Search

Context: A gold standard or validated tool for monitoring the level of discomfort during continuous palliative sedation (CPS) is lacking. Therefore, little is known about the course of discomfort in sedated patients, the efficacy of CPS, and the determinants of discomfort during CPS.Objectives: To identify the course of discomfort in patients receiving CPS.Methods: A prospective observational multicenter study in nine hospices and palliative care units was performed. The Discomfort Scale-Dementia of Alzheimer Type (DS-DAT) was independently assessed for monitoring of patient discomfort during CPS. The DS-DAT scores range from 0 (no observed discomfort) to a maximum of 27 (high level of observed discomfort). Using a mixed model, the mean group score of discomfort between four predefined time frames of CPS was compared, correcting for confounding patient characteristics.Results: A total of 130 patients were sedated, and the DS-DAT was completed in 106 patients at least once. The median duration of the sedation in these 106 patients was 25.5 hours (range 2-161). The mean score of the DS-DAT in the phase before sedation was 12.16 (95% CI 9.83-14.50) and decreased significantly to 8.06 (95% CI 5.53-10.58) in the titration phase of sedation. The mean score of the DS-DAT in the final phase of sedation was 7.42 (95% CI 4.90-9.94).Conclusion: This study shows that CPS is associated with a decrease in the level of discomfort within an acceptable time frame, although in some sedated patients higher levels of discomfort in the last hours of life occurred. Although the DS-DAT seems to be of value for monitoring the level of discomfort during CPS, the results of this study should be interpreted within the constraints of the limitations, and further research on the psychometric properties of this tool is needed before the DS-DAT can be used in clinical practice. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Context: Knowledge of determinants that are associated with the administration of continuous palliative sedation (CPS) helps physicians identify patients who are at risk of developing refractory symptoms, thereby enabling proactive care planning.Objectives: This study aims to explore which patient-related factors at admission are associated with receiving CPS later in the terminal phase of life.Methods: A prospective multicenter observational study was performed in six Dutch hospices and three nursing home-based palliative care units. The association between patient-related variables at admission (age, gender, diagnosis, use of opioids or psycholeptics, number of medications, Karnofsky Performance Status scale score, Edmonton Symptom Assessment System distress score, and Glasgow Coma Scale score) and the administration of CPS at the end of life was analyzed.Results: A total of 467 patients died during the study period, of whom 130 received CPS. In univariate analysis, statistically significant differences were noted between the sedated and nonsedated patients with respect to younger age (P = 0.009), malignancy as a diagnosis (P = 0.05), higher Karnofsky Performance Status score (P = 0.03), the use of opioids (P < 0.001), the use of psycholeptics (P = 0.003), and higher Edmonton Symptom Assessment System distress score (P = 0.05). Multivariate logistic regression analysis showed that only the use of opioids at admission (odds ratio 1.90; 95% confidence interval 1.18-3.05) was significantly associated with the administration of CPS.Conclusion: Physicians should be aware that patients who use opioids at admission have an increased risk for the administration of CPS at the end of life. In this group of patients, a comprehensive personalized care plan starting at admission is mandatory to try to prevent the development of refractory symptoms. Further research is recommended, to identify other determinants of the administration of CPS and to investigate which early interventions will be effective to prevent the need for CPS in patients at high risk. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Context: Near the end of life when patients experience refractory symptoms, palliative sedation may be considered as a last treatment. Clinical guidelines have been developed, but they are mainly based on expert opinion or retrospective chart reviews. Therefore, evidence for the clinical aspects of palliative sedation is needed.Objectives: To explore clinical aspects of palliative sedation in recent prospective studies.Methods: Systematic review was conducted following Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses guidelines and registered at PROSPERO. PubMed, CINAHL, Cochrane, MEDLINE, and EMBASE were searched (January 2014-December 2019), combining sedation, palliative care, and prospective. Article quality was assessed.Results: Ten prospective articles were included, involving predominantly patients with cancer. Most frequently reported refractory symptoms were delirium (41%-83%), pain (25%-65%), and dyspnea (16%-59%). In some articles, psychological and existential distress were mentioned (16%-59%). Only a few articles specified the tools used to assess symptoms. Level of sedation assessment tools were the Richmond Agitation Sedation Scale, Ramsay Sedation Scale, Glasgow Coma Scale, and Bispectral Index monitoring. The palliative sedation practice shows an underlying need for proportionality in relation to symptom intensity. Midazolam was the main sedative used. Other reported medications were phenobarbital, promethazine, and anesthetic medication-propofol. The only study that reported level of patient's discomfort as a palliative sedation outcome showed a decrease in patient discomfort.Conclusion: Assessment of refractory symptoms should include physical evaluation with standardized tools applied and interviews for psychological and existential evaluation by expert clinicians working in teams. Future research needs to evaluate the effectiveness of palliative sedation for refractory symptom relief. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]