Eva Schildmann1, Sophie Meesters, Claudia Bausewein. 1. Department of Palliative Medicine, University Hospital, LMU Munich; Oncological Palliative Care, Department of Hematology, Oncology and Cancer Immunology & Charité Comprehensive Cancer Center, Charité-Universitätsmedizin Berlin, corporate member of Freie Universität Berlin and Humboldt-Universität zu Berlin, Berlin.
Abstract
BACKGROUND: Data on sedation at the end of life (eol) in different medical disciplines are scarce and mostly based on subjective reports. We aimed to assess the use of sedatives with continuous effect in the last week of life and associated factors in different hospital departments, with the aid of objectifiable criteria. METHODS: We conducted a retrospective cohort study based on the medical records of patients who died in one of five clinical departments of German hospitals between January 2015 and December 2017 (hematology/oncology [two different departments], neurology, geriatrics, and gynecology). The use of sedatives that are recommended in guidelines for palliative sedation was analyzed, irrespective of indication and treatment intent, with the aid of published definitions of continuous effect and of at least moderately sedating doses. The analysis consisted of descriptive statistics and multivariate logistic regression analysis. RESULTS: 260/517 (50%) of the patients who died were given sedatives with continuous effect in the last week of life, 53/517 (10%) in at least moderately sedating doses. For 76/260 (29%) patients, no indication was noted. The term "sedation" was used in the medical records of 20/260 (8%) patients. The use of sedatives with continuous effect was significantly associated with the department in which the patient was treated (hematology/oncology II: OR 0.32, 95% CI [0.16: 0.63]; geriatrics: OR 0.23, 95% CI [0.10:0.50]; reference, hematology/oncology I). CONCLUSION: It was not possible to draw a clear distinction between the use of sedatives for symptom control, without sedating effect or intent to sedate, and intentional sedation to relieve suffering. The observed differences between hospital departments and deviations from recommended practice, e.g. lack of documentation of the indication, warrant further exploration. Moreover, context-specific supportive measures for the use of sedatives and sedation at the end of life should be developed.
BACKGROUND: Data on sedation at the end of life (eol) in different medical disciplines are scarce and mostly based on subjective reports. We aimed to assess the use of sedatives with continuous effect in the last week of life and associated factors in different hospital departments, with the aid of objectifiable criteria. METHODS: We conducted a retrospective cohort study based on the medical records of patients who died in one of five clinical departments of German hospitals between January 2015 and December 2017 (hematology/oncology [two different departments], neurology, geriatrics, and gynecology). The use of sedatives that are recommended in guidelines for palliative sedation was analyzed, irrespective of indication and treatment intent, with the aid of published definitions of continuous effect and of at least moderately sedating doses. The analysis consisted of descriptive statistics and multivariate logistic regression analysis. RESULTS: 260/517 (50%) of the patients who died were given sedatives with continuous effect in the last week of life, 53/517 (10%) in at least moderately sedating doses. For 76/260 (29%) patients, no indication was noted. The term "sedation" was used in the medical records of 20/260 (8%) patients. The use of sedatives with continuous effect was significantly associated with the department in which the patient was treated (hematology/oncology II: OR 0.32, 95% CI [0.16: 0.63]; geriatrics: OR 0.23, 95% CI [0.10:0.50]; reference, hematology/oncology I). CONCLUSION: It was not possible to draw a clear distinction between the use of sedatives for symptom control, without sedating effect or intent to sedate, and intentional sedation to relieve suffering. The observed differences between hospital departments and deviations from recommended practice, e.g. lack of documentation of the indication, warrant further exploration. Moreover, context-specific supportive measures for the use of sedatives and sedation at the end of life should be developed.
Authors: Angelique C M Jansen; Emily S van Aalst-Cohen; Barbara A Hutten; Harry R Büller; John J P Kastelein; Martin H Prins Journal: J Clin Epidemiol Date: 2005-03 Impact factor: 6.437
Authors: Evangelia S Papavasiliou; Sarah G Brearley; Jane E Seymour; Jayne Brown; Sheila A Payne Journal: J Pain Symptom Manage Date: 2013-04-06 Impact factor: 3.612
Authors: Sarah Ziegler; Margareta Schmid; Matthias Bopp; Georg Bosshard; Milo Alan Puhan Journal: J Gen Intern Med Date: 2018-03-20 Impact factor: 5.128
Authors: Judith A C Rietjens; Lia van Zuylen; Hetty van Veluw; Lidemarie van der Wijk; Agnes van der Heide; Carin C D van der Rijt Journal: J Pain Symptom Manage Date: 2008-04-14 Impact factor: 3.612