Parental Physical Proximity in End-of-Life Care in the PICU.

OBJECTIVE: Health professionals in PICUs support both child and parents when a child's death is imminent. Parents long to stay connected to their dying child but the high-tech environment and treatment implications make it difficult to stay physically close. This study explores in what sense physical aspects of end-of-life care in the PICU influence the parent-child relationship. DESIGN: Retrospective, qualitative interview study. SETTING: Level 3 PICU in Erasmus Medical Center in the Netherlands. PARTICIPANTS: Thirty-six parents of 20 children who had died in this unit 5 years previously. MEASUREMENTS AND MAIN RESULTS: Parents vividly remembered the damage done to the child's physical appearance, an inevitable consequence of medical treatment. They felt frustrated and hurt when they could not hold their child. Yet they felt comforted if facilitated to be physically close to the dying child, like lying with the child in one bed, holding the child in the hour of death, and washing the child after death. CONCLUSIONS: End-of-life treatment in the PICU presents both a barrier and an opportunity for parents to stay physically connected to their child. Parents' experiences suggest that aspects of physicality in medical settings deserve more attention. Better understanding of the significance of bodily aspects-other than pain and symptom management-improves end-of-life support and should be part of the humane approach to families.

Is pain assessment feasible as a performance indicator for Dutch nursing homes? A cross-sectional approach.

Quality of care gains transparency with the help of performance indicators. For Dutch nursing homes, the current set of performance indicators does not include pain. To determine the feasibility of pain assessment as performance indicator, information about pain prevalence and analgesic prescription in one nursing home was collected. Within the time span of 3 days, pain intensity was measured in 91% of the residents (201 out of 221), either with a numeric rating scale, a verbal rating scale, or the Rotterdam Elderly Pain Observation Scale (REPOS). Numerical rating was used for 72%, verbal rating for 3%, and REPOS observation for 25% of the residents. Pain was substantial in 65 residents (32%), who received the following analgesic prescription: World Health Organization (WHO) step 1, 45%; WHO step 3, 12%; and neuroactive agents, 5%. Thirty-eight percent of these residents were in pain and received no analgesics. Residents with substantial pain significantly more often received analgesics (p = .007). Results suggest that pain assessment is feasible in a nursing home and would stimulate staff attention to pain. Further investigation is necessary to find out if a pain algorithm is feasible and will lead to improved pain treatment.