectivity of the symptom, each assessment should start from the way in which the patients perceive the pain and from how they deal with it. Some factors related to individual patient characteristics may make pain management difficult because of interference with the clinical pain expression. These factors may amplify the reporting of pain. Cognitive disorders and psychological distress seem to strongly influence pain expression and may render the analgesic treatment more difficult. Aberrant behaviors, such as alcoholism, smoking, and opioid misuse, may play a role, although geographic differences were found in terms of prevalence of the phenomenon, especially in some countries. Finally, the assessment of patients' expectation and the meaning of the personal feeling of changes in pain intensity provide new concepts in pain assessment, which may allow better personalization of the analgesic therapy. A modern pain assessment should include a multitude of factors influencing the phenotype of pain.

Clinical Aspects of Palliative Sedation in Prospective Studies. A Systematic Review

CONTEXT

Near the end of life when patients experience refractory symptoms, palliative sedation may be considered as a last treatment. Clinical guidelines have been developed, but they are mainly based on expert opinion or retrospective chart reviews. Therefore, evidence for the clinical aspects of palliative sedation is needed.

OBJECTIVES

To explore clinical aspects of palliative sedation in recent prospective studies.

METHODS

Systematic review was conducted following Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses guidelines and registered at PROSPERO. PubMed, CINAHL, Cochrane, MEDLINE, and EMBASE were searched (January 2014-December 2019), combining sedation, palliative care, and prospective. Article quality was assessed.

RESULTS

Ten prospective articles were included, involving predominantly patients with cancer. Most frequently reported refractory symptoms were delirium (41%-83%), pain (25%-65%), and dyspnea (16%-59%). In some articles, psychological and existential distress were mentioned (16%-59%). Only a few articles specified the tools used to assess symptoms. Level of sedation assessment tools were the Richmond Agitation Sedation Scale, Ramsay Sedation Scale, Glasgow Coma Scale, and Bispectral Index monitoring. The palliative sedation practice shows an underlying need for proportionality in relation to symptom intensity. Midazolam was the main sedative used. Other reported medications were phenobarbital, promethazine, and anesthetic medication-propofol. The only study that reported level of patient's discomfort as a palliative sedation outcome showed a decrease in patient discomfort.

CONCLUSION

Assessment of refractory symptoms should include physical evaluation with standardized tools applied and interviews for psychological and existential evaluation by expert clinicians working in teams. Future research needs to evaluate the effectiveness of palliative sedation for refractory symptom relief.

How to measure the effects and potential adverse events of palliative sedation? An integrative review

BACKGROUND

Palliative sedation is the monitored use of medications intended to relieve refractory suffering. The assessment of palliative sedation has been focused on the assess of the level of consciousness but a more comprehensive approach to assessment is needed.

AIM

To understand how the potential effects and possible adverse events of palliative sedation in Palliative Care patients are measured.

DESIGN

Integrative review of most recent empirical research.

DATA SOURCES

Cochrane Library, Embase, Medline, PubMed, and CINAHL were searched (2010-2020) using the terms sedation, palliative care, terminal care, assessment. Limits included studies in English and adults. Inclusion criteria were: scientific assessment papers, effects and complications of palliative sedation; patients with incurable illness.

RESULTS

Out of 588 titles, 26 fulfilled inclusion criteria. The Discomfort Scale-Dementia of Alzheimer Type and Patient Comfort Score were used to assess comfort. The Richmond Agitation-Sedation Scale and The Ramsay Sedation Scale are the most used to measure its effect. Refractory symptoms were assessed through multi-symptom or specific scales; except for psychological or existential distress. Delirium was assessed using the Memorial Delirium Assessment Scale and pain through the Critical Care Pain Observation Tool. The use of technical approaches to monitor effects is upcoming. There is lack of measurement of possible adverse events and variability in timing measurement.

CONCLUSIONS

There are palliative care validated instruments to assess the sedation effect but this review shows the need for a more standardized approach when assessing it. Instruments should be used within an experienced and trained expert, providing a holistic assessment.

Midazolam: an essential palliative care drug

Midazolam is a commonly used benzodiazepine in palliative care and is considered one of the four essential drugs needed for the promotion of quality care in dying patients. Acting on the benzodiazepine receptor, it promotes the action of gamma-aminobutyric acid. Gamma-aminobutyric acid action promotes sedative, anxiolytic, and anticonvulsant properties. Midazolam has a faster onset and shorter duration of action than other benzodiazepines such as diazepam and lorazepam lending itself to greater flexibility in dosing than other benzodiazepines. The kidneys excrete midazolam and its active metabolite. Metabolism occurs in the liver by the P450 system. This article examines the pharmacology, pharmacodynamics, and clinical uses of midazolam in palliative care.

Symptom expression in advanced cancer patients admitted to hospice or home care with and without delirium

The aim of this study is to investigate the relationship between delirium and symptom expression in advanced cancer patients admitted to palliative care services. This is a secondary analysis of a consecutive sample of advanced cancer patients who were admitted to home care and hospices, and prospectively assessed for a period of 10 months. The Edmonton Symptom Assessment Scale (ESAS) and the MDAS (Memorial Delirium Assessment Scale) were measured at admission (T0) and after seven days of home care or hospice care (T7). Of the eight hundred and forty-eight patients screened in the period, 585 were not considered in the analysis for various reasons. The mean age was 72.1 years (SD 13.7), and 146 patients were males (55.5%). The mean Karnofsky status recorded at T0 is 34.1 (SD = 6.69). The mean duration palliative care assistance is 38.4 days (SD = 48, range 2-220). Of 263 patients who had a MDAS available at T0, 110 patients (41.8%) had a diagnosis of delirium. Of them, 167 patients had complete data regarding MDAS measurement, either at T0 and T7. A larger number of patients (n 167, 63.5%) had delirium after a week of palliative care. Patients with delirium are likely to be older, to have a lower Karnofsky level at T0, and to be home care patients. At T0, weakness, nausea, drowsiness, lack of appetite, and well-being are associated with delirium. At T7, weakness, poor appetite, and poor well-being are significantly associated with delirium. 27% of patients who had a normal cognitive status at T0 developed delirium at T7. In patients with delirium, an improvement in the cognitive status corresponds to a significant improvement in weakness, depression, and appetite. Conversely, the occurrence of delirium in patients who had a normal cognitive status at admission significantly increases the level depression, while the level of weakness and appetite decrease. Symptom expression is amplified in patients with delirium admitted to home care or hospices, while patients without delirium can be more responsive to palliative treatments with a significant decrease in intensity of ESAS items.

The Patient with Difficult Cancer Pain

Most patients with cancer pain can be managed with relatively simple methods using oral analgesics at relatively low doses, even for prolonged periods of time. However, in some clinical conditions pain may be more difficult to manage. Various factors can interfere with a desirable and favorable analgesic response. Data from several studies assessing factors of negative pain prognosis have indicated that neuropathic pain, incident pain, psychological distress, opioid addiction, and baseline pain intensity were associated with more difficult pain control. In this narrative review, the main factors that make the therapeutic response to opioids difficult are examined.

Home Palliative Sedation Using Phenobarbital Suppositories: Time to Death, Patient Characteristics, and Administration Protocol

BACKGROUND

Most people in the United States and other countries cite their preferred location of death as their homes. However, intractable symptoms sometimes require hospitalization, especially if significant sedation becomes necessary. For over a decade, Hospice of Central New York has been using compounded phenobarbital suppositories with individuals in whom adequate sedation has not been achieved using sufficient doses of antipsychotics or benzodiazepines but prefer to remain in their homes.

OBJECTIVES

(1) Describe the use of phenobarbital suppositories in homes for the purpose of sedation. (2) Understand patient characteristics of potential users and those in whom suppositories were actually used. (3) Measure time to death after initiating the phenobarbital suppositories.

SETTING

Medicare-certified not-for-profit hospice organization in New York State.

METHOD

Retrospective case series.

RESULTS

Of 1675 patients enrolled in hospice over an 18-month period, phenobarbital suppositories were placed in the homes of 90 patients for potential use. Suppositories were initiated in 31 of the 90 patients. Agitated delirium was the major symptom for which suppositories were placed and initiated. Both groups had a greater prevalence of cancer diagnoses than the target population. The mean time to death after initiation of phenobarbital suppositories was 38.8 hours. None of the users were hospitalized.

CONCLUSION

The use of compounded phenobarbital suppositories for the purpose of palliative sedation is an alternative for patients and families who desire to remain home despite refractory symptoms.

Reflections on palliative sedation

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

Symptom Expression in Patients with Advanced Cancer Admitted to an Acute Supportive/Palliative Care Unit With and Without Delirium

AIM

The aim of this study was to investigate the relationship between delirium and symptom expression in patients with advanced cancer admitted to an acute supportive/palliative care unit (ASPCU).

METHODS

A consecutive sample of patients with advanced cancer who were admitted to an ASPCU was prospectively assessed for a period of 10 months. The Edmonton Symptom Assessment Scale (ESAS) and the MDAS (Memorial Delirium Assessment Scale) were measured at admission (T0) and after 7 days of palliative care (T7).

RESULTS

Two hundred forty-six patients had complete data regarding MDAS measurements, at either T0 and T7. Of these, 75 (30.5%) and 63 patients (25.6%) had delirium at T0 and after a week of palliative care (T7), with a decrease in the frequency of delirium of 4.9% (from 30.5% to 25.6%); that means that 16% of patients with delirium improved their cognitive status after initiation of palliative care. Intensities of pain, depression, poor well-being, and global ESAS were significantly higher in patients with delirium. Patients who did not have delirium at T0 but developed delirium during admission after 1 week of palliative care had a higher level of symptom expression for pain, weakness, nausea, anxiety, dyspnea, appetite, and consequently global ESAS. Patients who did not develop delirium at any time had a relevant decrease in intensity of all ESAS items after 1 week of palliative care. The decrease of symptom intensity was significant for pain, insomnia, appetite, poor well-being, and global ESAS in patients with delirium either at T0 and T7, although these differences were less relevant than those observed in patients without delirium. In patients with delirium at T0 who improved their cognitive function at T7 (no delirium), significant changes were found in most ESAS items.

CONCLUSION

Symptom expression is amplified in patients with delirium, whereas patients without delirium may be more responsive to palliative treatments with a significant decrease in intensity of ESAS items.

IMPLICATIONS FOR PRACTICE

Symptom expression is amplified in patients with cancer who have delirium, whereas patients without delirium may be more responsive to palliative treatments with a significant decrease in symptom intensity.

Palliative Sedation for the Terminally Ill Patient

Palliative sedation (PS) is performed in the terminally ill patient to manage one or more refractory symptoms. Proportional PS, which means that drugs can be titrated to the minimum effective dose, is the form most widely used. From a quarter to a third of all terminally ill patients undergo PS, with a quarter of these requiring continuous deep sedation. The prevalence of PS varies according to the care setting and case mix. The most frequent refractory physical symptoms are delirium and dyspnea, but PS is also considered for existential suffering or psychological distress, which is an extremely difficult and delicate issue to deal with. Active consensus from the patient and advanced care planning is recommended for PS. The decision-making process concerning the continuation or withdrawal of other treatments is not the same as that used for PS. The practice differs totally from euthanasia in its intentions, procedures, and results. The most widely used drugs are midazolam and haloperidol for refractory delirium, but chlorpromazine and other neuroleptics are also effective. In conclusion, some patients experience refractory symptoms during the last hours or days of life and PS is a medical intervention aimed at managing this unbearable suffering. It does not have a detrimental effect on survival.

Palliative Sedation in Terminal Cancer Patients Admitted to Hospice or Home Care Programs: Does the Setting Matter? Results From a National Multicenter Observational Study

CONTEXT

Few studies regarding palliative sedation (PS) have been carried out in home care (HC) setting. A comparison of PS rate and practices between hospice (HS) and HC is also lacking.

OBJECTIVES

Comparing HC and HS settings for PS rate, patient clinical characteristics before and during PS, decision-making process, and clinical aspects of PS.

METHODS

About 38 HC/HS services in Italy participated in a multicenter observational longitudinal study. Consecutive adult cancer patients followed till death during a four-month period and undergoing PS were eligible. Symptom control and level of consciousness were registered every eight hours to death.

RESULTS

About 4276 patients were screened, 2894 followed till death, and 531 (18%) underwent PS. PS rate was 15% in HC and 21% in HS (P < 0.001). Principal refractory symptoms were delirium (54%) and dyspnea (45%), respectively, more common in HC (P < 0.001) and HS (P = 0.03). Informed consent was not obtained in 72% of patients but achieved by 96% of families. Midazolam was the most used drug (94% HS vs. 75% HC; P < 0.001) mainly by continuous infusion (74% HC vs. 89% HS; P < 0.001). PS duration was less than 48 hours in 67% of patients. Hydration during PS was less frequent in HC (27% vs. 49%; P < 0.001). In the eight hours before death, consciousness level was unrousable to mild physical stimulation in 81% and symptom control complete in 89% of cases.

CONCLUSION

Our results show feasibility of PS in HC and HS and suggest setting differences in rates, indications, and practice of PS, possibly related to patients' selection or care organization.

Continuous palliative sedation for patients with advanced cancer at a tertiary care cancer center

Background

Palliative sedation (PS) is an intervention to treat refractory symptoms and to relieve suffering at the end of life. Its prevalence and practice patterns vary widely worldwide. The aim of our study was to evaluate the frequency, clinical indications and outcomes of PS in advanced cancer patients admitted to our tertiary comprehensive cancer center.

Methods

We retrospectively studied the use of PS in advanced cancer patients who died between March 1st, 2012 and December 31st, 2014. PS was defined as the use of continuous infusion of midazolam or neuroleptics for refractory symptoms in the end of life. This study was approved by the Research Ethics Committee of our institution (project number 2481–15).

Results

During the study period, 552 cancer patients died at the institution and 374 met the inclusion criteria for this study. Main reason for exclusion was death in the Intensive Care Unit. Among all included patients, 54.2% (n = 203) received PS. Patients who received PS as compared to those not sedated were younger (67.8 vs. 76.4 years-old, p < 0.001) and more likely to have a diagnosis of lung cancer (23% vs. 14%, p = 0.028). The most common indications for sedation were dyspnea (55%) and delirium (19.7%) and the most common drugs used were midazolam (52.7%) or midazolam and a neuroleptic (39.4%). Median initial midazolam infusion rate was 0.75 mg/h (interquartile range – IQR - 0.6-1.5) and final rate was 1.5 mg/h (IQR 0.9–3.0). Patient survival (length of hospital stay from admission to death) of those who had PS was more than the double of those who did not (33.6 days vs 16 days, p < 0.001). The palliative care team was involved in the care of 12% (n = 25) of sedated patients.

Conclusions

PS is a relatively common practice in the end-of-life of cancer patients at our hospital and it is not associated with shortening of hospital stay. Involvement of a dedicated palliative care team is strongly recommended if this procedure is being considered. Further research is needed to identify factors that may affect the frequency and outcomes associated with PS.

Electronic supplementary material

The online version of this article (10.1186/s12904-017-0264-2) contains supplementary material, which is available to authorized users.

Prevalence of delirium in advanced cancer patients in home care and hospice and outcomes after 1 week of palliative care

AIM

The aim of this study was to assess the prevalence of delirium in advanced cancer patients admitted to different palliative care services in Italy and possible related factors. The secondary outcome was to assess the changes of delirium after 1 week of palliative care.

METHODS

A consecutive sample of patients was screened for delirium in period of 1 year in seven palliative care services. General data, including primary tumor, age, gender, concomitant disease, palliative prognostic score (PaP), and Karnofsky status, were collected. Possible causes or factors associated with delirium were looked for. The Edmonton Symptom Assessment Scale was used to assess physical and psychological symptoms and the Memorial Delirium Assessment Scale (MDAS) to assess the cognitive status of patients, at admission (T0) and 1 week after palliative care (T7).

RESULTS

Of 848 patients screened, 263 patients were evaluated. Sixty-six patients had only the initial evaluation. The mean Karnofsky status was 34.1 (SD = 6.69); the mean PaP score at admission was 6.9 (SD = 3.97). The mean duration of palliative care assistance, equivalent to survival, was 38.4 days (SD = 48, range 2-220). The mean MDAS values at admission and after 1 week of palliative care were 6.9 (SD = 6.71) and 8.8 (SD = 8.26), respectively. One hundred ten patients (41.8%) and 167 patients (67.3%) had MDAS values ≥ 7 at admission and after 1 week of palliative care, respectively. Age, dehydration, cachexia, chemotherapy in the last three months, and intensity of drowsiness and dyspnea were independently associated with a MDAS > 7. A worsening of drowsiness, the use of opioids, and the use of corticosteroids were independently associated with changes of MDAS from T0 to T7.

CONCLUSION

Although the prevalence of delirium seems to be similar to that reported in other acute settings, delirium tended to worsen or poorly responded to a palliative care treatment. Some clinical factors were independently associated with delirium. This information is relevant for decision-making when delirium does not change despite a traditional intervention. Continuous assessment of delirium should be performed in these settings to detect deterioration of cognitive function. Further studies should elucidate whether an earlier approach to palliative care would decrease the prevalence of delirium at a late stage of disease.

Delirium assessed by Memorial Delirium Assessment Scale in advanced cancer patients admitted to an acute palliative/supportive care unit

BACKGROUND

Delirium is often unrecognized in cancer patients. The aim of this study was to investigate the prevalence of delirium assessed by the Memorial Delirium Assessment Scale (MDAS) and possible associated factors on admission to an acute palliative/supportive care unit (APSCU). The secondary outcome was to assess changes in MDAS and symptom burden at time of discharge.

METHODS

A consecutive sample of advanced cancer patients who were admitted to an APSCU was prospectively assessed for a period of 10 months. Patient demographics, including age, gender, primary diagnosis, Karnofsky status, stage of disease, and educational level were collected. The Edmonton Symptom Assessment Scale (ESAS) and the MDAS were measured at hospital admission and discharge.

RESULTS

A total of 314 patients were surveyed. Of 292 patients with MDAS available at T0, 74 (25.3%) and 24 (8.2%) had a MDAS of 7-12 and ≥13, respectively. At discharge, there was a significant decrease in the number of patients with a MDAS ≥7/30. Higher values of MDAS were associated with age (p = .028), a lower Karnofsky status (p < .0005), gender (male, p = .04), low level of education (p = .002), less awareness of disease (p < .0005), more indications for end-of-life care admission (p < .0005) or other symptoms (p = .026), hospital stay (p = .038) and death (p < .0005). Significant decreases in ESAS were observed in all patients independently of MDAS values (p < .0005).

CONCLUSION

Delirium is highly prevalent in patients admitted to APSCU, characterized by a low mortality due to early referral. Comprehensive assessment and treatment may allow a decrease in the level of cognitive disorders and symptom burden.

Non-opioid medications for the relief of chronic breathlessness: current evidence

INTRODUCTION

To evaluate systematically randomised clinical trials investigating non-opioid medications for the management and treatment of chronic breathlessness. Areas covered: The evidence for the role of benzodiazepines, anxiolytics, selective serotonin re-uptake inhibitors (SSRIs), tricyclic antidepressants, antihistamines, cannabinoids, nebulized furosemide and herbal-based treatments were critically reviewed. Search of the Clinical Trials Registry (Clinicaltrial.gov) identified ongoing studies expected to generate new data in the near future in several classes of non-opioid medications for their net effect on chronic breathlessness. Expert commentary: Morphine still has the best level of evidence for the symptomatic treatment of chronic breathlessness. Non-opioid treatments for chronic breathlessness are less studied than morphine and morphine-related medications although evidence is emerging in relation to some options. Currently, there is insufficient evidence to recommend non-opioids in the routine treatment of chronic breathlessness. There is a need to find agents, new as well as re-purposed, that can be used as alternative therapies to opioids for chronic breathlessness for people who are unable to tolerate morphine.

Attitudes of palliative home care physicians towards palliative sedation at home in Italy

BACKGROUND

Information about the attitudes towards palliative sedation (PS) at home is limited.

AIM

The aim of this survey was to assess the attitudes of palliative care physicians in Italy regarding PS at home.

DESIGN

A questionnaire was submitted to a sample of palliative care physicians, asking information about their activity and attitudes towards PS at home.

SETTING

This is a survey of home care physicians in Italy who were involved in end-of-life care decisions at home.

RESULTS

One hundred and fifty participants responded. A large heterogeneity of home care organizations that generate some problems was found. Indications, intention and monitoring of PS seem to be appropriate, although some cultural and logistic conditions were limiting the use of PS. Specialized home care physicians are almost involved to start PS at home. Midazolam was seldom available at home and opioids were more frequently used.

CONCLUSION

These data should prompt health care agencies to make a minimal set of drugs easily available for home care. Further research is necessary to compare attitudes in countries with different sociocultural profiles.

Background and episodic breathlessness in advanced cancer patients followed at home

BACKGROUND

The aim of this study was to assess the phenomenon of episodic breathlessness in advanced cancer patients followed by palliative care services at home.

METHODS

A consecutive sample of patients with advanced cancer, admitted to home care for a period of six months, was surveyed. The presence of background breathlessness and episodic breathlessness, their intensity, and drugs used for their treatment were collected. Factors inducing episodic breathlessness, and its influence on daily activities were investigated.

RESULTS

Three hundred forty-seven advanced cancer patients admitted to home palliative care were surveyed. The prevalence of breathlessness was 35.3%. The mean intensity of breathlessness was 3.8 (SD 1.96), out of a maximum score of 10 for worst imaginable. Sixty patients (49.2%) were receiving drugs for background breathlessness. In the multivariate analysis the risk of breathlessness increased with cardiovascular disease, chronic obstructive pulmonary disease, and lung cancer while it decreased in patients with a better performance status. The prevalence of episodic breathlessness in patients with background breathlessness was 79.5% and its mean intensity was 7.1 (SD 1.5, range 2-10). The mean duration of episodic breathlessness was 28.6 minutes (SD 47.1, range 1-300 minutes). Forty-three patients (44.3%) were receiving one or more drugs as needed. The majority of episodic breathlessness events were triggered by activity. Episodic breathlessness was interfering with daily activities in 65 patients (67%). Episodic breathlessness wasn't associated with any variable taken into consideration.

CONCLUSION

This study showed that episodic breathlessness frequently occurs in advanced cancer patients admitted to home care, is severe in intensity, is triggered in most cases by activity, and is characterized by a short duration which requires rapid measures.

[Determining factors in the sedation of geriatric and oncology patients treated at home]

INTRODUCTION

Sedation, used as a therapeutic measure in the field of Palliative Care, continues to present difficulties for many professionals in its management and indications. Is varied existing literature in this regard, often exclusive cancer patients. Our objective is to analyse the characteristics of patients attended by a Home Care Support Team who required sedation compared to non-sedated patients, for possible determining factors for its use that could help in decision-making.

METHOD

A prospective analytical study conducted in Barbastro (Huesca) from September 2007 to February 2011. The study population are patients referred to the Home Care Support Team of Barbastro.

MAIN VARIABLES

Age, sex, medical history, symptoms, previous and current Barthel, Karnofsky, primary caregiver, previous drugs, drugs after intervention, sedation yes/no.

RESULTS

Required sedation 16.6% (n=106) of the cases (N=638). Sedated patients were younger, with no differences in sex, and the large majority (83%) were oncology patients. The presence of metastases showed no differences in need for sedation. Sedated patients have an increased functional impairment, determined by Barthel index decreased and a worse Karnofsky. Sedated patients showed increased frequency of uncontrolled symptoms, except psychomotor agitation, a fact determined by the medications used pre- and post-intervention.

CONCLUSIONS

The presence of neoplastic disease, marked with existence of functional decline, and uncontrolled clinical need for certain medications to control symptoms may determine the need for sedation at the end of the process, above other factors such as patient comorbidity.

Distancing sedation in end-of-life care from physician-assisted suicide and euthanasia

Lipuma equates continuous sedation until death (CSD) to physician-assisted suicide/euthanasia (PAS/E) based on the premise that iatrogenic unconsciousness negates social function and, thus, personhood, leaving a patient effectively 'dead'. Others have extrapolated upon this position further, to suggest that any use of sedation and/or opioids at the end of life would be analogous to CSD and thus tantamount to PAS/E. These posits sit diametrically opposite to standard end-of-life care practices. This paper will refute Lipuma's position and the posits borne from it. We first show that prevailing end-of-life care guidelines require proportional and monitored use of sedatives and/or opioids to attenuate fears that the use of such treatment could hasten death. These guidelines also classify CSD as a last resort treatment, employed only when symptoms prove intractable, and not amenable to all standard treatment options. Furthermore, CSD is applied only when deemed appropriate by a multidisciplinary palliative medicine team. We also show that empirical data based on local views of personhood will discount concerns that iatrogenic unconsciousness is tantamount to a loss of personhood and death.

Age differences in the last week of life in advanced cancer patients followed at home

A retrospective analysis of a consecutive sample of patients admitted to a home care program was performed. Data were recorded in the last week through a backward analysis from the day before death as follows: 1 week before dying (-1W), 3 days before death (-3D), and the day before dying (-1D). Data to be collected included the Edmonton Symptom Assessment System (ESAS), background pain intensity, the prevalence of breakthrough pain, the use of opioids in the last week, and the need for palliative sedation, with indications, duration, and drugs used. Patients were distributed according to the following age ranges: adults (<65 years, A) and aged (≥65 years, O). Of the latter group, three subgroups were assessed: old (65-74 years, O1), very old (75-84 years, O2), and the oldest (≥85 years, O3). Four hundred eleven patients were assessed. At -W1, no statistical differences in intensity of ESAS items ≥4 among the age subgroups were found. For ESAS values at -1W, -3D, and -1D, no statistical differences were found unless for anorexia at -1W (p = 0.000) (more likely), depression at -3D (p = 0.000) (less likely), depression (p = 0.000), and dyspnea (p = 0.01) (less likely) at -1D in the oldest group (O3). No differences in pain intensity among the groups were found (p = 0.54). Opioid doses increased in time and were significantly lower in older patients (p = 0.000). The subcutaneous route was more frequently used at -3D and -1D in older patients. No differences in opioid switching were found among the groups (p = 0.56). Adult patients required more often palliative sedation (p = 0.003). Older patients have problems relatively similar to adult patients in the last week of life, unless for some symptoms. Older patients had also a lower opioid consumption, a more frequent use of the subcutaneous route, and a lower need for palliative sedation.

[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.

Pain medicine and palliative care as an alternative to euthanasia in end-of-life cancer care

There exists support for euthanasia or physician-assisted suicide (PAS) in cases of terminal cancer. One of the premises for this approach is the goal of the alleviation of suffering. Do current means of pain control in the greater overall setting of palliative care serve as a desirable alternative? A contrast comparison may be drawn between the above approaches using both theological and medical sources to show that the enlightened use of both interventional and non-interventional pain medicine approaches in an integrated palliative care setting are a theologically grounded and medically feasible alternative to euthanasia or PAS in this population. Lay summary: Patients suffering from terminal cancer often have pain. Some have advocated euthanasia or physician-assisted suicide as a potential way of alleviating this suffering. Further examination of this topic, however, shows this approach may be essentially utilitarian and fail to consider the inherent value of human life. There has been significant development in recent years in the fields of pain medicine and palliative care, which afford alternate means of addressing suffering in this patient population.

Delirium diagnosis, screening and management

Purpose of review

Our review focuses on recent developments across many settings regarding the diagnosis, screening and management of delirium, so as to inform these aspects in the context of palliative and supportive care.

Recent findings

Delirium diagnostic criteria have been updated in the long-awaited Diagnostic Statistical Manual of Mental Disorders, fifth edition. Studies suggest that poor recognition of delirium relates to its clinical characteristics, inadequate interprofessional communication and lack of systematic screening. Validation studies are published for cognitive and observational tools to screen for delirium. Formal guidelines for delirium screening and management have been rigorously developed for intensive care, and may serve as a model for other settings. Given that palliative sedation is often required for the management of refractory delirium at the end of life, a version of the Richmond Agitation-Sedation Scale, modified for palliative care, has undergone preliminary validation.

Summary

Although formal systematic delirium screening with brief but sensitive tools is strongly advocated for patients in palliative and supportive care, it requires critical evaluation in terms of clinical outcomes, including patient comfort. Randomized controlled trials are needed to inform the development of guidelines for the management of delirium in this setting.