BACKGROUND: There is wide variation in the frequency of reported use of palliative sedation (PS) to control intractable and refractory symptoms in terminally ill patients. The aim of this study was to determine the frequency and outcomes of PS use and examine patterns of practice after establishment of a policy for the administration of midazolam for PS in our palliative care unit (PCU). MATERIALS AND METHODS: This retrospective study reviewed PCU admissions for 2004 and 2005 and pharmacy records to identify patients who received chlorpromazine, lorazepam, or midazolam for PS in the PCU. Data on indication for PS, drug used, and discharge outcome were assessed for each patient. RESULTS: During the period studied, there were 1,207 PCU admissions. Of these patients, 186 (15%) received PS; and 143 (41%) of the 352 patients who died in the PCU received PS. The median age of PS patients was 58 (range, 20-84) years, and 106 (57%) were male. The most common indications for PS were delirium, 153 cases (82%); dyspnea, 11 (6%); and multiple indications, 12 (6%). Midazolam was used in 18 PS cases (10%). Six (55%) of 11 patients with dyspnea received midazolam for PS, compared with 12 (7%) of 175 patients with other indications for PS (p < 0.001). Forty-three (23%) of 186 PS patients were discharged alive, compared with 812 (80%) of 1,021 patients who did not receive PS (p < 0.001). CONCLUSIONS: PS was required in 15% of PCU admissions, and 23% of PS patients were discharged alive. Our findings suggest a potential for significant underreporting of overall PS. If our institution's policy on midazolam use for PS were less restrictive, midazolam use might increase. More research is needed to define the optimal agent for inducing rapid, effective, and easily reversible PS.
BACKGROUND: There is wide variation in the frequency of reported use of palliative sedation (PS) to control intractable and refractory symptoms in terminally ill patients. The aim of this study was to determine the frequency and outcomes of PS use and examine patterns of practice after establishment of a policy for the administration of midazolam for PS in our palliative care unit (PCU). MATERIALS AND METHODS: This retrospective study reviewed PCU admissions for 2004 and 2005 and pharmacy records to identify patients who received chlorpromazine, lorazepam, or midazolam for PS in the PCU. Data on indication for PS, drug used, and discharge outcome were assessed for each patient. RESULTS: During the period studied, there were 1,207 PCU admissions. Of these patients, 186 (15%) received PS; and 143 (41%) of the 352 patients who died in the PCU received PS. The median age of PSpatients was 58 (range, 20-84) years, and 106 (57%) were male. The most common indications for PS were delirium, 153 cases (82%); dyspnea, 11 (6%); and multiple indications, 12 (6%). Midazolam was used in 18 PS cases (10%). Six (55%) of 11 patients with dyspnea received midazolam for PS, compared with 12 (7%) of 175 patients with other indications for PS (p < 0.001). Forty-three (23%) of 186 PSpatients were discharged alive, compared with 812 (80%) of 1,021 patients who did not receive PS (p < 0.001). CONCLUSIONS:PS was required in 15% of PCU admissions, and 23% of PSpatients were discharged alive. Our findings suggest a potential for significant underreporting of overall PS. If our institution's policy on midazolam use for PS were less restrictive, midazolam use might increase. More research is needed to define the optimal agent for inducing rapid, effective, and easily reversible PS.
Authors: W Breitbart; R Marotta; M M Platt; H Weisman; M Derevenco; C Grau; K Corbera; S Raymond; S Lund; P Jacobson Journal: Am J Psychiatry Date: 1996-02 Impact factor: 18.112
Authors: Andrea Tendas; Pasquale Niscola; Luca Cupelli; Teresa Dentamaro; Laura Scaramucci; Agostina Siniscalchi; Michela Ales; Marco Giovannini; Alessio Perrotti; Paolo de Fabritiis Journal: Support Care Cancer Date: 2008-11-04 Impact factor: 3.603
Authors: Ferraz Gonçalves; Aida Cordero; Ana Almeida; Arlindo Cruz; Céu Rocha; Madalena Feio; Paula Silva; Salomé Barbas; Sandra Neves Journal: Support Care Cancer Date: 2012-03-24 Impact factor: 3.603
Authors: Augusto Caraceni; Ernesto Zecca; Cinzia Martini; Giovanna Gorni; Tiziana Campa; Cinzia Brunelli; Franco De Conno Journal: Support Care Cancer Date: 2011-07-16 Impact factor: 3.603
Authors: Stephanie Stiel; Maria Heckel; Britta Christensen; Christoph Ostgathe; Carsten Klein Journal: Support Care Cancer Date: 2015-08-14 Impact factor: 3.603
Authors: Santiago Parra Palacio; Clara Elisa Giraldo Hoyos; Camilo Arias Rodríguez; Daniel Mejía Arrieta; John Jairo Vargas Gómez; Alicia Krikorian Journal: Support Care Cancer Date: 2018-03-29 Impact factor: 3.603