BACKGROUND: Palliative sedation (PS) can be offered to patients with intolerable symptom burden refractory to comprehensive palliative care (PC) treatment. Little is known about the daily practice of using PS in German specialized PC institutions in the context of existing national and international recommendations. PURPOSE: This study's primary objective is to explore how PS is used in German specialized PC institutions with reference to the EAPC framework. METHODS: The heads of all palliative care units, hospices, specialized palliative home care teams, and specialized pediatric palliative home care teams listed in the official address registers were invited to take part in a questionnaire survey about the clinical practice of PS in their institution. RESULTS: Considerable differences of the frequency of PS exist between institutions. The estimated frequency of PS ranges from 0 to 80 % of all patients treated per year (mean 6.7 %). Some PC specialists report to discuss PS as treatment option for every patient they encounter. Specific evaluation and documentation tools are rare. Of the study participants, 36.2 % are not familiar with international and national recommendations. CONCLUSION: Many differences exist in frequency and clinical handling of PS in Germany. Implementation of international and national recommendations into clinical practice remains inconsistent.
BACKGROUND: Palliative sedation (PS) can be offered to patients with intolerable symptom burden refractory to comprehensive palliative care (PC) treatment. Little is known about the daily practice of using PS in German specialized PC institutions in the context of existing national and international recommendations. PURPOSE: This study's primary objective is to explore how PS is used in German specialized PC institutions with reference to the EAPC framework. METHODS: The heads of all palliative care units, hospices, specialized palliative home care teams, and specialized pediatric palliative home care teams listed in the official address registers were invited to take part in a questionnaire survey about the clinical practice of PS in their institution. RESULTS: Considerable differences of the frequency of PS exist between institutions. The estimated frequency of PS ranges from 0 to 80 % of all patients treated per year (mean 6.7 %). Some PC specialists report to discuss PS as treatment option for every patient they encounter. Specific evaluation and documentation tools are rare. Of the study participants, 36.2 % are not familiar with international and national recommendations. CONCLUSION: Many differences exist in frequency and clinical handling of PS in Germany. Implementation of international and national recommendations into clinical practice remains inconsistent.
Authors: Paul A Harris; Robert Taylor; Robert Thielke; Jonathon Payne; Nathaniel Gonzalez; Jose G Conde Journal: J Biomed Inform Date: 2008-09-30 Impact factor: 6.317
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: Alexander Kremling; Claudia Bausewein; Carsten Klein; Eva Schildmann; Christoph Ostgathe; Kerstin Ziegler; Jan Schildmann Journal: J Palliat Med Date: 2022-01-21 Impact factor: 2.947