Respiratory function during parenteral opioid titration for cancer pain

Low dose of morphine to relieve dyspnea in acute respiratory failure: the OpiDys double-blind randomized controlled trial

BACKGROUND

Morphine relieves dyspnea in various clinical circumstances. Whether or not this applies to patients admitted to intensive care units (ICUs) for acute respiratory failure (ARF) is unknown. We evaluated the efficacy and safety of low-dose morphine on dyspnea in patients admitted to the ICU for ARF.

METHODS

In this single-center, double-blind, phase 2, randomized, controlled trial, we assigned non-intubated adults admitted to the ICU for ARF with severe dyspnea, defined by a visual analog scale for dyspnea (dyspnea-VAS) from zero (no dyspnea) to 100 mm (worst imaginable dyspnea) ≥40 mm, to receive a low dose of Morphine Hydrochloride (intravenous titration followed by subcutaneous relay) or Placebo. All patients received standard therapy, including etiological treatment and non-invasive respiratory support.

RESULTS

Twenty-two patients were randomized, 11 in each group. The average dyspnea (median [interquartile range]) over 24 hours did not significantly differ between the two groups (40 [25 - 43] mm in the Morphine group vs. 40 [36 - 49] mm in the Placebo group, p=0.411). Dyspnea-VAS was lower in the Morphine group than in the Placebo group at the end of intravenous titration (30 [11 - 30] vs. 35 [30 - 44], p=0.044) and four hours later (18 [10 - 29] vs. 50 [30 - 60], p=0.043). The cumulative probability of intubation was higher in the Morphine group than in the Placebo group (p=0.046) CONCLUSION: In this phase 2 pilot trial, morphine did not improve 24-hour average dyspnea in adult patients with ARF, even though it had a statistically significant immediate effect. Of concern, Morphine use was associated with a higher intubation rate.

TRIAL REGISTRATION

The protocol was declared on the ClinicalTrial.gov database (no. NCT04358133) and was published in September 2022.

Opioid dose titration for cancer pain

BACKGROUND

Opioid dose titration is a fundamental process of opioid therapy in cancer pain.

AIMS

To assess data opioid dose titration.

METHODS

The principal opioid dose titration methods, outcomes, and modalities of administration regarding the different opioid preparations were examined in different clinical contexts.

RESULTS

Most studies suggested that opioid-naive patients should be started at doses of 15-30 mg/day of oral morphine equivalents. Opioid-tolerant patients may receive low or higher doses of oral morphine equivalents, depending on the level of opioid tolerance. Generally, dose increments of 30%-50% seem to be indicated to start dose titration. Some patients with severe excruciating cancer pain may present as an emergency requiring a rapid application of powerful analgesic strategies. The intravenous use of opioids may circumvent this problem providing a faster pain relief, due to the large availability and rapid achievement of effective plasma concentrations.

DISCUSSION

Opioid dose titration is a delicate passage in patients with cancer pain. This approach may be different according to different clinical conditions. Opioid dose titration requires expertise to optimize cancer pain management while minimizing the development of adverse effects.

CONCLUSION

While most approaches are meaningful and partially supported by existing literature, more studies are necessary to establish advantages and disadvantages in different clinical conditions. Optimization of opioid dose titration is of paramount importance.

SIGNIFICANCE

This review provides the most recent insights on the different modalities of opioid dose titration in cancer pain management.

Dyspnoea in acutely ill mechanically ventilated adult patients: an ERS/ESICM statement

This statement outlines a review of the literature and current practice concerning the prevalence, clinical significance, diagnosis and management of dyspnoea in critically ill, mechanically ventilated adult patients. It covers the definition, pathophysiology, epidemiology, short- and middle-term impact, detection and quantification, and prevention and treatment of dyspnoea. It represents a collaboration of the European Respiratory Society and the European Society of Intensive Care Medicine. Dyspnoea ranks among the most distressing experiences that human beings can endure. Approximately 40% of patients undergoing invasive mechanical ventilation in the intensive care unit (ICU) report dyspnoea, with an average intensity of 45 mm on a visual analogue scale from 0 to 100 mm. Although it shares many similarities with pain, dyspnoea can be far worse than pain in that it summons a primal fear response. As such, it merits universal and specific consideration. Dyspnoea must be identified, prevented and relieved in every patient. In the ICU, mechanically ventilated patients are at high risk of experiencing breathing difficulties because of their physiological status and, in some instances, because of mechanical ventilation itself. At the same time, mechanically ventilated patients have barriers to signalling their distress. Addressing this major clinical challenge mandates teaching and training, and involves ICU caregivers and patients. This is even more important because, as opposed to pain which has become a universal healthcare concern, very little attention has been paid to the identification and management of respiratory suffering in mechanically ventilated ICU patients.

Dyspnoea in acutely ill mechanically ventilated adult patients: an ERS/ESICM statement

This statement outlines a review of the literature and current practice concerning the prevalence, clinical significance, diagnosis and management of dyspnoea in critically ill, mechanically ventilated adult patients. It covers the definition, pathophysiology, epidemiology, short- and middle-term impact, detection and quantification, and prevention and treatment of dyspnoea. It represents a collaboration of the European Respiratory Society (ERS) and the European Society of Intensive Care Medicine (ESICM). Dyspnoea ranks among the most distressing experiences that human beings can endure. Approximately 40% of patients undergoing invasive mechanical ventilation in the intensive care unit (ICU) report dyspnoea, with an average intensity of 45 mm on a visual analogue scale from 0 to 100 mm. Although it shares many similarities with pain, dyspnoea can be far worse than pain in that it summons a primal fear response. As such, it merits universal and specific consideration. Dyspnoea must be identified, prevented and relieved in every patient. In the ICU, mechanically ventilated patients are at high risk of experiencing breathing difficulties because of their physiological status and, in some instances, because of mechanical ventilation itself. At the same time, mechanically ventilated patients have barriers to signalling their distress. Addressing this major clinical challenge mandates teaching and training, and involves ICU caregivers and patients. This is even more important because, as opposed to pain which has become a universal healthcare concern, very little attention has been paid to the identification and management of respiratory suffering in mechanically ventilated ICU patients.

The Use of Parenteral Opioids in Cancer Pain Management

Opioids should be offered to patients with moderate-to-severe pain related to cancer or active cancer treatment unless contraindicated. Although oral administration of opioids is generally preferable, a parenteral route may be advisable and mandatory in some clinical circumstances. Parenteral administration of opioids may accelerate the achievement of analgesia. The intravenous route fits the need of rapid achievement of analgesia in patients poorly responsive to other opioids and provides a fast analgesia in patients with breakthrough pain, that has a specific temporal pattern requiring a rapid analgesic effect. When the oral route is unavailable for the presence of nausea, vomiting, or dysphagia. the parenteral route is one of the principal options. Opioids have different pharmacokinetic and pharmacodynamic characteristics and should be chosen according to the individual needs. Thus, the knowledge and experience with these routes of administration are mandatory for anesthesiologists committed to cancer pain management.

Low dose of morphine to relieve dyspnea in acute respiratory failure (OpiDys): protocol for a double-blind randomized controlled study

Background

Dyspnea is common and severe in intensive care unit (ICU) patients managed for acute respiratory failure. Dyspnea appears to be associated with impaired prognosis and neuropsychological sequels. Pain and dyspnea share many similarities and previous studies have shown the benefit of morphine on dyspnea in patients with end-stage onco-hematological disease and severe heart or respiratory disease. In these populations, morphine administration was safe. Here, we hypothesize that low-dose opioids may help to reduce dyspnea in patients admitted to the ICU for acute respiratory failure. The primary objective of the trial is to determine whether the administration of low-dose titrated opioids, compared to placebo, in patients admitted to the ICU for acute respiratory failure with severe dyspnea decreases the mean 24-h intensity of dyspnea score.

Methods

In this single-center double-blind randomized controlled trial with 2 parallel arms, we plan to include 22 patients (aged 18–75 years) on spontaneous ventilation with either non-invasive ventilation, high flow oxygen therapy or standard oxygen therapy admitted to the ICU for acute respiratory failure with severe dyspnea. They will be assigned after randomization with a 1:1 allocation ratio to receive in experimental arm administration of low-dose titrated morphine hydrochloride for 24 h consisting in an intravenous titration relayed subcutaneously according to a predefined protocol, or a placebo (0.9% NaCl) administered according to the same protocol in the control arm. The primary endpoint is the mean 24-h dyspnea score assessed by a visual analog scale of dyspnea.

Discussion

To our knowledge, this study is the first to evaluate the benefit of opioids on dyspnea in ICU patients admitted for acute respiratory failure.

Trial registration

ClinicalTrials.govNCT04358133. Registered on 24 April 2020.

Real-world ethics in palliative care: A systematic review of the ethical challenges reported by specialist palliative care practitioners in their clinical practice

BACKGROUND

Ethical issues arise daily in the delivery of palliative care. Despite much (largely theoretical) literature, evidence from specialist palliative care practitioners about day-to-day ethical challenges has not previously been synthesised. This evidence is crucial to inform education and adequately support staff.

AIM

To synthesise the evidence regarding the ethical challenges which specialist palliative care practitioners encounter during clinical practice.

DESIGN

Systematic review with narrative synthesis (PROSPERO registration CRD42018105365). Quality was dual-assessed using the Mixed-Methods Appraisal Tool. Tabulation, textural description, concept mapping and thematic synthesis were used to develop and present the narrative.

DATA SOURCES

Seven databases (MEDLINE, Philosopher's Index, EMBASE, PsycINFO, LILACS, Web of Science and CINAHL) were searched from inception to December 2019 without language limits. Eligible papers reported original research using inductive methods to describe practitioner-reported ethical challenges.

RESULTS

A total of 8074 records were screened. Thirteen studies from nine countries were included. Challenges were organised into six themes: application of ethical principles; delivering clinical care; working with families; engaging with institutional structures and values; navigating societal values and expectations; philosophy of palliative care. Challenges related to specific scenarios/contexts rather than the application of general ethical principles, and occurred at all levels (bedside, institution, society, policy).

CONCLUSION

Palliative care practitioners encounter a broad range of contextual ethical challenges, many of which are not represented in palliative care ethics training resources, for example, navigating institutional policies, resource allocation and inter-professional conflict. Findings have implications for supporting ethical practice and training practitioners. The lack of low- and middle- income country data needs addressing.

A response to critics: weakening the ethical distinction between euthanasia, palliative opioid use and palliative sedation

My essay 'Weakening the ethical distinction between euthanasia, palliative opioid use and palliative sedation' has recently generated some critique which I will attempt to address in this response. Regarding the empirical question of whether palliative opioid and sedative use shorten survival time, Schofield et al raise the three concerns that my literature review contains a cherry-picking bias through focusing solely on the palliative care population, that continuous deep palliative sedation falls beyond the scope of routine palliative care, and that my research may contribute to opiophobia and be harmful to palliative care provision globally. Materstvedt argues that euthanasia 'ends' rather than 'relieves' suffering and is not a treatment, and that the arguments in my essay are therefore predicated on a 'category mistake' and are a non-starter. Symons and Giebel both raise the concern that my Kantian and Millian interpretation of the Doctrine of Double Effect is anachronistic, and that when interpreted from the contemporaneous perspective of Aquinas it is a sound ethical principle. Giebel also argues that palliative opioid and sedative use do meet the Doctrine of Double Effect's four criteria on this Thomistic account, and that it does not contradict the Doctrine of the Sanctity of Human Life. In this response I will explore and defend against most of these claims, in doing so clarifying my original argument that the empirical and ethical differences between palliative opioid/sedative use and euthanasia may not be as significant as often believed, thereby advancing the case for euthanasia.

Palliative opioid use, palliative sedation and euthanasia: reaffirming the distinction

We read with interest the extended essay published from Riisfeldt and are encouraged by an empirical ethics article which attempts to ground theory and its claims in the real world. However, such attempts also have real-world consequences. We are concerned to read the paper's conclusion that clinical evidence weakens the distinction between euthanasia and normal palliative care prescribing. This is important. Globally, the most significant barrier to adequate symptom control in people with life-limiting illness is poor access to opioid analgesia. Opiophobia makes clinicians reluctant to prescribe and their patients reluctant to take opioids that might provide significant improvements in quality of life. We argue that the evidence base for the safety of opioid prescribing is broader than that presented, restricting the search to palliative care literature produces significant bias as safety experience and literature for opioids and sedatives exists in many fields. This is not acknowledged in the synthesis presented. By considering additional evidence, we reject the need for agnosticism and reaffirm that palliative opioid prescribing is safe. Second, palliative sedation in a clinical context is a poorly defined concept covering multiple interventions and treatment intentions. We detail these and show that continuous deep palliative sedation (CDPS) is a specific practice that remains controversial globally and is not considered routine practice. Rejecting agnosticism towards opioids and excluding CDPS from the definition of routine care allows the rejection of Riisfeldt's headline conclusion. On these grounds, we reaffirm the important distinction between palliative care prescribing and euthanasia in practice.

Changes in attitudes towards hastened death among Finnish physicians over the past sixteen years

Background

The ethics of hastened death are complex. Studies on physicians’ opinions about assisted dying (euthanasia or assisted suicide) exist, but changes in physicians’ attitudes towards hastened death in clinical decision-making and the background factors explaining this remain unclear.

The aim of this study was to explore the changes in these attitudes among Finnish physicians.

Methods

A questionnaire including hypothetical patient scenarios was sent to 1182 and 1258 Finnish physicians in 1999 and 2015, respectively. Two scenarios of patients with advanced cancer were presented: one requesting an increase in his morphine dose to a potentially lethal level and another suffering a cardiac arrest. Physicians’ attitudes towards assisted death, life values and other background factors were queried as well. The response rate was 56%.

Results

The morphine dose was increased by 25% and 34% of the physicians in 1999 and 2015, respectively (p < 0.001). Oncologists approved the increase most infrequently without a significant change between the study years (15% vs. 17%, p = 0.689). Oncological specialty, faith in God, female gender and younger age were independent factors associated with the reluctance to increase the morphine dose. Euthanasia, but not assisted suicide, was considered less reprehensible in 2015 (p = 0.008). In both years, most physicians (84%) withheld cardiopulmonary resuscitation.

Conclusion

Finnish physicians accepted the risk of hastening death more often in 2015 than in 1999. The physicians’ specialty and many other background factors influenced this acceptance. They also regarded euthanasia as less reprehensible now than they did 16 years ago.

Transdermal buprenorphine and fentanyl patches in cancer pain: a network systematic review

Treatment of cancer pain is generally based on the three-step World Health Organization (WHO) pain relief ladder, which utilizes a sequential approach with drugs of increasing potency. Goals of pain management include optimization of analgesia, optimization of activities of daily living, minimization of adverse effects, and avoidance of aberrant drug taking. In addition, it is recommended that analgesic regimens are individualized and simplified to help ensure patient compliance and should provide the least invasive, easiest, and safest route of opioid administration to ensure adequate analgesia. Buprenorphine and fentanyl are two opioids available for the relief of moderate-to-severe cancer pain. Available clinical data regarding the transdermal (TD) formulations of these opioids and the extent to which they fulfill the recommendations mentioned earlier are systematically reviewed, with the aim of providing additional information for oncologists and pain specialists regarding their comparative use. Due to lack of studies directly comparing TD buprenorphine with TD fentanyl, data comparing these with other step-3 opioids are also evaluated in a network fashion.

An Order Protocol for Respiratory Distress/Acute Pain Crisis in Pediatric Palliative Care Patients: Medical and Nursing Staff Perceptions

BACKGROUND

An order protocol for distress (OPD), including respiratory distress and acute pain crisis, has been established for pediatric palliative care patients at Sainte-Justine Hospital (SJH). After discussion with the patient/his or her family, the OPD is prescribed by the attending physician whenever judged appropriate. The OPD can then be initiated by the bedside nurse when necessary; the physician is notified after the first dose is administered.

OBJECTIVES

The study objectives were to evaluate the perceptions and experience of the medical/nursing staff towards the use of the OPD.

METHODS

A survey was distributed to all physicians/nurses working on wards with pediatric palliative care patients. Answers to the survey were anonymous, done on a voluntary basis, and after consent of the participant.

RESULTS

Surveys (258/548) were answered corresponding to a response rate of 47%. According to the respondents, the most important motivations in using the OPD were the desire to relieve patient's distress and the speed of relief of distress by the OPD; the most important obstacles were going against the patient's/his or her family's wishes and fear of hastening death. The respondents reported that the OPD was frequently (56%) or always (36%) effective in relieving the patient's distress. The respondents felt sometimes (16%), frequently (34%), or always (41%) comfortable in giving the OPD. They thought the OPD could never (12%), rarely (32%), sometimes (46%), frequently (8%), or always (1%) hasten death. Physicians were less favorable than nurses with the autonomy of bedside nurses to initiate the OPD before notifying the physician (p = 0.04). Overall, 95% of respondents considered that they would use the OPD in the future.

CONCLUSIONS

Data from this survey shows that respondents are in favor of using the OPD at SJH and find it effective. Further training as well as support for health care professionals are mandatory in such palliative care settings.

Outcomes of lung transplant candidates referred for co-management by palliative care: A retrospective case series

BACKGROUND

Lung transplant candidates experience important symptoms, but they are rarely referred for palliative care consultation until they are deemed ineligible for transplant. Our lung transplant service has a high rate of palliative care referral for patients awaiting transplant.

AIM

We reviewed the characteristics, interventions, and outcomes of lung transplant candidates referred for co-management by palliative care, to determine whether they safely received opioids and went on to transplantation.

DESIGN AND PARTICIPANTS

Retrospective review of lung transplant candidates referred to our palliative care consultation service between January 2010 and May 2012.

RESULTS

Of 308 lung transplant candidates, 64 (20.7%) were referred to palliative care. Most had interstitial lung disease and were referred for dyspnea and a rapidly deteriorating course. A total of 59 (92%) were prescribed opioids for dyspnea, 55/59 used the opioids more than once, and 38/59 were maintained on standing opioids. There were no episodes of clinically important opioid toxicity or respiratory depression, and there was a trend toward increased exertion during exercise sessions post-opioid versus pre-opioid (19.3 vs 17.0 kcal, respectively, p = 0.06). At last follow-up, 30 (47%) had been transplanted, 23 (36%) had died while on the wait-list, 9 (14%) had died after delisting, and 2 (3%) were still awaiting transplantation. Of the 30 patients who underwent lung transplantation, only 7 (23%) still required an opioid prescription 1 month post-discharge.

CONCLUSION

In lung transplant candidates, palliative care and opioids in particular can be safely provided without compromising eligibility for transplantation. Palliative care should not be delayed until a patient is deemed ineligible for transplant.

Use of opioid analgesics among older persons with colorectal cancer in two health districts with palliative care programs

CONTEXT

Prescription of opioid analgesics is a key component of pain management among persons with cancer at the end of life.

OBJECTIVES

To use a population-based method to assess the use of opioid analgesics within the community among older persons with colorectal cancer (CRC) before death and determine factors associated with the use of opioid analgesics.

METHODS

Data were derived from a retrospective, linked administrative database study of all persons who were diagnosed with CRC between January 1, 2001 and December 31, 2005 in Nova Scotia, Canada. This study included all persons who 1) were 66 years or older at the date of diagnosis; 2) died between January 1, 2001 and April 1, 2008; and 3) resided in health districts with formal palliative care programs (PCPs) (n=657). Factors associated with having filled at least one prescription for a so-called "strong" opioid analgesic in the six months before death were examined using multivariate logistic regression.

RESULTS

In all, 36.7% filled at least one prescription for any opioid in the six months before death. Adjusting for all covariates, filling a prescription for a strong opioid was associated with enrollment in a PCP (odds ratio [OR]=3.18, 95% CI=2.05-4.94), residence in a long-term care facility (OR=2.19, 95% CI=1.23-3.89), and a CRC cause of death (OR=1.75, 95% CI=1.14-2.68). Persons were less likely to fill a prescription for a strong opioid if they were older (OR=0.97, 95% CI=0.95-0.99), male (OR=0.59, 95% 0.40-0.86), and diagnosed less than six months before death (OR=0.62, 95% CI=0.41-0.93).

CONCLUSION

PCPs may play an important role in enabling access to end-of-life care within the community.

Opioid side effects and their treatment in patients with chronic cancer and noncancer pain

Opioids are the foundation of standard analgesic regimens for moderate to severe pain due to life-threatening illnesses such as cancer, and are increasingly employed in chronic noncancer pain of the same severity. Opioids are frequently used for long periods in these populations, sometimes for years. However, side effects are common and may reduce quality of life, or become life threatening, and frequently cause patients to discontinue opioid therapy. Successful opioid therapy dictates that benefits of analgesia outweigh safety concerns. The mechanisms, incidence, and treatment or prevention of commonly reported side effects in chronic pain populations are reviewed, employing best available evidence along with empiric practice. General management strategies include switching opioids ("opioid rotation"), discontinuation of concurrent medications that exacerbate side effects, and symptomatic treatment. In addition, recently recognized adverse events that occur after long-term opioid therapy are discussed. High-quality evidence is lacking for the treatment of most side effects, and the true incidence, underlying mechanisms, and clinical implications of long-term responses to opioid therapy are not yet fully understood.

The infusion of opioids during terminal withdrawal of mechanical ventilation in the medical intensive care unit

CONTEXT

Most deaths in intensive care units occur after limitation or withdrawal of life-sustaining therapies. Often these patients require opioids to assuage suffering; yet, little has been documented concerning their use in the medical intensive care unit.

OBJECTIVES

To determine the dose and factors influencing the use of opioids in patients undergoing terminal withdrawal of mechanical ventilation in this setting.

METHODS

Data were prospectively collected from 74 consecutive patients expected to die soon after extubation. The doses of morphine, effect on time to death, and relation of dose to diagnostic categories were analyzed.

RESULTS

The mean (±standard deviation) dose of morphine given to patients during the last hour of mechanical ventilation was 5.3mg/hour. Patients dying after extubation received 10.6 mg/hour just before death. Immediately before extubation, the dose correlated directly with chronic medical opioid use and sepsis with respiratory failure and inversely with coma after cardiopulmonary resuscitation or a primary neurological event. After terminal extubation, the final morphine dose correlated directly with the presence of sepsis with respiratory failure and chronic pulmonary disease. The mean time to death after terminal extubation was 152.7 ± 229.5 minutes without correlation with premorbid diagnoses. After extubation, each 1mg/hour increment of morphine infused during the last hour of life was associated with a delay of death by 7.9 minutes (P = 0.011).

CONCLUSION

Premorbid conditions may influence the dose of morphine given to patients undergoing terminal withdrawal of mechanical ventilation. Higher doses of morphine are associated with a longer time to death.

[Limits of pain treatment: medical and judicial aspects]

Medical principles of pain treatment are generally in line with the judicial principles. To relieve pain is one of the fundamentals of medicine and this has also been acknowledged by the Federal Court in Germany. It is criminal bodily harm, when a physician denies a possible pain treatment. Whereas courts clearly see an obligation to basic and continuing education in pain diagnosis and therapy, pain is still not represented in the German licensing regulations for physicians. Only palliative medicine has been added to the obligatory curriculum. Very similar pain is not mandatory in many clinical disciplines leaving physicians without the needed knowledge to treat pain. The need for interdisciplinary treatment is not yet acknowledged sufficiently, although meanwhile chronic pain is regarded as a bio-psycho-social illness.Since 2009 the advance directive is regulated by law. However, still many physicians are unaware that not only the position of the patient but also of the relatives have been strengthened. In 2010 the Federal Court has pronounced a judgment allowing "passive euthanasia" in certain conditions but prohibiting any active handling even in line with the patient's will. This is also in line with the European Human Rights Convention. The judicial unpunished assisted suicide has provoked an ethical discussion within the medical profession. However, what is not illegal is not automatically accepted as ethical handling for physicians. Palliative medicine is at least one alternative in this discussion.

The use of opioids at the end of life: the knowledge level of Dutch physicians as a potential barrier to effective pain management

BACKGROUND

Pain is still one of the most frequently occurring symptoms at the end of life, although it can be treated satisfactorily in most cases if the physician has adequate knowledge. In the Netherlands, almost 60% of the patients with non-acute illnesses die at home where end of life care is coordinated by the general practitioner (GP); about 30% die in hospitals (cared for by clinical specialists), and about 10% in nursing homes (cared for by elderly care physicians).The research question of this study is: what is the level of knowledge of Dutch physicians concerning pain management and the use of opioids at the end of life?

METHODS

A written questionnaire was sent to a random sample of physicians of specialties most often involved in end of life care in the Netherlands. The questionnaire was completed by 406 physicians, response rate 41%.

RESULTS

Almost all physicians were aware of the most basal knowledge about opioids, e.g. that it is important for treatment purposes to distinguish nociceptive from neuropathic pain (97%). Approximately half of the physicians (46%) did not know that decreased renal function raises plasma concentration of morphine(-metabolites) and 34% of the clinical specialists erroneously thought opioids are the favoured drug for palliative sedation.Although 91% knew that opioids titrated against pain do not shorten life, 10% sometimes or often gave higher dosages than needed with the explicit aim to hasten death. About half felt sometimes or often pressured by relatives to hasten death by increasing opioiddosage.The large majority (83%) of physicians was interested in additional education about subjects related to the end of life, the most popular subject was opioid rotation (46%).

CONCLUSIONS

Although the basic knowledge of physicians was adequate, there seemed to be a lack of knowledge in several areas, which can be a barrier for good pain management at the end of life. From this study four areas emerge, in which it seems likely that an improvement can improve the quality of pain management at the end of life for many patients in the Netherlands: 1)palliative sedation; 2)expected effect of opioids on survival; and 3) opioid rotation.

The use of opioids at the end of life: knowledge level of pharmacists and cooperation with physicians

Purpose

What is the level of knowledge of pharmacists concerning pain management and the use of opioids at the end of life, and how do they cooperate with physicians?

Methods

A written questionnaire was sent to a sample of community and hospital pharmacists in the Netherlands. The questionnaire was completed by 182 pharmacists (response rate 45%).

Results

Pharmacists were aware of the most basic knowledge about opioids. Among the respondents, 29% erroneously thought that life-threatening respiratory depression was a danger with pain control, and 38% erroneously believed that opioids were the preferred drug for palliative sedation. One in three responding pharmacists did not think his/her theoretical knowledge was sufficient to provide advice on pain control. Most pharmacists had working agreements with physicians on euthanasia (81%), but fewer had working agreements on palliative sedation (46%) or opioid therapy (25%). Based on the experience of most of responding pharmacists (93%), physicians were open to unsolicited advice on opioid prescriptions. The majority of community pharmacists (94%) checked opioid prescriptions most often only after dispensing, while it was not a common practice among the majority of hospital pharmacists (68%) to check prescriptions at all.

Conclusions

Although the basic knowledge of most pharmacists was adequate, based on the responses to the questionnaire, there seems to be a lack of knowledge in several areas, which may hamper pharmacists in improving the quality of care when giving advice to physicians and preventing or correcting mistakes if necessary. If education is improved, a more active role of the pharmacist may improve the quality of end-of-life pharmacotherapy.

Management of cancer-related pain

Patients and families struggling with cancer fear pain more than any other physical symptom. There are also significant barriers to optimal pain management in the emergency setting, including lack of knowledge, inexperienced clinicians, myths about addiction, and fears of complications after discharge. In this article, we review the assessment and management options for cancer-related pain based on the World Health Organization (WHO) 3-step approach.

Ethical and legal issues in end-of-life care

The doctor has a responsibility to develop and maintain an effective approach to ethical decision making and the skills to implement the correct moral action. At the heart of this process is the experience and knowledge of particular conditions and their outcomes, alongside excellence in communication skills and working with colleagues.

Continuous Deep Sedation Until Death: Palliation or Physician-Assisted Death?

Published literature have not discerned end-of-life palliative versus life-shortening effects of pharmacologically maintaining continuous deep sedation until death (ie, dying in deep sleep) compared with common sedation practices relieving distress in the final conscious phase of dying. Continuous deep sedation predictably suppresses brainstem vital centers and shortens life. Continuous deep sedation remains controversial as palliation for existential suffering and in elective death requests by discontinuation of chronic ventilation or circulatory support with mechanical devices. Continuous deep sedation contravenes the double-effect principle because: (1) it induces permanent coma (intent of action) for the contingency relief of suffering and for social isolation (desired outcomes) and (2) because of its predictable and proportional life-shortening effect. Continuous deep sedation should be distinguished from common sedation practices for palliation and characterized instead as physician-assisted death.

A comparison of the effects of hydromorphone HCl and a novel extended release hydromorphone on arterial blood gas values in conscious healthy dogs

The purpose of this study was to evaluate arterial blood gases in dogs that were given hydromorphone or extended release liposome-encapsulated hydromorphone (LEH). Dogs were randomly administered LEH, n=6, (2.0 mg kg(-1)), hydromorphone, n=6, (0.2 mg kg(-1)) or a placebo of blank liposomes, n=3, subcutaneously on separate occasions. Arterial blood samples were drawn at serial time points over a 6-h time period for blood gas analysis. There was no change from baseline values in P(a)CO(2), P(a)O(2), (HCO(3)-), pH, and SBEc in the dogs that received the placebo. Administration of hydromorphone resulted in significant increases in P(a)CO(2) (maximum (mean+SD] 44.4+1.1mm of Hg) and significant decreases in P(a)O(2) (minimum (mean+SD) 82.4+4.7 mm of Hg) and pH (minimum (mean+SD) 7.31+0.01) compared with baseline. Administration of LEH resulted in significant increases in P(a)CO(2) (maximum (mean+SD) 44.6+0.9 mm of Hg) and significant decreases in P(a)O(2) (minimum (mean+SD) 84.8+2.6mm of Hg) and pH (minimum (mean+SD) 7.34+0.02) compared with baseline. There was no significant difference between these two groups at any time point. The changes observed in P(a)CO(2), P(a)O(2), and pH, however, were within clinically acceptable limits for healthy dogs. LEH was determined to cause moderate changes in arterial blood gas values similar to those caused by hydromorphone.

Pain management within the palliative and end-of-life care experience in the ICU

In the ICU where critically ill patients receive aggressive life-sustaining interventions, suffering is common and death can be expected in up to 20% of patients. High-quality pain management is a part of optimal therapy and requires knowledge and skill in pharmacologic, behavioral, social, and communication strategies grounded in the holistic palliative care approach. This contemporary review article focuses on pain management within comprehensive palliative and end-of-life care. These key points emerge from the transdisciplinary review: (1) all ICU patients experience opportunities for discomfort and suffering regardless of prognosis or goals, thus palliative therapy is a requisite approach for every patient, of which pain management is a principal component; (2) for those dying in the ICU, an explicit shift in management to comfort-oriented care is often warranted and may be the most beneficial treatment the health-care team can offer; (3) communication and cultural sensitivity with the patient-family unit is a principal approach for optimizing palliative and pain management as part of comprehensive ICU care; (4) ethical and legal misconceptions about the escalation of opiates and other palliative therapies should not be barriers to appropriate care, provided the intention of treatment is alleviation of pain and suffering; (5) standardized instruments, performance measurement, and care delivery aids are effective strategies for decreasing variability and improving palliative care in the complex ICU setting; and (6) comprehensive palliative care should addresses family and caregiver stress associated with caring for critically ill patients and anticipated suffering and loss.

Management of cancer-related pain

Patients and families struggling with cancer fear pain more than any other physical symptom. There are also significant barriers to optimal pain management in the emergency setting, including lack of knowledge, inexperienced clinicians, myths about addiction, and fears of complications after discharge. In this article, we review the assessment and management options for cancer-related pain based on the World Health Organization (WHO) 3-step approach.

Trends in the use of opioids at the end of life and the expected effects on hastening death

The aim of our study was to describe trends in opioid use and perceptions of having hastened the end of life of a patient. In 2005, a questionnaire was sent to 6860 physicians in The Netherlands who had attended a death. The response rate was 78%. In 1995 and 2001 similar studies were done. Physicians less often administered opioids with the intention to hasten death in 2005 (3.1% of the non-sudden deaths) than in 2001 and in 1995 (7% and 10%, respectively). Physicians gave similar dosages of opioids in 2005, 2001, and 1995, but physicians in 2005 less often thought that life was actually shortened than in 2001 and 1995 (37% in 2005, 50% in 2001, and 53% in 1995). Of the physicians in 2005 who did think that the life of the patient was shortened by opioids, 94% did not give higher dosages than were, in their own opinion, required for pain and symptom management. Physicians in 2005 more often took hastening death into account when they gave higher dosages of opioids when the patient experienced more severe symptoms and with female patients. In older patients (>or=80 years), physicians took the hastening of death into account more often, but the actual dosages of opioids were lower. These data indicate that physicians in The Netherlands less often thought that death was hastened by opioids and less often gave opioids, with the intention to hasten death in 2005 than in 2001 and 1995.

End of life care in chronic obstructive pulmonary disease: in search of a good death

Chronic obstructive pulmonary disease (COPD) is an incurable, progressive illness that is the fourth commonest cause of death worldwide. Death tends to occur after a prolonged functional decline associated with uncontrolled symptoms, emotional distress and social isolation. There is increasing evidence that the end of life needs of those with advanced COPD are not being met by existing services. Many barriers hinder the provision of good end of life care in COPD, including the inherent difficulties in determining prognosis. This review provides an evidence-based approach to overcoming these barriers, summarising current evidence and highlighting areas for future research. Topics include end of life needs, symptom control, advance care planning, and service development to improve the quality of end of life care.