International variations in clinical practice guidelines for palliative sedation: a systematic review

An easier way to die?-A qualitative interview study on specialist palliative care team members' views on dying under sedation

BACKGROUND

Professionals' personal perceptions of sedated patients in the context of palliative care may influence their opinion on sedation as treatment option. However, little is known of palliative care professionals' perception of patients dying under sedation.

AIM

To explore German specialist palliative care team members' views on and perception of the dying process under sedation.

DESIGN

Qualitative phenomenological study using semi-structured interviews (n = 59). Interviews took place in-person after recruitment via a contact person and were transcribed verbatim. Framework Analysis was used for analysis.

SETTING/PARTICIPANTS

Physicians, nurses, psychologists, physical therapists, chaplains, and social workers from 10 palliative care units and 7 specialist palliative homecare teams across 12 German cities.

RESULTS

Participants' views on patients dying under sedation can be grouped into: (i) those who perceived an influence of sedation on the dying process with and without positive and/or negative connotations and (ii) those who saw no difference between dying with or without sedation. Positive connotations referred to the perception of sedation providing an easier path. Concerns were mainly related to the deprivation of patients regarding a conscious dying. The metaphorical description of sedation as "sleep" was common among participants.

CONCLUSIONS

The wide range of perceptions of patients dying under sedation may be rooted in different judgements regarding aspects of a good death. Clarifying ideals of a good death with professionals, patients, and relatives before sedation may support transparent decision-making and help avoid conflicts or moral distress.

Decision-making about palliative sedation for patients with cancer: a qualitative study in five European countries linked to the Palliative sedation project

BACKGROUND

Palliative sedation refers to the proportional use of titrated medication which reduces consciousness with the aim of relieving refractory suffering related to physical and psychological symptoms and/or existential distress near the end of life. Palliative sedation is intended to be an end of life option that enables healthcare professionals to provide good patient care but there remains controversy on how it is used. Little is known about decision-making processes regarding this procedure. The aim of this study was to explore decision-making processes in palliative sedation based on the experiences and perceptions of relatives and healthcare professionals.

METHODS

We conducted a qualitative interview study with dyads (a bereaved relative and a healthcare professional) linked to 33 deceased patient with cancer who had palliative sedation, in seven in-patient palliative care settings in five countries (Belgium, Germany, Italy, the Netherlands, and Spain). A framework analysis approach was used to analyse the data.

RESULTS

Two main themes are defined: 1) Decision-making about palliative sedation is a complex iterative process, 2) Decision-making is a shared process between the patient, healthcare professionals, and relatives. Decision-making about palliative sedation appears to follow an iterative process of shared information, deliberation, and decision-making. The patient and healthcare professionals are the main stakeholders, but relatives are involved and may advocate for, or delay, the decision-making process. Starting palliative sedation is reported to be an emotionally difficult decision for all parties.

CONCLUSIONS

As decision-making about palliative sedation is a complex and iterative process, patients, relatives and healthcare professionals need time for regular discussions. This requires a high level of engagement by healthcare professionals, that takes into account patients' wishes and needs, and helps to facilitate decision-making.

The Attitudes and Experiences of Hospice Nurses Regarding Palliative Sedation: A Cross-Sectional Descriptive Study

Background: Despite the global acceptance of palliative sedation, China's engagement in this field remains comparatively restricted. There exists a scarcity of information regarding the attitudes and experiences of hospice nurses concerning palliative sedation. Objectives: This survey aimed at investigating the attitudes of Chinese hospice nurses toward palliative sedation, as well as their practices in palliative sedation. Design: A cross-sectional descriptive study. Setting/Subjects: In 2023, the survey on palliative sedation was introduced during the opening ceremony of the largest National Symposium on New Advances in Hospice Nursing in China. Subsequently, the study questionnaire was disseminated through email to a cohort of 806 hospice nurses attending the conference. Measurements/Results: The statistical analysis was based on 641 valid responses. Among them, 508 had no experience with palliative sedation, while only 133 had such experience. Around 92.5% of hospice nurses with experience in palliative sedation agreed with the physician's instructions to begin palliative sedation. Nurses were present at the start of sedation in nearly all cases (97.0%), and most doctors (79.7%) and family members (82.0%) were also present. However, 8.3% of them perceived that there was no difference between palliative sedation and euthanasia. Furthermore, 13.5% of participants believed that the purpose of palliative sedation was to hasten death. Conclusions: Hospice nurses play a crucial role in the process of palliative sedation, yet they also face significant challenges. It suggests that there is an urgent need in China for the development of consensus or guidelines for palliative sedation to clarify the roles of team members, including hospice nurses.

Report on palliative sedation medication usage: a survey of palliative care experts in Eight European countries

BACKGROUND

The practice of palliative sedation continues to raise ethical questions among people, which in turn leads to its varied acceptance and practice across regions. As part of the Palliative Sedation European Union (EU) project, the aim of the present study was to determine the perceptions of palliative care experts regarding the practice of palliative sedation in eight European countries (The Netherlands, Belgium, Germany, UK, Italy, Spain, Hungary, and Romania).

METHODS

A specifically designed survey, including questions on the most frequently used medications for palliative sedation, their availability per countries and settings, and the barriers and facilitators to the appropriate practice of palliative sedation was sent to expert clinicians involved and knowledgeable in palliative care in the indicated countries. A purposive sampling strategy was used to select at least 18 participating clinicians per consortium country. Descriptive statistical analysis was conducted on the survey data.

RESULTS

Of the 208 expert clinicians invited to participate, 124 participants completed the survey. Midazolam was perceived to be the most frequently used benzodiazepine in all eight countries. 86% and 89% of expert clinicians in Germany and Italy, respectively, perceived midazolam was used "almost always", while in Hungary and Romania only about 50% or less of the respondents perceived this. Levomepromazine was the neuroleptic most frequently perceived to be used for palliative sedation in the Netherlands, Spain, Germany, and the United Kingdom. Between 38- 86% of all eight countries´ expert clinicians believed that opioid medications were "almost always" used during palliative sedation. The perceived use of IV hydration and artificial nutrition "almost always" was generally low, while the country where both IV hydration and artificial nutrition were considered to be "very often" given by a third of the expert clinicians, was in Hungary, with 36% and 27%, respectively.

CONCLUSIONS

Our study provides insight about the differences in the perceived practice of medication during palliative sedation between eight European countries. In countries where palliative care services have been established longer perceptions regarding medication use during palliative sedation were more in line with the recommended European guidelines than in Central and Eastern European countries like Romania and Hungary.

Availability and stability of palliative care for family members of terminally ill patients in an integrated model of health and social care

BACKGROUND

Palliative care and the integration of health and social care have gradually become the key direction of development to address the aging of the population and the growing burden of multimorbidity at the end of life in the elderly.

AIMS

To explore the benefits/effectiveness of the availability and stability of palliative care for family members of terminally ill patients in an integrated institution for health and social care.

METHODS

This prospective observational study was conducted at an integrated institution for health and social care. 230 patients with terminal illness who received palliative care and their family members were included. Questionnaires and scales were administered to the family members of patients during the palliative care process, including quality-of-life (SF-8), family burden (FBSD, CBI), anxiety (HAMA), and distress (DT). We used paired t-tests and correlation analyses to analyze the data pertaining to our research questions.

RESULTS

In the integrated institution for health and social care, palliative care can effectively improve quality of life, reduce the family's burden and relieve psychological impact for family members of terminally ill patients. Palliative care was an independent influencing factor on the quality of life, family burden, and psychosocial status. Independently of patient-related and family-related factors, the results are stable and widely applicable.

CONCLUSION

The findings underline the availability and stability of palliative care and the popularization of an integrated service model of health and social care for elder adults.

Continuous palliative sedation until death: a qualitative study of palliative care clinicians' experiences

BACKGROUND

The practice of continuous palliative sedation until death is the subject of much medical and ethical debate, which is reflected in the inconsistency that persists in the literature regarding the definition and indications of palliative sedation.

AIM

This study aims to gain a better understanding of palliative care clinicians' experiences with continuous palliative sedation.

DESIGN

We conducted a qualitative study based on focus group discussions.

SETTING/PARTICIPANTS

We conducted six focus groups with a total of 28 palliative care clinicians (i.e., 15 nurses, 12 physicians, and 1 end-of-life doula) from diverse care settings across Canada, where assisted dying has recently been legalized.

RESULTS

An interpretative phenomenological analysis was used to consolidate the data into six key themes: responding to suffering; grappling with uncertainty; adapting care to ensure ongoing quality; grounding clinical practice in ethics; combining medical expertise, relational tact, and reflexivity; and offering an alternative to assisted death.

CONCLUSIONS

Interaction with the patient's family, uncertainty about the patient's prognosis, the concurrent practice of assisted dying, and the treatment of existential suffering influence the quality of sedation and indicate a lack of clear palliative care guidelines. Nevertheless, clinicians exhibit a reflective and adaptive capacity that can facilitate good practice.

Palliative sedation - revised recommendations

Palliative sedation is defined as the monitored use of medications intended to induce a state of decreased or absent awareness (unconsciousness) to relieve the burden of otherwise intractable suffering in a manner ethically acceptable to the patient, their family, and healthcare providers. In Switzerland, the prevalence of continuous deep sedation until death increased from 4.7% in 2001 to 17.5% of all deceased in 2013, depending on the research method used and on regional variations. Yet, these numbers may be overestimated due to a lack of understanding of the term "continuous deep sedation" by for example respondents of the questionnaire-based study. Inadequately trained and inexperienced healthcare professionals may incorrectly or inappropriately perform palliative sedation due to uncertainties regarding its definitions and practice. Therefore, the expert members of the Bigorio group and the authors of this manuscript believe that national recommendations should be published and made available to healthcare professionals to provide practical, terminological, and ethical guidance. The Bigorio group is the working group of the Swiss Palliative Care Society whose task is to publish clinical recommendations at a national level in Switzerland. These recommendations aim to provide guidance on the most critical questions and issues related to palliative sedation. The Swiss Society of Palliative Care (palliative.ch) mandated a writing board comprising four clinical experts (three physicians and one ethicist) and two national academic experts to revise the 2005 Bigorio guidelines. A first draft was created based on a narrative literature review, which was internally reviewed by five academic institutions (Lausanne, Geneva, Bern, Zürich, and Basel) and the heads of all working groups of the Swiss Society of Palliative Care before finalising the guidelines. The following themes are discussed regarding palliative sedation: (a) definitions and clinical aspects, (b) the decision-making process, (c) communication with patients and families, (d) patient monitoring, (e) pharmacological approaches, and (f) ethical and controversial issues. Palliative sedation must be practised with clinical and ethical accuracy and competence to avoid harm and ethically questionable use. Specialist palliative care teams should be consulted before initiating palliative sedation to avoid overlooking other potential treatment options for the patient's symptoms and suffering.

Practices of and Perspectives on Palliative Sedation Among Palliative Care Physicians in Ontario, Canada: A Mixed-Methods Study

Background

Palliative sedation (PS) is a therapeutic intervention employed to manage severe and refractory symptoms in terminally ill patients at end of life. Inconsistencies in PS practice guidelines coupled with clinician ambiguity have resulted in confusion about how PS is best integrated into practice. Understanding the perspectives, experiences, and practices relating to this modality will provide insight into its clinical application and challenges within the palliative care landscape.

Objective

The aim is to explore the perspectives of palliative care physicians administering PS, including how practitioners define PS, factors influencing decision making about the use of PS, and possible reasons for changes in practice patterns over time.

Methods

A survey (n = 37) and semistructured interviews (n = 23) were conducted with palliative care physicians throughout Ontario. Codes were determined collaboratively and applied line-by-line by two independent investigators. Survey responses were analyzed alongside interview transcripts and noted to be concordant. Themes were generated through reflexive thematic analysis.

Results

Five key themes were identified: (1) lack of standardization, (2) differing definitions, (3) logistical challenges, (4) perceived "back-up" to Medical Assistance in Dying, and (5) tool of the most responsible physician.

Conclusion

There was significant variability in how participants defined PS and in frequency of use of PS. Physicians described greater ease implementing PS when practicing in palliative care units, with significant barriers faced by individuals providing home-based palliative care or working as consultants on inpatient units. Educational efforts are required about the intent and practice of PS, particularly among inpatient interprofessional teams.

Palliative sedation determinants: systematic review and meta-analysis in palliative medicine

BACKGROUND

The utilisation of palliative sedation is often favoured by patients approaching end of life due to the presence of multiple difficult-to-manage symptoms during the terminal stage. This study aimed to identify the determinants of the use of palliative sedation.

METHODS

To identify pertinent observational studies, a comprehensive search was performed in PubMed, Embase, Cochrane Library, and PsycINFO databases from their inception until March 2022. The methodological quality of the chosen prospective and retrospective cohort studies was assessed using the Newcastle Ottawa Scale, while the Agency for Healthcare Research and Quality was used to evaluate the methodological quality of the selected cross-sectional studies. For each potential determinant of interest, the collected data were synthesised and analysed, and in cases where data could not be combined, a narrative synthesis approach was adopted.

RESULTS

A total of 21 studies were analysed in this research, consisting of 4 prospective cohort studies, 7 retrospective cohort studies, and 10 cross-sectional studies. The findings indicated that several determinants were significantly associated with palliative sedation. These determinants included younger age, male gender, presence of tumours, dyspnoea, pain, delirium, making advanced medical end-of-life decisions, and dying in a hospital setting.

CONCLUSIONS

The findings of our review could help physicians identify patients who may need palliative sedation in advance and implement targeted interventions to reverse refractory symptoms, develop personalized palliative sedation programs, and ultimately improve the quality of palliative care services.

TRIAL REGISTRATION

PROSPERO registration number CRD42022324720.

Ought the level of sedation to be reduced during deep palliative sedation? A clinical and ethical analysis

BACKGROUND

Deep palliative sedation (DPS) is applied as a response to refractory suffering at the end of life when symptoms cannot be relieved in an awake state. DPS entails a dilemma of whether to provide uninterrupted sedation-in which case DPS would turn into deep and continuous palliative sedation (DCPS) -to minimise the risk that any further intolerable suffering will occur or whether to pause sedation to avoid unnecessary sedation. DPS is problematic in that it leaves the patient 'socially dead' by eradicating their autonomy and conscious experiences.

AIM

To perform a normative ethical analysis of whether guidelines should recommend attempting to elevate consciousness during DPS.

DESIGN

A structured analysis based on the four principles of healthcare ethics and consideration of stakeholders' interests.

RESULTS

When DPS is initiated it reflects that symptom relief is valued above the patient's ability to exercise autonomy and experience social interaction. However, if a decrease in symptom burden occurs, waking could be performed without patients experiencing suffering. Such pausing of deep sedation would satisfy the principles of autonomy and beneficence. Certain patients require substantial dose increases to maintain sedation. Waking such patients risks causing distressing symptoms. This does not happen if deep sedation is kept uninterrupted. Thus, the principle of non-maleficence points towards not pausing sedation. The authors' clinical ethics analysis demonstrates why other stakeholders' interests do not appear to override arguments in favour of providing uninterrupted sedation.

CONCLUSION

Stopping or pausing DPS should always be considered, but should not be routinely attempted.

Sedation practices in palliative care services across France: a nationwide point-prevalence analysis

OBJECTIVES

Terminally ill patients may require sedation to relieve refractory suffering. The prevalence and modalities of this practice in palliative care services remain unclear. This study estimated the prevalence of all sedation leading to a deep unconsciousness, whether transitory, with an undetermined duration, or maintained until death, for terminally ill patients referred to a home-based or hospital-based palliative care service.

METHODS

We conducted a national, multicentre, observational, prospective, cross-sectional study. In total, 331 centres participated, including academic/non-academic and public/private institutions. The participating institutions provided hospital-based or home-based palliative care for 5714 terminally ill patients during the study.

RESULTS

In total, 156 patients received sedation (prevalence of 2.7%; 95% CI, 2.3 to 3.2); these patients were equally distributed between 'transitory', 'undetermined duration' and 'maintained until death' sedation types. The prevalence was 0.7% at home and 8.0% in palliative care units. The median age of the patients was 70 years (Q1-Q3: 61-83 years); 51% were women and 78.8% had cancers. Almost all sedation events occurred at a hospital (90.4%), mostly in specialised beds (74.4%). In total, 39.1% of patients were unable to provide consent; only two had written advance directives. A collegial procedure was implemented in 80.4% of sedations intended to be maintained until death. Midazolam was widely used (85.9%), regardless of the sedation type.

CONCLUSIONS

This nationwide study provides insight into sedation practices in palliative care institutions. We found a low prevalence for all practices, with the highest prevalence among most reinforced palliative care providers, and an equal frequency of all practices.

Palliative sedation in paediatric solid tumour patients: choosing the best drugs

OBJECTIVES

Cancer remains the leading cause of mortality by disease in childhood in high-income countries. For terminally ill children, care focuses on quality of life, and patient management fundamentally affects grieving families. This paper describes our experience of palliative sedation (PS) for children with refractory symptoms caused by solid tumours, focusing on the drugs involved.

METHODS

We retrospectively collected data on all children treated for cancer who died at the pediatric oncology unit of the Fondazione IRCCS Istituto Nazionale dei Tumori between January 2016 and December 2020.

RESULTS

Of the 29 patients eligible for the study, all but 4 received PS. Midazolam was always used, combined in 16 cases with other drugs (mainly classic neuroleptics, alpha-2 agonists and antihistamines). Throughout the period of PS and on the day of death, patients with sarcoma were given higher doses of midazolam and morphine, and more often received combinations of drugs than patients with brain tumours. Sarcoma causes significant symptoms, while brain tumours require less intensive analgesic-sedative therapies because they already impair a patient's state of consciousness.

CONCLUSIONS

Optimising pharmacological treatments demands a medical team that knows how drugs (often developed for other indications) work. Emotional and relational aspects are important too, and any action to lower a patient's consciousness should be explained to the family and justified. Parents should not feel like helpless witnesses. Guidelines on PS in paediatrics could help, providing they acknowledge that a child's death is always a unique case.

Palliative sedation: ethics in clinical practice guidelines - systematic review

OBJECTIVES

The objective of our study was to determine whether, and to what degree, the ethical dimension was present in clinical practice guidelines (CPGs) on palliative sedation, and to identify the ethical issues with respect to the different forms of this practice. The purpose was purely to be descriptive; our aim was not to make any kind of normative judgements on these ethical issues or to develop our own ethical recommendations.

METHODS

We performed a systematic review of CPGs on the palliative sedation of adults, focusing our analysis on the ethical dimension of these texts and the ethical issues of this practice. The study protocol is registered on PROSPERO.

RESULTS

In total, 36 current CPGs from four continents (and 14 countries) were included in our analysis. Generally, ethics was rarely referred to or absent from the CPGs. Only six texts contained a specific section explicitly related to ethics. Ethical issues were named, conceptualised and presented in heterogeneous, often confusing ways. It was impossible to identify the ethical issues of each form of palliative sedation. Ethics expertise was not involved in the development of most of the CPGs and, if it was, this did not always correlate with the ethical dimension of the document.

CONCLUSIONS

Effective cooperation between palliative care clinicians and ethicists should be encouraged, in order to integrate in particular the crucial ethical issues of continuous deep sedation until death when developing or updating CPGs on palliative sedation.

Should we all die asleep? The problem of the normalization of palliative sedation

Palliative sedation is a medical intervention to manage distress in dying patients, by reducing consciousness when symptom-directed therapies fail. Continuous deep sedation is ethically sensitive because it may shorten life and completely prevents communication. But sedation short of this is also common. There has been a steady increase in the use of sedation over recent decades. Sedation may have become a means to die while sleeping, rather than a method of last resort to alleviate suffering. Sedation may be requested or expected by patients, families or staff. The need for sedation may be being interpreted more loosely. The acceptance of a 'tolerable amount of discomfort' may have lost ground to a desire to get the final phase over with quickly. Sedation is not always a bad thing. Medical care is otherwise unable to completely control all distressing symptoms in every patient. Sedation may result from other necessary symptom control drugs. Dying when sedated can be seen by as 'peaceful'. We feel it is necessary, however, to highlight three caveats: the need to manage expectations, the cost in terms of loss of communication, and the grey area between continuous deep sedation and euthanasia. We conclude that there may be good grounds for sedation in palliative care, and in some cases, continuous deep sedation may be used as a last resort. But the criteria of necessary and proportionate drug treatment should remain. The normalisation of sedation into dying while sleeping should be resisted.

Sedation in Palliative Care—a Clinically Oriented Overview of Guidelines and Treatment Recommendations

BACKGROUND

The appropriate provision of sedation as a last resort for the relief of suffering in palliative care is dealt with variably in actual practice. This article is intended as an overview of practically relevant information found in treatment recommendations and guidelines.

METHODS

A systematic literature search was conducted in the PubMed, Scopus, and Google Scholar databases, and a manual search was carried out online. Recommendations that were not available in either German or English, or that were specific to pediatric practice, were excluded. Publication quality was assessed with the AGREE II instrument (Appraisal of Guidelines for Research & Evaluation II). The recommendations in the documents were qualitatively evaluated.

RESULTS

29 publications (11 journal articles, 18 other) of varying quality according to AGREE II were included. All recommendations and guidelines were essentially based on expert consensus. The common indications for sedation are otherwise intractable delirium, dyspnea, and pain, in patients with a life expectancy of no more than two weeks. Existential distress is a controversial indication. The drug of first choice is midazolam. As the sedating effect of opioids is hard to predict, they should not be used as sedatives. The risks of sedation include respiratory and circulatory depression, as well as the loss of communicative ability, control, and autonomy. It is generally recommended that the patient's symptom burden and depth of sedation should be monitored; clinical and technically supported monitoring are recommended in some publications as well, depending on the situation.

CONCLUSION

There is a broad consensus in favor of sedation to relieve suffering in the last days and hours of life. Recommendations vary for patients with a longer life expectancy and for those with existential distress, and with respect to monitoring.

Effect of Dexmedetomidine for Palliative Sedation for Refractory Dyspnoea in Patients with Terminal-Stage Cancer

Background

Dyspnoea affects a considerable percentage of patients with terminal-stage cancer, and clinical guidelines recommend palliative sedation for patients with refractory dyspnoea. Midazolam is currently the most commonly used sedative; however, it can cause serious adverse reactions, such as respiratory/circulatory depression. Hence, there is a need for an alternative sedative. Dexmedetomidine (DEX) is a promising alternative as its "awake sedation" effect; however, little is known regarding its use in patients with end-stage dyspnoea. Therefore, the aim of this study was to determine the safety and usefulness of DEX for palliative sedation of patients with refractory dyspnoea.

Methods

This retrospective study included patients with terminal-stage cancer who received DEX for palliative sedation owing to refractory dyspnoea in the hospice ward from January 2018 to October 2022. We analysed their general data, dyspnoea conditions, sedation details, sedative treatment effect, dyspnoea relief, and changes in vital signs before and after sedation, via paired t-tests.

Results

We included 17 patients with terminal-stage cancer who received DEX palliative sedation at a dose of 0.2-0.9 µg/kg·h for refractory dyspnoea, among whom 6 (35%) received a loading dose of 1 µg/kg in 10 min. After 1 h of sedation and at the maximum sedation dose, the Respiratory Distress Observation Scale and Richmond Agitation-Sedation Scale scores decreased significantly compared with those before sedation (all P<0.001), as did the respiratory rate (P=0.024 and P=0.008, respectively). The heart rate and blood oxygen saturation did not significantly change, whereas the systolic and diastolic blood pressure after 1 h of sedation were significantly lower than those before sedation (both P=0.015).

Conclusion

DEX is a promising palliative sedative for patients with terminal-stage cancer, as it safely relieved the symptoms of refractory dyspnoea without inducing serious adverse reactions. Therefore, DEX may greatly enhance the quality of life for patients with terminal-stage cancer.

Ethical challenges in palliative sedation of adults: protocol for a systematic review of current clinical practice guidelines

INTRODUCTION

This study aims to identify the full spectrum of ethical challenges of all forms of palliative sedation for adults as presented in current clinical practice guidelines (CPGs) and to determine whether CPGs specify ethical challenges of this therapy for patients with cancer and non-cancer and, if so, how exactly they do this. To the best of our knowledge, no studies have yet investigated this topic. The purpose is purely descriptive; our aim is not to make any kind of normative judgements on these challenges. Nor is our aim to assess the quality of the CPGs.

METHODS AND ANALYSIS

We will perform a systematic review of CPGs on palliative sedation for adults via five electronic databases, grey literature search tools, citation tracking and contact with palliative care experts. Current CPGs accredited by an international, national or regional authority, published in English, German, French, Italian or Polish, from 2000 to the date of the search, will be subjected to content analysis at the textual, linguistic and thematic levels.

ETHICS AND DISSEMINATION

This is a protocol for a systematic review and no human will be involved in this research. Therefore, ethics approval and consent to participate are not applicable to this context. This study protocol is reported in accordance with the Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis for Protocols criteria and registered on PROSPERO. Moreover, the integral version of this study protocol is published as a preprint on Research Square. The results of this study will be actively disseminated through peer-reviewed journals and books, international, national and local conference presentations, social media and media in general.

The quality of palliative sedation in end-stage disease: audit from a department of oncology and haematology

PURPOSE

Palliative sedation (PS) plays a critical role to give suffering relief from refractory symptoms at the end of life. Our audit aimed to assess and improve quality of PS at the Department of Oncology and Hematology of University Hospital of Modena, to verify the adherence to international guidelines, the cooperation among members of care team, focusing with attention on family's perception of this delicate situation.

METHODS

From December 2016 to June 2019, data of patients undergoing PS in the Department were collected by an electronic folder tool, "Sedation Tool" (ST), that recorded clinical and PS informations, D-PaP, Rudkin score, and family's perception.

RESULTS

In total, 245 patients were enrolled. Eighty-two percent had a Karnofsky Performance Status 10-20%. The most common cancer types were lung and gastro-intestinal carcinomas (27% and 21% respectively). Refractory symptoms observed were confusion and agitation (76%), dyspnea (39%), pain (15%), delirium (10%), and psychological distress (5%). Midazolam was the drug of choice for PS. Most of patients had Rudkin score 5 after 24 h and 33% had terminal event within a period of 24 h from the beginning of PS. During PS, most of patient's relatives reported peacefulness (65%), agitation/impatience in 6% of cases, and concern for suffering (16%).

CONCLUSION

PS is used in case of worsening general conditions at the end-stage disease to relieve refractory symptoms with dignity. The ST can become a simple instrument to evaluate and improve PS quality, providing more attention on the impact of PS on relatives to then possibly develop new supportive procedures for patients and their families.

Control Measures for Continuous Deep Sedation Until Death: A Framing Analysis of the Views of Physicians

Physicians have been subject to increasing external control to improve their medical practice, and scholars have theorized extensively about their opposition to such control. However, little empirical attention has been paid to the views and reasoning that lie behind this opposition. An in-depth understanding is necessary for enhancing the effectiveness and efficiency of external controls, and continuous deep sedation until death (CDS) is an interesting case in this regard. This study aims to explore how physicians frame control measures for CDS. We conducted 47 semi-structured interviews with Belgian physicians in 2019. A qualitative framing analysis was performed to analyze their views and reasoning. This study reveals that physicians approach CDS practice and control measures with different emphases. Controlling by mechanisms of professional self-regulation and state governance are put forward as appropriate means to improve CDS practice. Policymakers should take into consideration physicians' frames to develop sound control measures.

"We don't want to sedate him" - A qualitative interview study on intentions when administering sedative drugs at the end of life in nursing homes and hospitals

BACKGROUND

Previous data indicate major differences between countries and settings regarding the intention when administering sedative drugs at the end of life and the perception, which drugs are sedating. Therefore, we aimed to explore the concept of 'sedative drugs' and the intentions of German healthcare professionals in general palliative care when administering sedative drugs at the end of life.

METHODS

Semi-structured qualitative interviews with physicians and nurses (n = 49). Recruitment took place via contact persons in five hospital departments (haematology/oncology (n = 2), neurology, geriatrics, gynaecology) and five nursing homes. We thematically analysed the transcripts by the Framework approach, using MAXQDA version 2018.2.

RESULTS

Most interviewees referred to benzodiazepines, opioids, and antipsychotics. Some subsumed all into sedative drugs, others differentiated between sedative drugs, anxiolytics, and analgesics. In explaining their intention, interviewees particularly emphasized what they want to avoid when administering sedative drugs. We identified three main themes regarding (excluded) intentions: (1) use of sedative drugs to relieve the patient's suffering with reduction of consciousness as side effect, (2) use of sedative drugs to relieve the situation for the team and/or the family, (3) distinction between intention and expectation regarding hastening death. Interviewees often equated the term 'sedation' with inducing a state of unconsciousness, which should be avoided.

CONCLUSION

German healthcare professionals in general palliative care seem to negatively connote the term 'sedation'. Moreover, they see themselves in a more passive role by accepting a side effect rather than performing an intentional act. Critical reflection of indications and intentions in accordance with respective guidelines is needed.

Care of the adult cancer patient at the end of life: ESMO Clinical Practice Guidelines

•This ESMO Clinical Practice Guideline provides key recommendations for end-of-life care for patients with advanced cancer. •It details care that is focused on comfort, quality of life and approaching death of patients with advanced cancer. •All recommendations were compiled by a multidisciplinary group of experts. •Recommendations are based on available scientific data and the authors’ collective expert opinion.

A qualitative study on continuous deep sedation until death as an alternative to assisted suicide in Switzerland

BACKGROUND

According to the European Association for Palliative Care, decisions regarding palliative sedation should not be made in response to requests for assisted dying, such as euthanasia or assisted suicide. However, several studies show that continuous deep sedation until death (CDSUD) - a particular form of sedation - has been considered as an alternative to these practices in some countries. In Switzerland, where assisted suicide is decriminalized and CDSUD is not legally regulated, no studies have comprehensively investigated their relation. Our study aimed to identify and describe the experience among palliative care physicians of CDSUD as a potential alternative to assisted suicide in the French-speaking part of Switzerland.

METHODS

We performed an exploratory multicentre qualitative study based on interviews with palliative care physicians in the French-speaking part of Switzerland and conducted linguistic and thematic analysis of all interview transcripts. The study is described in accordance with COREQ guidelines.

RESULTS

We included 10 interviews conducted in four palliative care units. Our linguistic analysis shows four main types of sedation, which we called 'rapid CDSUD', 'gradual CDSUD', 'temporary sedation' and 'intermittent sedation'. CDSUD (rapid or gradual) was not considered an alternative to assisted suicide, even if a single situation has been reported. In contrast, 'temporary' or 'intermittent sedation', although not medically indicated, was sometimes introduced in response to a request for assisted suicide. This was the fact when there were barriers to an assisted suicide at home (e.g., when transfer home was impossible or the patient wished not to burden the family).

CONCLUSION

These preliminary results can guide clinical, ethical, linguistic and legal reflection in this field and be used to explore this question more deeply at the national and international levels in a comparative, interdisciplinary and multiprofessional approach. They can also be useful to update Swiss clinical guidelines on palliative sedation in order to include specific frameworks on various sedation protocols and sedation as an alternative to assisted suicide. Potential negative impacts of considering palliative sedation as an alternative to assisted suicide should be nuanced by open and honest societal debate.

« Sédation » ou « pratiques sédatives à visée palliative en fin de vie » ? Une étude linguistique des recommandations francophones en matière de sédation en soins palliatifs chez l’adulte

Introduction&#160;: Despite the number and importance of French-language guidelines related to palliative sedation for adults, these texts have never been the subject of a linguistic analysis.Objectives&#160;: This study aimed to explore and analyze the terms used for sedation and their definitions in Belgian, French, Quebec, and Swiss guidelines.Methods&#160;: Current documents were subjected to textual, terminological, and conceptual analysis.Results&#160;: Belgian, Quebec, and Swiss guidelines use the same term to refer to sedation, without, however, conceptualizing it in a consistent way. By contrast, guidelines developed in France use various terms but define sedation in a similar (but not identical) way. Cultural specificities linked to end-of-life legislation in those countries and region were identified as a potential causal factor.Discussion and conclusion&#160;: The diversity of terms and definitions inevitably reinforces the imprecision of the medical language, and the terminology in particular. This is likely to have a negative impact on communication between healthcare professionals, patients, and their families. Efforts should be made to homogenize the terminology and definitions used in guidelines.

Nurses' experience with palliative sedation procedures in line with the 2005 Swiss guidelines: an exploratory study

Many international studies have shown that the process of palliative sedation in an end-of-life context can be an adverse, even emotionally distressing experience for nurses. However, to the best of our knowledge, the experience of nurses working in palliative care in Switzerland has never been explored. The purpose of our study was, therefore, to understand and describe nurses' experience with the process of palliative sedation in line with the Swiss guidelines developed in 2005. We opted for an exploratory qualitative monocentric study using comprehensive individual interviews to achieve this objective. A total of 10 nurses were approached, and nine agreed to take part. After the interviews were transcribed, eight were ultimately included in the analysis. This analysis shows that nurses' attitudes toward the process of palliative sedation tended to be hesitant, resistant, or confident and that this was linked to the length of time they had worked in palliative care. These findings suggest that the 2005 Swiss guidelines do not protect nurses against the uncertainty related to process of palliative sedation. A national comprehensive multicentric study therefore needs to be developed to consolidate these results.

Neurophysiological Assessments During Continuous Sedation Until Death Put Validity of Observational Assessments Into Question: A Prospective Observational Study

Introduction

In case of untreatable suffering at the end of life, continuous sedation until death (CSD) may be the only treatment option left. Because these patients cannot communicate anymore, caregivers have to rely on behavioral observation to assess the patient’s comfort. Recently, however, a number of studies from the neurosciences have shown that sometimes consciousness and pain are undetectable with these traditional behavioral methods. The aim of this study was to find out if subjective caregiver assessments of consciousness and pain would be confirmed by objective neurophysiological measures.

Methods

In this prospective observational study, we observed patients from the start of palliative sedation until death. Subjective caregiver assessments of level of consciousness and pain based on behavioral observations were compared with objective measures from neurophysiological monitoring devices.

Results

We collected and analyzed 108 subjective caregiver assessments in a sample of 12 patients and 32 assessments by traditionally used observational scales. We compared these with objective neurophysiological measures. Sensitivity and specificity of caregivers’ subjective assessments of consciousness was 23.6 and 91.1% respectively, with an accuracy of 54.0% and interrater reliability (κ) of 0.13. For pain, this was 0 and 94.79%, respectively, an accuracy of 88%, and an inter-rater reliability (κ) of − 0.063. Agreement between caregivers’ subjective assessments and objective neurophysiological measures of consciousness and pain was very poor.

Conclusions

Caregivers’ subjective assessment of level of consciousness and pain during CSD is unreliable compared with objective neurophysiological monitoring. Our results suggest that assessments of patient comfort during CSD could have been improved substantially by including objective monitoring of level of consciousness and pain.

Trial Registration

The protocol for this observational study has been registered retrospectively at Clinical-Trials.gov (ID NCT03273244).

What do you mean by "palliative sedation"? : Pre-explicative analyses as preliminary steps towards better definitions

BACKGROUND

Sedation in palliative care is frequently but controversially discussed. Heterogeneous definitions and conceptual confusion have been cited as contributing to different problems 1) relevant to empirical research, for example, inconsistent data about practice, the 'data problem', and 2) relevant for an ethically legitimate characterisation of the practice, the 'problem of ethical pre-emption'. However, little is known about how exactly definitions differ, how they cause confusion and how this can be overcome.

METHOD

Pre-explicative analyses: (A) systematic literature search for guidelines on sedation in palliative care and systematic decomposition of the definitions of the practice in these guidelines; (B) logical distinction of different ways through which the two problems reported might be caused by definitions; and (C) analysis of how content of the definitions contributes to the problems reported in these different ways.

RESULTS

29 guidelines from 14 countries were identified. Definitions differ significantly in both structure and content. We identified three ways in which definitions can cause the 'data problem' - 1) different definitions, 2) deviating implicit concepts, 3) disagreement about facts. We identified two ways to cause the problem of ethical pre-emption: 1) explicit or 2) implicit normativity. Decomposition of definitions linked to the distinguished ways of causing the conceptual problems shows how exactly single parts of definitions can cause the problems identified.

CONCLUSION

Current challenges concerning empirical research on sedation in palliative care can be remediated partly by improved definitions in the future, if content and structure of the used definitions is chosen systematically. In addition, future research should bear in mind that there are distinct purposes of definitions. Regarding the 'data problem', improving definitions is possible in terms of supplementary information, checking for implicit understanding, systematic choice of definitional elements. 'Ethical pre-emption', in contrast, is a pseudo problem if definitions and the relationship of definitions and norms of good practice are understood correctly.

Identification and evaluation of observational measures for the assessment and/or monitoring of level of consciousness in adult palliative care patients: A systematic review for I-CAN-CARE

BACKGROUND

The use of observational measures to assess palliative care patients' level of consciousness may improve patient care and comfort. However, there is limited knowledge regarding the validity and reliability of these measures in palliative care settings.

AIM

To identify and evaluate the psychometric performance of observational level of consciousness measures used in palliative care.

DESIGN

Systematic review; PROSPERO registration: CRD42017073080.

DATA SOURCES

We searched six databases until November 2018, using search terms combining subject headings and free-text terms. Psychometric performance for each identified tool was appraised independently by two reviewers following established criteria for developing and evaluating health outcome measures.

RESULTS

We found 35 different levels of consciousness tools used in 65 studies. Only seven studies reported information about psychometric performance of just eight tools. All other studies used either ad hoc measures for which no formal validation had been undertaken (n = 21) or established tools mainly developed and validated in non-palliative care settings (n = 37). The Consciousness Scale for Palliative Care and a modified version of the Richmond Agitation-Sedation Scale received the highest ratings in our appraisal, but, since psychometric evidence was limited, no tool could be assessed for all psychometric properties.

CONCLUSION

An increasing number of studies in palliative care are using observational measures of level of consciousness. However, only a few of these tools have been tested for their psychometric performance in that context. Future research in this area should validate and/or refine the existing measures, rather than developing new tools.

Survey of Palliative Sedation at End of Life in Terminally Ill Heart Failure Patients - A Single-Center Experience of 5-Year Follow-up

BACKGROUND

Little is known about palliative sedation in terminally ill heart failure (HF) patients.

METHODS AND RESULTS

We retrospectively reviewed terminally ill HF patients who received palliative sedation from September 2013 to August 2018. Among 95 terminally ill HF patients, 25 were prescribed dexmedetomidine and 12 were prescribed midazolam at the end of life. Richmond Agitation-Sedation Scale was significantly reduced (P<0.01), but blood pressure and heart rate were unaltered after treatment in both the dexmedetomidine and midazolam groups.

CONCLUSIONS

Prescription of dexmedetomidine and/or midazolam might be feasible in selected terminally ill HF patients.

Palliative care specialists in hospice and hospital/community teams predominantly use low doses of sedative medication at the end of life for patient comfort rather than sedation: Findings from focus groups and patient records for I-CAN-CARE

BACKGROUND

Little research has explored the detail of practice when using sedative medications at the end of life. One work package of the I-CAN-CARE research programme investigates this in UK palliative care.

AIMS

To investigate current practices when using sedative medication at the end of life in London, UK, by (1) qualitatively exploring the understandings of palliative care clinicians, (2) examining documented sedative use in patient records and (3) comparing findings from both investigations.

DESIGN

We conducted focus groups with experienced palliative care physicians and nurses, and simultaneously reviewed deceased patient records.

SETTING/PARTICIPANTS

In total, 10 physicians and 17 senior nurses in London hospice or hospital/community palliative care took part in eight focus groups. Simultaneously, 50 patient records for people who received continuous sedation at end of life in the hospice and hospital were retrieved and reviewed.

RESULTS

Focus group participants all said that they used sedative medication chiefly for managing agitation or distress; selecting drugs and dosages as appropriate for patients' individual needs; and aiming to use the lowest possible dosages for patients to be 'comfortable', 'calm' or 'relaxed'. None used structured observational tools to assess sedative effects, strongly preferring clinical observation and judgement. The patient records' review corroborated these qualitative findings, with the median continuous dose of midazolam administered being 10 mg/24 h (range: 0.4-69.5 mg/24 h).

CONCLUSION

Clinical practice in these London settings broadly aligns with the European Association for Palliative Care framework for using sedation at the end of life, but lacks any objective monitoring of depth of sedation. Our follow-on study explores the utility and feasibility of objectively monitoring sedation in practice.

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.

Medical staff opposition to a deep and continuous palliative sedation request under Claeys-Leonetti law

Background

For the year 2018, the French government plans a revision of bioethics laws, including certainly the recent Claeys-Leonetti law introducing the right to deep and continuous sedation at the request of palliative patients and prohibiting euthanasia for end-of-life patients. Because there is no published data on medical staff opposition to a deep and continuous palliative sedation request under Claeys-Leonetti law, we believe this report may give insight into physicians’ decision making, into the role of criteria for prudent practice, and thus contribute to the bioethical debate.

Case presentation

We report a 70-year-old patient with squamous cell carcinoma of the hypopharyngeal region, who categorically refused any treatment since one year and asked for deep and continuous palliative sedation until death after attempting suicide. The patient’s request was examined and denied by palliative multidisciplinary board, in accordance with by the French Oncology Coordination Centre guidelines. This situation did not fulfil the criteria requested by Claeys-Leonetti law.

Conclusions

As highlighted by the present case-report, patient’s expectation regarding palliative sedation can be ambivalent with properly so called euthanasia or assisted suicide. This ambivalent perception was part of the controversy surrounding the parliamentary debate, which is still relevant. This case report supports that deep and continuous sedation under Claeys-Leonetti law need to meet specific criteria defined by the law and documented in the medical files as a safeguard against inappropriate practice. In fact, one of the shortcomings of the current arrangements of Claeys-Leonetti law is a lack of objective medical-based criteria. So it is necessary that scientific peer-reviews papers be published quickly in order to deepen the bioethical debate on the end of life.

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.

Continuous Deep Sedation Until Death-a Swiss Death Certificate Study

BACKGROUND

In the last decade, the number of patients continuously deeply sedated until death increased up to fourfold. The reasons for this increase remain unclear.

OBJECTIVE

To identify socio-demographic and clinical characteristics of sedated patients, and concurrent possibly life-shortening medical end-of-life decisions.

DESIGN

Cross-sectional death certificate study in German-speaking Switzerland in 2001 and 2013.

PARTICIPANTS

Non-sudden and expected deaths (2001: N = 2281, 2013: N = 2256) based on a random sample of death certificates and followed by an anonymous survey on end-of-life practices among attending physicians.

MAIN MEASURES

Physicians' reported proportion of patients continuously deeply sedated until death, socio-demographic and clinical characteristics, and possibly life-shortening medical end-of life decisions.

KEY RESULTS

In 2013, physicians sedated four times more patients continuously until death (6.7% in 2001; 24.5.5% in 2013). Four out of five sedated patients died in hospitals, outside specialized palliative care units, or in nursing homes. Sedation was more likely among patients younger than 65 (odds ratio 2.24, 95% CI 1.6 to 3.2) and those dying in specialized palliative care (OR 2.2, 95% CI 1.3 to 3.8) or in hospitals (1.7, 95% CI 1.3 to 2.3). Forgoing life-prolonging treatment with the explicit intention to hasten or not to postpone death combined with intensified alleviation of symptoms was very strongly associated with continuous deep sedation (OR 6.8, 95% CI 4.7 to 9.8).

CONCLUSIONS

In Swiss clinical practice, continuously deeply sedated patients predominantly died outside specialized palliative care. The increasing trend over time appears to be related to changes in medical end-of-life practice rather than to patient's clinical characteristics.

[Palliative sedation : Development and consensus of a German language documentation template]

BACKGROUND

Palliative sedation (PS) serves as a therapeutic option in cases of otherwise intractable suffering. As the use of sedative and hypnotic medication in many diverse situations is a core competency of anesthesiology, anesthesiologists are confronted with questions of sedative therapy at the end of life in institutions for specialized palliative care, in intensive care units and intermediate care wards. In recent years a number of guidelines have been published internationally but so far no official guidelines exist in Germany. The most recognized document is the European Association for Palliative Care (EAPC) framework on PS. This project aims to develop a German language template for the preparation, application, documentation and evaluation of PS according to the current frameworks, especially the EAPC framework on PS.

METHODS

A first draft of the template was generated by the project team using the EAPC framework and individual templates of various institutions, which had been collected during a previous project. Professionals (n = 136) from inpatient and outpatient specialist palliative and hospice care were invited to assess all items of the draft regarding "relevance", "wording" and "feasibility" in an online Delphi survey (Unipark®, Questback, Cologne, Germany). After the second Delphi round an expert panel was asked to reflect the results and generate a final draft. Approval was granted if acceptance exceeded 75% of participants.

RESULTS

The 3 rounds of the Delphi process were completed by 64, 46 and 41 participants, respectively. The Delphi process as well as the expert panel led to significant changes of the template. The indications for PS had to be clarified. The significance of documentation of vital parameters, such as oxygen saturation, blood pressure or respiratory rate during PS was intensively discussed. In many teams, predominantly hospice or outpatient palliative care teams, it seems to be difficult to measure these parameters or it is regarded as inappropriate in a palliative care setting. In contrast, the EAPC framework recommends monitoring of vital parameters in cases of intermittent or respite sedation. Finally, a solution was found to support documentation of additional data without the explicit mentioning of specific parameters. After the third Delphi round, all 16 items of the documentation template reached consensus with respect to relevance (82.9-100%), clarity of wording (80.5-100%), and feasibility in practice (78-100%).

CONCLUSION

This article provides an empirically based, multiprofessional consented documentation template for PS. Core elements of the documentation of PS are the indications and the decision process towards PS. During the treatment, at least the level of sedation and the symptom burden have to be recorded. The documentation of vital signs during PS remains a highly disputed topic. The presented data suggest that especially in outpatient settings and in hospices measuring and documentation of vital parameters is uncommon and therefore is often regarded as not feasible. This template can help to support the medically and ethically sound use of PS and facilitate research. The template can be accessed at http://www.palliativmedizin.uk-erlangen.de/forschung/downloads/ .

Comfort in palliative sedation (Compas): a transdisciplinary mixed method study protocol for linking objective assessments to subjective experiences

BACKGROUND

In case of untreatable suffering at the end of life, palliative sedation may be chosen to assure comfort by reducing the patient's level of consciousness. An important question here is whether such sedated patients are completely free of pain. Because these patients cannot communicate anymore, caregivers have to rely on observation to assess the patient's comfort. Recently however, more sophisticated techniques from the neurosciences have shown that sometimes consciousness and pain are undetectable with these traditional behavioral methods. The aim of this study is to better understand how unconscious palliative sedated patients experience the last days of their life and to find out if they are really free of pain.

METHODS

In this study we will observe 40 patients starting with initiation of palliative sedation until death. Assessment of comfort based on behavioral observations will be related with the results from a NeuroSense monitor, an EEG-based monitor used for evaluation of the adequacy of anesthesia and sedation in the operating room and an ECG-based Analgesia Nociception Index (ANI) monitor, which informs about comfort or discomfort condition, based on the parasympathetic tone. An innovative and challenging aspect of this study is its qualitative approach; "objective" and "subjective" data will be linked to achieve a holistic understanding of the study topic. The following data will be collected: assessment of pain/comfort by the patients themselves (if possible) by scoring a Visual Analogue Scale (VAS); brain function monitoring; monitoring of parasympathetic tone; caregivers' assessment (pain, awareness, communication); relatives' perception of the quality of the dying process; assessment by 2 trained investigators using observational scales; video and audio registration.

DISCUSSION

Measuring pain and awareness in non-communicative dying patients is both technically and ethically challenging. ANI and EEG have shown to be promising technologies to detect pain that otherwise cannot be detected with the "traditional" methods. Although these technologies have the potential to provide objective quantifiable indicators for distress and awareness in non-communicative patients, strikingly they have not yet been used to check whether the current assessments for non-communicative patients are reliable.

TRIAL REGISTRATION

The study is registered on ClinicalTrials.gov (Identifier: NCT03273244 ; registration date: 7.9.2017).