The Use of Humor in Palliative Care: A Systematic Literature Review.

BACKGROUND: Humor has its own place in the context of medicine. Nevertheless, its acceptance by terminal stage patients and health-care professionals has not been studied in depth and is not free from controversy. OBJECTIVES: To understand the significance, appropriateness, and pertinence of the use of humor in palliative care and to analyze its applicability. DESIGN: A narrative systematic review was undertaken and included in PROSPERO. DATA SOURCES: Online searches were carried out on PUBMED, PSYCINFO, EBSCO (CINHAL), EMBASE, SCIELO, SCOPUS, TESEO, WEB of SCIENCE, and COCHRANE between their launch date and December 31, 2015, complemented with manual searches with queries to experts. A total of 156 studies were identified, which were then filtered in pairs by means of an established hierarchy, selecting studies that discussed the use of humor specifically in palliative care from all perspectives and designs, and finally published in Spanish, English, French, or Portuguese. Critical reading of all the selected studies took place, with no exclusions due to quality evaluation. RESULTS: Thirty-four studies were included. Five main topics were identified: (1) definition of humor, (2) use and functions of humor in palliative care, (3) how to use humor, (4) when not to use humor, and (5) humor before and after the diagnosis of terminal illness. CONCLUSIONS: Humor plays an unquestionable role in palliative care, but its use needs training and appropriate use.

A randomized crossover clinical trial to evaluate the efficacy of oral transmucosal fentanyl citrate in the treatment of dyspnea on exertion in patients with advanced cancer.

BACKGROUND: Morphine is the only opioid which has been clearly demonstrated as effective in the treatment of dyspnea. The role of other opioids has not been sufficiently substantiated. OBJECTIVE: To evaluate the efficacy of oral transmucosal fentanyl citrate (OTFC) in the treatment of dyspnea on exertion in patients with advanced cancer. DESIGN: This is a randomized, double-blind crossover clinical trial to evaluate the efficacy of OTFC in dyspnea on exertion after the completion of a 6-minute walk test (6MWT). All patients were attended in 2011 by the Palliative Care Supportive Team from Badajoz. In visit 1, patients were randomly assigned to 1 of the 2 treatment groups. In visit 2, the patients who had been receiving the investigational product were given placebos and vice versa. RESULTS: Thirteen patients were recruited (26 6MWT), with a mean age of 65 years. Of the patients, 11 (76%)were males and lung cancer was the most frequently represented etiology. The patients were classified into 3e categories: better response in the first period, the same response in both the periods, and better response in the second period. No differences between the treatments were demonstrated (P: 1). There were no differences in changes in oxygen saturation (P: .7541) nor in the distance walked in the different sequences (P: .6550). No significant differences were found in relation to the Edmonton Symptom Assessment System, either before or after the 6MWT (P: .1234). No secondary effects associated with the medication were observed. CONCLUSION: It could not be demonstrated that the OTFC improved exertion dyspnea in patients with advanced cancer. A placebo effect was observed in all the patients.