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.

Recent advances and contributions to procedural sedation with considerations for the future

As the demand for sedation services have increased, the delivery of sedation has shifted from the operating room setting to areas distant to the operating room, both within and outside the hospital setting. Sedation delivery is not monopolized by any one specialty, but rather is being delivered by anesthesiologists as well as non-anesthesiologists. As the field of sedation burgeons and multi-specialists enter the realm of meeting the demands, so also have the politics increased. Unfortunately, the choice of sedative agents has not increased in parallel with the demand for sedation. Over the past decade, there has been a paucity of new introductions for procedural sedation. Rather, new formulations of approved agents are being reexamined. The safe, efficient and predictable delivery of sedation remains at the forefront of discussion and review worldwide. This review will explore the recent, significant and noteworthy contributions to the field of sedation.

Time to wake up the patients in the ICU: a crazy idea or common sense?

With the first generation of ventilators, it was often necessary to sedate patients to avoid dyssynchrony between patient and ventilator. The standard treatment of patients in need of mechanical ventilation has therefore traditionally included sedation. Modern ventilators are able to simulate the patients breathing efforts to a higher degree, and therefore, deep sedation is no longer necessary. In the last decade, support has grown for a reduction in the use of sedation. The focus has been placed on the correlation between the depth of sedation and the length of mechanical ventilation. It has been shown that a daily wake up trial reduced the time that patients were dependent on mechanical ventilation. Additionally, it has been shown that combining both a spontaneous breathing trial and a daily wake up trial reduced the mechanical ventilation time compared to a spontaneous breathing trial alone. We have recently shown in a randomized study that the use of no sedation, compared to the standard treatment with sedation and a daily wake up trial, reduced the time that patients required mechanical ventilation, the length of the patients' stay in the intensive care unit, and the total length of the hospital stay. All evidence indicates that the use of sedative drugs should be reduced, patients should be mobilized, and each patient's needs should be evaluated on a daily basis to optimize the care of each individual patient.

Continuous deep sedation in medical practice: a descriptive study

CONTEXT

Continuous deep sedation (CDS) until death can form an effective part of palliative care. In The Netherlands and Belgium, CDS is sometimes regarded as an alternative to euthanasia, and the involvement of palliative care specialists is low. Provision of CDS through opioids alone is not recommended.

OBJECTIVES

This study investigates the use of CDS in the United Kingdom.

METHODS

A survey of 8,857 doctors, of whom 3,733 (42%) replied, with 2,923 reporting on their last patient who died.

RESULTS

In total, 18.7% (17.3-20.1) of the doctors attending a dying patient reported the use of CDS. CDS was more likely when patients were younger or were dying of cancer. Specialists in care of the elderly were least likely to report the use of CDS; doctors in other hospital specialties were most likely to report its use. CDS was associated with a higher rate of requests from patients or relatives for a hastened death and with a greater incidence of other end-of-life decisions containing some intent to end life by the doctor. Doctors supporting legalization of euthanasia or physician-assisted suicide, or who were nonreligious, were more likely to report using CDS. There was palliative care team involvement in half of all CDS cases, and prescription of opioids alone for sedation occurred in one-fifth of the cases but was not reported by specialists in palliative care.

CONCLUSION

This study provides baseline data for monitoring future trends in the United Kingdom and highlights the need for a fuller understanding of the circumstances in which CDS occurs in particular care settings.