Your browser doesn't support javascript.
Show: 20 | 50 | 100
Results 1 - 4 de 4
Filter
1.
BMC Palliat Care ; 22(1): 34, 2023 Apr 04.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: covidwho-2278335

ABSTRACT

BACKGROUND: Clinical experts experienced challenges in the practice of palliative sedation (PS) during the COVID-19 pandemic. Rapid deterioration in patients' situation was observed while the indications for starting PS seemed to differ compared to other terminal patients. It is unclear to which extent clinical trajectories of PS differ for these COVID patients compared to regular clinical practice of PS. OBJECTIVES: To describe the clinical practice of PS in patients with COVID versus non-COVID patients. METHODS: A retrospective analysis of data from a Dutch tertiary medical centre was performed. Charts of adult patients who died with PS during hospitalisation between March '20 and January '21 were included. RESULTS: During the study period, 73 patients received PS and of those 25 (34%) had a COVID infection. Refractory dyspnoea was reported as primary indication for starting PS in 84% of patients with COVID compared to 33% in the other group (p < 0.001). Median duration of PS was significantly shorter in the COVID group (5.8 vs. 17.1 h, p < 0.01). No differences were found for starting dosages, but median hourly dose of midazolam was higher in the COVID group (4.2 mg/hr vs. 2.4 mg/hr, p < 0.001). Time interval between start PS and first medication adjustments seemed to be shorter in COVID patients (1.5 vs. 2.9 h, p = 0.08). CONCLUSION: PS in COVID patients is characterized by rapid clinical deterioration in all phases of the trajectory. What is manifested by earlier dose adjustments and higher hourly doses of midazolam. Timely evaluation of efficacy is recommended in those patients.


Subject(s)
COVID-19 , Neoplasms , Terminal Care , Adult , Humans , Midazolam/therapeutic use , Palliative Care , Hypnotics and Sedatives/therapeutic use , Retrospective Studies , Pandemics , Neoplasms/drug therapy
2.
J Pain Palliat Care Pharmacother ; : 1-7, 2022 Aug 25.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: covidwho-2004906

ABSTRACT

Patients who suffer from dyspnea while dying from COVID-19 are treated with opioids and benzodiazepines. In some instances, patients may experience refractory dyspnea at the end of life. Palliative sedation can be prescribed to alleviate such patients' suffering. We describe two patients being treated for severe COVID-19 pneumonia in a tertiary hospital. Both developed intractable dyspneic crises despite high-dose opioids and benzodiazepines. This led to their requirement of palliative sedation in the general ward using subcutaneous phenobarbitone (phenobarbital). We outline clinical considerations for the use of palliative sedation in COVID-19 related dyspnea. In particular, we discuss the evidence for, benefits and limitations of using phenobarbitone for palliative sedation in COVID-19 patients.

3.
Nurs Ethics ; 29(5): 1220-1230, 2022 Aug.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: covidwho-1896271

ABSTRACT

BACKGROUND: Recently, palliative care is increasingly important, with an emphasis on the process of dying with dignity. However, nurses who care for such patients experience the associated ethical dilemmas. OBJECTIVE: To explore the meaning of nurses' experiences in dealing with ethical dilemmas in relation to palliative sedation. RESEARCH DESIGN: A qualitative research design was employed with a thematic analysis approach. PARTICIPANTS AND RESEARCH CONTEXT: Using purposive sampling, 15 nurses, working at palliative care units for at least 1 year, were recruited as participants. Data were collected using unstructured in-depth interviews, and data collection and analysis was performed simultaneously. ETHICAL CONSIDERATIONS: Ethical approval was obtained from the authors' institutional review board. All participants provided informed consent. For the face-to-face interview, the South Korean standard COVID-19 quarantine guidelines, such as mandatory masking and social distancing, were followed. RESULTS: Dilemmas raised by patients, were related to concerns about appropriate drug dose; dilemmas raised by nurses, were related to passive care, sense of guilt for failure to predict death, and colleague's disrespectful attitudes toward patients; dilemmas from patients' families were related to demands for palliative sedation and reversal of those demands. Care actions to deal with ethical dilemmas comprised evidence-based care, person-centered thinking, reflecting on the death situation, compassion, providing explanation and help to family members. CONCLUSION: Nurses' ethical dilemmas were pre-dominantly influenced by themselves, rather than by the patients or their families, especially if they felt they could not do their best for patients. The core concept of care actions to deal with the ethical dilemmas, was person-centered care and compassion. Then, how patients and their family members perceive person-centered care and compassion, should be further explored to improve palliative sedation.


Subject(s)
COVID-19 , Hospice and Palliative Care Nursing , Nurses , Humans , Morals , Palliative Care , Qualitative Research
4.
BMC Palliat Care ; 20(1): 161, 2021 Oct 18.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: covidwho-1477412

ABSTRACT

BACKGROUND: Cancer patients' end-of-life care may involve complex decision-making processes. Colombia has legislation regarding provision of and access to palliative care and is the only Latin American country with regulation regarding euthanasia. We describe medical end-of-life decision-making practices among cancer patients in three Colombian hospitals. METHODS: Cancer patients who were at the end-of-life and attended in participating hospitals were identified. When these patients deceased, their attending physician was invited to participate. Attending physicians of 261 cancer patients (out of 348 identified) accepted the invitation and answered a questionnaire regarding end-of-life decisions: a.) decisions regarding the withdrawal or withholding of potentially life-prolonging medical treatments, b.) intensifying measures to alleviate pain or other symptoms with hastening of death as a potential side effect, and c.) the administration, supply or prescription of drugs with an explicit intention to hasten death. For each question addressing the first two decision types, we asked if the decision was fully or partially made with the intention or consideration that it may hasten the patient's death. RESULTS: Decisions to withdraw potentially life-prolonging treatment were made for 112 (43%) patients, 16 of them (14%) with an intention to hasten death. For 198 patients (76%) there had been some decision to not initiate potentially life-prolonging treatment. Twenty-three percent of patients received palliative sedation, 97% of all patients received opioids. Six patients (2%) explicitly requested to actively hasten their death, for two of them their wish was fulfilled. In another six patients, medications were used with the explicit intention to hasten death without their explicit request. In 44% (n = 114) of all cases, physicians did not know if their patient had any advance care directives, 26% (n = 38) of physicians had spoken to the patient regarding the possibility of certain treatment decisions to hasten death where this applied. CONCLUSIONS: Decisions concerning the end of life were common for patients with cancer in three Colombian hospitals, including euthanasia and palliative sedation. Physicians and patients often fail to communicate about advance care directives and potentially life-shortening effects of treatment decisions. Specific end-of-life procedures, patients' wishes, and availability of palliative care should be further investigated.


Subject(s)
Decision Making , Neoplasms , Colombia , Death , Hospitals , Humans , Neoplasms/therapy , Surveys and Questionnaires
SELECTION OF CITATIONS
SEARCH DETAIL