Are the effects of cognitive behavior therapy for severe fatigue in cancer survivors sustained up to 14 years after therapy?

PURPOSE: Cognitive behavior therapy (CBT) reduces cancer-related fatigue (CRF) in cancer survivors in the short term. We examined fatigue levels up to 14 years after CBT. METHODS: Eligible participants of two randomized controlled trials who had completed CBT for CRF and a post-treatment assessment were contacted (n = 81). Fatigue was assessed with the subscale "fatigue severity" of the Checklist Individual Strength (CIS-fatigue). The course of fatigue over time was examined with linear mixed model analyses. Fatigue levels of participants were compared to matched population controls at long-term follow-up. We tested with multiple regression analysis if fatigue at follow-up was predicted by the patients' fatigue level and fatigue-perpetuating factors directly after CBT (post-CBT). RESULTS: Seventy-eight persons completed a follow-up assessment (response rate = 96%, mean time after CBT = 10 years). The mean level of fatigue increased from 23.7 (SD = 11.1) at post-CBT to 34.4 (SD = 12.4) at follow-up (p < 0.001). Population controls (M = 23,9, SD = 11.4) reported lower fatigue levels than participants. Half of the patients (52%) who were recovered from severe fatigue at post-CBT (CIS-fatigue < 35) were still recovered at long-term follow-up. Patients with lower fatigue levels at post-CBT were less likely to show relapse. CONCLUSION: Despite initial improvement after CBT, levels of fatigue deteriorated over time. Half of the patients who were recovered from severe fatigue after CBT still scored within normal ranges of fatigue at long-term follow-up. IMPLICATIONS FOR CANCER SURVIVORS: It should be explored how to help patients with a relapse of severe fatigue following an initially successful CBT. They may profit from CBT again, or another evidence-based intervention for fatigue (like mindfulness or exercise therapy). Future research to gain insight into reasons for relapse is warranted.

Level of Discomfort Decreases After the Administration of Continuous Palliative Sedation: A Prospective Multicenter Study in Hospices and Palliative Care Units.

CONTEXT: A gold standard or validated tool for monitoring the level of discomfort during continuous palliative sedation (CPS) is lacking. Therefore, little is known about the course of discomfort in sedated patients, the efficacy of CPS, and the determinants of discomfort during CPS. OBJECTIVES: To identify the course of discomfort in patients receiving CPS. METHODS: A prospective observational multicenter study in nine hospices and palliative care units was performed. The Discomfort Scale-Dementia of Alzheimer Type (DS-DAT) was independently assessed for monitoring of patient discomfort during CPS. The DS-DAT scores range from 0 (no observed discomfort) to a maximum of 27 (high level of observed discomfort). Using a mixed model, the mean group score of discomfort between four predefined time frames of CPS was compared, correcting for confounding patient characteristics. RESULTS: A total of 130 patients were sedated, and the DS-DAT was completed in 106 patients at least once. The median duration of the sedation in these 106 patients was 25.5 hours (range 2-161). The mean score of the DS-DAT in the phase before sedation was 12.16 (95% CI 9.83-14.50) and decreased significantly to 8.06 (95% CI 5.53-10.58) in the titration phase of sedation. The mean score of the DS-DAT in the final phase of sedation was 7.42 (95% CI 4.90-9.94). CONCLUSION: This study shows that CPS is associated with a decrease in the level of discomfort within an acceptable time frame, although in some sedated patients higher levels of discomfort in the last hours of life occurred. Although the DS-DAT seems to be of value for monitoring the level of discomfort during CPS, the results of this study should be interpreted within the constraints of the limitations, and further research on the psychometric properties of this tool is needed before the DS-DAT can be used in clinical practice.

Patient-Related Determinants of the Administration of Continuous Palliative Sedation in Hospices and Palliative Care Units: A Prospective, Multicenter, Observational Study.

CONTEXT: Knowledge of determinants that are associated with the administration of continuous palliative sedation (CPS) helps physicians identify patients who are at risk of developing refractory symptoms, thereby enabling proactive care planning. OBJECTIVES: This study aims to explore which patient-related factors at admission are associated with receiving CPS later in the terminal phase of life. METHODS: A prospective multicenter observational study was performed in six Dutch hospices and three nursing home-based palliative care units. The association between patient-related variables at admission (age, gender, diagnosis, use of opioids or psycholeptics, number of medications, Karnofsky Performance Status scale score, Edmonton Symptom Assessment System distress score, and Glasgow Coma Scale score) and the administration of CPS at the end of life was analyzed. RESULTS: A total of 467 patients died during the study period, of whom 130 received CPS. In univariate analysis, statistically significant differences were noted between the sedated and nonsedated patients with respect to younger age (P = 0.009), malignancy as a diagnosis (P = 0.05), higher Karnofsky Performance Status score (P = 0.03), the use of opioids (P < 0.001), the use of psycholeptics (P = 0.003), and higher Edmonton Symptom Assessment System distress score (P = 0.05). Multivariate logistic regression analysis showed that only the use of opioids at admission (odds ratio 1.90; 95% confidence interval 1.18-3.05) was significantly associated with the administration of CPS. CONCLUSION: Physicians should be aware that patients who use opioids at admission have an increased risk for the administration of CPS at the end of life. In this group of patients, a comprehensive personalized care plan starting at admission is mandatory to try to prevent the development of refractory symptoms. Further research is recommended, to identify other determinants of the administration of CPS and to investigate which early interventions will be effective to prevent the need for CPS in patients at high risk.

The Practice of Continuous Palliative Sedation in Long-Term Care for Frail Patients with Existential Suffering.

Some guidelines and recommendations identify existential suffering as a potential refractory symptom for which continuous palliative sedation (CPS) can be administered under certain conditions. However, there has been little research on the characteristics of patients with existential suffering treated with CPS and the degree to which the preconditions are fulfilled. The aim of this study was to provide insight into this specific indication for CPS. Questionnaires were sent to nursing home physicians in The Netherlands, who described 314 patients. Existential suffering was a refractory symptom in 83 of the patients. For most of the patients with refractory existential suffering, other refractory symptoms were also reported, and life expectancy was seven days or less; informed consent for initiating CPS had been obtained in all cases. Consultation and intermittent sedation before the start of CPS were far less frequently reported than one would expect based on the guidelines. Multivariate analysis showed that being male, having previously requested euthanasia, having a nervous system disease, or having an other diagnosis were positively correlated with the administration of CPS for existential suffering. We conclude that more attention should be paid to the suggested preconditions and to the presence of existential suffering in male patients or patients with a nervous system disease.

Determinants of the administration of continuous palliative sedation: a systematic review.

BACKGROUND: Little is known about the determining factors related to the administration of continuous palliative sedation. Knowledge of these determinants may assist physicians in identifying patients who are at high risk of developing refractory symptoms, enable physicians to inform patients, and optimize close monitoring. OBJECTIVE: The aim of this systematic review was to identify determinants of the administration of continuous palliative sedation. DESIGN: A systematic review of PubMed, EMBASE, and CINAHL was performed to identify English, Dutch, and German language papers published from January 1990 through April 2011. Inclusion was based on the following criteria: patient-based research on continuous palliative sedation, studies investigating determinants of palliative sedation and/or comparison between sedated and nonsedated cohorts, and studies using multivariate analyses and of fair to good or good methodological quality. RESULTS: In total, eight papers were reviewed. The following nine factors were found to be associated with the administration of continuous palliative sedation: younger age, male sex, having cancer, feelings of hopelessness, dying in a hospital, living in a Dutch speaking community setting, very nonreligious or extremely nonreligious physicians, physicians working in "other hospital" specialties, and physicians in favor of assisted death. CONCLUSIONS: Given the variation in study designs and the limitations of the included studies, the outcomes should be interpreted carefully. Further research is needed, particularly regarding factors that can be influenced and that may alter the course of a patient's symptoms and the patient's eventual need for palliative sedation.

The practice of continuous palliative sedation in elderly patients: a nationwide explorative study among Dutch nursing home physicians.

OBJECTIVES: To study the practice of continuous palliative sedation (CPS) by Dutch nursing home physicians in 2007. DESIGN: A structured retrospective questionnaire. SETTING: Nationwide nursing home physician study in the Netherlands. PARTICIPANTS: One thousand two hundred fifty-four nursing home physicians received a questionnaire concerning their last case of CPS in 2007; 54% (n=675) responded. MEASUREMENTS: Characteristics of CPS and requests for euthanasia were measured. RESULTS: Three hundred sixteen patients were described. The majority had cancer or dementia. The most-reported refractory symptoms were pain (52%), anxiety (44%), exhaustion (44%), dyspnea (40%), delirium (24%), loss of dignity (18%), and existential distress (16%). In 98% of cases, CPS was aimed at symptom relief. Of patients with cancer, 17% had previously requested euthanasia. The mean starting dose of midazolam was 31 mg every 24 hours (range 0-240 mg/24 h), and the mean end dose was 48 mg every 24 hours (range 0-480 mg/24 h). CONCLUSION: In addition to physical symptoms, anxiety, exhaustion, loss of dignity, and existential distress are often mentioned as refractory symptoms in the decision to start CPS by nursing home physicians. Furthermore, close to one in five patients with cancer had made a previous request for euthanasia. The dosage range of midazolam in this study fits the recommendations of the Dutch national guideline on palliative sedation, although international studies show smaller dosage ranges. Finally, prospective research about the acceptability and assessment of nonphysical symptoms as indications for CPS is recommended.

When cancer symptoms cannot be controlled: the role of palliative sedation.

PURPOSE OF REVIEW: Palliative sedation, the intentional lowering of consciousness for refractory and unbearable distress, has been much discussed during the last decade. In recent years, much research has been published about this subject that will be discussed in this review. The review concentrates on: a brief overview of the main developments during the last decade, an exploration of current debate regarding ethical dilemmas, the development of clinical guidelines, and the application of palliative sedation. RECENT FINDINGS: Main findings are that palliative sedation is mostly described in retrospective studies and that the terminology palliative sedation in now common in the majority of the studies. In addition, life-shortening effects for palliative sedation are scarcely reported, although not absent. A number of guidelines have been developed and published, although systematic implementation needs more attention. Consequently, palliative sedation has become more clearly positioned as a medical treatment, to be distinguished from active life shortening. SUMMARY: Caregivers should apply palliative sedation proportionally, guided by the symptoms of the patient without striving for deep coma and without motives for life shortening. Clinical and multidisciplinary assessment of refractory symptoms is recommended as is patient monitoring during sedation. Future research should concentrate on proportional sedation rather than continuous deep sedation exclusively, preferably in a prospective design.

Changed patterns in Dutch palliative sedation practices after the introduction of a national guideline.

BACKGROUND: Continuous sedation, contrary to euthanasia, has been increasingly accepted among medical professionals worldwide. In the Netherlands, a national guideline for continuous palliative sedation has been developed to contribute to the quality of palliative sedation practice. The present follow-up study investigated whether the practice of continuous sedation has changed after the introduction of this guideline. METHODS: This study compared the practice of continuous sedation before and after the introduction of the guideline on December 7, 2005. A baseline measurement was performed between February 1, 2003, and May 1, 2005, with an enrollment of 492 physicians (medical specialists, general practitioners, and nursing home physicians). From January 1 to June 30, 2007, after the introduction of a national guideline for palliative sedation, a follow-up study was performed with the respondents of the baseline study. Physicians were asked to report on their last case of deep and continuous sedation in the past 12 months. RESULTS: This study reports the results of the follow-up study and compares them to the results of the baseline study. The response rate was 69.3% (n = 341). Of these physicians, 160 reported a last case of continuous sedation in both the baseline and the follow-up studies. Physicians reported a significant increase in patient involvement in decision making, from 72.3% to 82.2%. Pain remained the most often reported reason to start sedation, whereas exhaustion as a reason for sedation increased. The use of benzodiazepines increased from 69.9% to 90.4%. In the first and second measurements, symptom-directed treatment during sedation was applied in 56% to 58% of the cases. In the second period, there was more often an explicit decision to not give artificial hydration during sedation (78.8% vs 56.3%). Of the physicians, 34.2% were convinced that sedation shortened the life of the patient because of dehydration. CONCLUSIONS: After the introduction of the guideline, physicians reported that changes in palliative sedation practice conform to the recommendations of this guideline. For example, benzodiazepines were used for sedation more frequently than before and patient involvement in the decision-making process improved. Possible effects of dehydration and the large variation in symptom-directed treatment during sedation deserve careful attention.

Improving prescription in palliative sedation: compliance with dutch guidelines.

BACKGROUND: Two guidelines addressing palliative sedation have been published in the Netherlands in 2002 and 2003. The objective of the present study is to determine adherence to the guidelines for palliative sedation with regard to prescription. The study is restricted to the practice of continuous deep palliative sedation. METHODS: A structured retrospective questionnaire was administered to 1464 physicians concerning their last case of deep sedation during the past 12 months. Physicians included Dutch hospital specialists, general practitioners, and nursing home physicians. RESULTS: The response rate was 36%. A total of 43% (95% confidence interval [CI], 37%-49%) of the responding physicians did not adhere to the guidelines. Sources of deviation were the use of basic medication other than a benzodiazepine (30%), which mostly involved morphine, and omissions in adjuvant medication (13%). Nonsignificant positive association was found for consultation of a palliative care expert (odds ratio [OR], 3.86; 95% CI, 0.92-8.87). Significant positive association was found for the physician being a palliative care expert himself or herself (OR, 4.42; 95% CI, 1.42-13.75) and the use of guidelines (OR, 1.74; 95% CI, 1.02-2.98). Treatment of pain symptoms (OR, 2.21; 95% CI, 1.28-3.82), anxiety (OR, 2.32; 95% CI, 1.33-4.06), vomiting (OR, 6.52; 95% CI, 1.08-39.50), and loss of dignity (OR, 3.93; 95% CI, 1.80-8.58) also correlated positively. Treatment of delirium correlated negatively with adherence to the guidelines (OR, 0.22; 95% CI,0.11-0.44). CONCLUSIONS: The rate of 43% noncompliance to the guidelines was mostly owing to the omission of continued antipsychotic treatment for delirium and the use of morphine as the single therapy for the purpose of deep sedation. Future efforts, like better use and knowledge of the guidelines and a larger involvement of consultation teams, should increase adherence to the guidelines.