Physicians in Postgraduate Training Characteristics and Support of Palliative Sedation for Existential Distress

Palliative care physicians' decision-making about palliative sedation for existential suffering: A Belgian nationwide qualitative study

OBJECTIVES

This study aims to provide an in-depth understanding of the content and process of decision-making about palliative sedation for existential suffering (PS-ES) as perceived by Belgian palliative care physicians.

METHODS

This Belgian nationwide qualitative study follows a grounded theory approach. We conducted semistructured interviews with 25 palliative care physicians working in 19 Belgian hospital-based palliative care units and 4 stand-alone hospices. We analyzed the data using the Qualitative Analysis Guide of Leuven, and we followed the Consolidated Criteria for Reporting Qualitative Research Guidelines (COREQ).

RESULTS

Analysis of the data identified several criteria that physicians apply in their decision-making about PS-ES, namely, the importance of the patient's demand, PS-ES as a last resort option after all alternatives have been applied, the condition of unbearable suffering combined with other kinds of suffering, and the condition of being in a terminal stage. Regarding the process of decision-making itself, physicians refer to the need for multidisciplinary perspectives supported by an interpretative dialogue with the patient and all other stakeholders. The decision-making process involves a specific temporality and physicians' inner conviction about the need of PS-ES.

SIGNIFICANCE OF RESULTS

Belgian palliative care physicians are not sure about the criteria regarding decision-making in PS-ES. To deal with complex existential suffering in end-of-life situations, they stress the importance of participation by all stakeholders (patient, relatives, palliative care team, other physicians, nurses, social workers, physiotherapists, occupational therapists, chaplains, etc.) in the decision-making process to prevent inadequate decisions being made.

Physician Perceptions and Beliefs Regarding End-of-Life Care in a Central California Health System

Objective: We sought to describe the preparedness, beliefs, and experience regarding end-of-life (EOL) care for in-training and attending physicians. We hoped to clarify how medical training impacts views about EOL, and topics where physicians desire more EOL training. Methods: An online anonymous survey was sent to 766 physicians who worked at Community Medical Centers in Fresno, California from October to December 2016. Descriptive statistics of the population were compiled. Chi-squared and Mann-Whitney U tests comparing differences in personal experience, and preparedness and confidence with palliative care topics by training level were performed. Results: 195 physicians responded to the survey (25%). Respondents were 42% in-training, 55% male, 57% Caucasian, and 38% Christian. Compared to attendings those in-training were younger, more often female, and more likely to have a DO degree. The 2 groups did not differ in ethnicity, specialty, or religion. Attendings were more likely than those in-training (46% vs 14%, P < .001) to have an advance directive, reported a higher level of formal training in discussing prognosis (P = .037), and had higher confidence with palliative care topics like delivering bad news (P = .002), discussing resuscitation status (P = .015), and discussing the new California EOL Option Act (P < .001). Thirty-two percent of respondents believed patients often starve at EOL. Otherwise, knowledge was 90% correct. Conclusions: Physicians in-training are less prepared to discuss EOL topics. Physicians in-training and attendings desire more education in pain management at EOL.

Ethics of sedation for existential suffering: palliative medicine physician perceptions - qualitative study

OBJECTIVES

Palliative sedation for existential suffering (PS-ES) is considered a controversial practice to control refractory suffering at the end of life. This study aims to explore Belgian palliative care physicians' perceptions regarding the ethics of PS-ES.

METHODS

This nationwide qualitative study follows a Grounded Theory approach. We conducted semistructured interviews with 25 palliative care physicians working in 23 Belgian hospitals and hospices (Flanders, Brussels, Wallonia). We analysed the data using the Qualitative Analysis Guide Of Leuven and we followed the Consolidated Criteria for Reporting Qualitative Research guidelines.

RESULTS

The data revealed that Belgian palliative care physicians have difficulty characterising ES and distinguishing it from other types of suffering. They express mixed attitudes towards PS-ES and employ a wide range of ethical arguments in favour and against it, which are mainly linked to the four principles of biomedical ethics.

CONCLUSION

Since there is a lack of consensus among Belgian palliative care physicians about PS-ES, further research is needed to clarify their attitudes. A better understanding of physicians' underlying presuppositions can provide more insight into their perceptions of ES and PS-ES and provide further insight for establishing good practices in ES management at the end of life.

Existential Distress in Cancer Patients: A Concept Analysis

BACKGROUND

Existential distress is a widely used concept used in describing cancer patients. However, this concept is vague and has failed to achieve a consensus. The lack of a recognized conceptual framework could hinder future research on existential distress.

OBJECTIVE

The aim of this study was to clarify and analyze the concept of existential distress in cancer patients.

METHODS

The Walker and Avant concept analysis approach was applied.

RESULTS

For cancer patients, the concept of existential distress included 5 core attributes: (a) lack of meaning; (b) loss of autonomy; (c) loss of dignity; (d) hopelessness; and (e) death anxiety. Existential distress is a key factor causing poor quality of life, a poor emotional state, demoralization, and even suicide. It is often underpinned by uncontrolled physical pain, serious psychological morbidity, and a perceived sense of being a burden on others.

CONCLUSION

The concept analysis provides a theoretical framework for healthcare providers to better understand existential distress in cancer patients, to improve patient well-being.

IMPLICATIONS FOR PRACTICE

On the basis of the antecedents of this concept, cancer patients experiencing uncontrolled physical pain, severe psychological morbidity, and a perceived sense of being a burden on others are at a high risk of existential distress. These factors should be eliminated in a timely manner to prevent cancer patients from being caught in a state of existential distress. The 5 defining attributes and empirical referents of this concept could be used to develop tools to screen for existential distress in cancer patients and distinguish it from similar concepts.

Physicians' perceptions of palliative sedation for existential suffering: a systematic review

BACKGROUND

Palliative sedation for existential suffering (PS-ES) is a controversial clinical intervention. Empirical studies about physicians' perceptions do not converge in a clear position and current clinical practice guidelines do not agree either regarding this kind of intervention.

AIM

To gain deeper insight into physicians' perceptions of PS-ES, the factors influencing it, the conditions for implementing it and the alternatives to it.

DESIGN

Systematic review of qualitative, quantitative and mixed-methods studies following the Peer Review Electronic Search Strategies and Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-analyses protocols; quality appraisal and thematic synthesis methodology.

DATA SOURCES

Seven electronic databases (PubMed, CINAHL, Embase, Scopus, Web of Science, PsycINFO, PsycARTICLES) were exhaustively searched from inception through March 2019. Two reviewers screened paper titles, abstracts and full texts. We included only peer-reviewed journal articles published in English, French, German, Dutch, Spanish, Italian or Portuguese that focused on physicians' perceptions of PS-ES.

RESULTS

The search yielded 17 publications published between 2002 and 2017. Physicians do not hold clear views or agree if and when PS-ES is appropriate. Case-related and individual-related factors that influenced physicians' perceptions were identified. There is still no consensus regarding criteria to distinguish between necessary and sufficient conditions for invoking PS-ES. Some alternatives to PS-ES were identified.

CONCLUSIONS

To date, there is still no consensus on physicians' perceptions of PS-ES. Further research is necessary to understand factors that influence physicians' perceptions and philosophical-ethical presuppositions underlying this perceptions.

Palliative Sedation for Existential Suffering: A Systematic Review of Argument-Based Ethics Literature

CONTEXT

Although unanimity exists on using palliative sedation (PS) for controlling refractory physical suffering in end-of-life situations, using it for controlling refractory existential suffering (PS-ES) is controversial. Complicating the debate is that definitions and terminology for existential suffering are unclear, ambiguous, and imprecise, leading to a lack of consensus for clinical practice.

OBJECTIVES

To systematically identify, describe, analyze, and discuss ethical arguments and concepts underpinning the argument-based bioethics literature on PS-ES.

METHODS

We conducted a systematic search of the argument-based bioethics literature in PubMed, CINAHL, Embase^®, The Philosopher's Index, PsycINFO^®, PsycARTICLES^®, Scopus, ScienceDirect, Web of Science, Pascal-Francis, and Cairn. We included articles published in peer-reviewed journals till December 31, 2016, written in English or French, which focused on ethical arguments related to PS-ES. We used Peer Review of Electronic Search Strategies protocol, Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses, and The Qualitative Analysis Guide of Leuven for data extraction and synthesis of themes.

RESULTS

We identified 18 articles that met the inclusion criteria. Our analysis revealed mind-body dualism, existential suffering, refractoriness, terminal condition, and imminent death as relevant concepts in the ethical debate on PS-ES. The ethical principles of double effect, proportionality, and the four principles of biomedical ethics were used in argumentations in the PS-ES debate.

CONCLUSION

There is a clear need to better define the terminology used in discussions of PS-ES and to ground ethical arguments in a more effective way. Anthropological presuppositions such as mind-body dualism underpin the debate and need to be more clearly elucidated using an interdisciplinary approach.