La sedación paliativa, ¿es una forma encubierta de eutanasia? / Is palliative sedation a covert form of euthanasia?

No disponible

The rise, fall, and future direction of computer-assisted personalized sedation.

PURPOSE OF REVIEW: The first computer-assisted personalized sedation (CAPS) device was developed to address the growing demand for routine endoscopy procedures in the United States in the early 2000s. This review will describe the environment that gave rise to CAPS and summarize the design of that first device. It will then discuss the market forces that led to the fall of CAPS, with sales of the device ending 2 years after commercialization. RECENT FINDINGS: CAPS was initially conceived as a means to enable proceduralists to administer conscious sedation with propofol safely. In the nearly 20 years since its conception, the expectations of patients and proceduralists for endoscopy sedation, have evolved from conscious sedation to deep. Due to the increased risk inherent in deep sedation, future CAPS devices should be tools for anesthesiologists, not proceduralists. SUMMARY: Over $2 billion are spent annually for anesthesia services in routine endoscopic procedures for low-risk patients; a spending rate that is not sustainable. CAPS, in an 'anesthesia oversight' model similar to medical supervision, has a future as a cost-efficient means for anesthesia services to provide sedation in endoscopy and other nonoperating room venues. Anesthesiologists should work with medical device companies and payers to develop a CAPS 'anesthesia oversight' model.

Substantial Increase in Anesthesia Assistance for Outpatient Colonoscopy and Associated Cost Nationwide.

BACKGROUND AND AIMS: The use of anesthesia assistance (AA) for outpatient colonoscopy has been increasing over the past decade, raising concern over its effects on procedure safety, quality, and cost. We performed a nationwide claims-based study to determine regional, patient-related, and facility-related patterns of anesthesia use as well as cost implications of AA for payers. METHODS: We analyzed the Premier Perspective database to identify patients undergoing outpatient colonoscopy at over 600 acute-care hospitals throughout the United States from 2006 through 2015, with or without AA. We used multivariable analysis to identify factors associated with AA and cost. RESULTS: We identified 4,623,218 patients who underwent outpatient colonoscopy. Of these, 1,671,755 (36.2%) had AA; the proportion increased from 16.7% in 2006 to 58.1% in 2015 (P < .001). Factors associated with AA included younger age (odds ratios [ORs], compared to patients 18-39 years old: 0.94, 0.82, 0.77, 0.72, and 0.77 for age groups 40-49 years, 50-59 years, 60-69 years, 70-79 years, and ≥80 years, respectively); and female sex (OR, 0.96 for male patients compared to female patients; 95% CI, 0.95-0.96). Black patients were less likely to receive AA than white patients (OR, 0.81; 95% CI, 0.81-0.82), although this difference decreased with time. The median cost of outpatient colonoscopy with AA was higher among all payers, ranging from $182.43 (95% CI, $180.80-$184.06) higher for patients with commercial insurance to $232.62 (95% CI, $222.58-$242.67) higher for uninsured patients. CONCLUSIONS: In an analysis of a database of patients undergoing outpatient colonoscopy throughout the United States, we found that the use of AA during outpatient colonoscopy increased significantly from 2006 through 2015, associated with increased cost for all payers. The increase in anesthesia use mandates evaluation of its safety and effectiveness in colorectal cancer screening programs.

Continuous Deep Sedation Until Death-a Swiss Death Certificate Study.

BACKGROUND: In the last decade, the number of patients continuously deeply sedated until death increased up to fourfold. The reasons for this increase remain unclear. OBJECTIVE: To identify socio-demographic and clinical characteristics of sedated patients, and concurrent possibly life-shortening medical end-of-life decisions. DESIGN: Cross-sectional death certificate study in German-speaking Switzerland in 2001 and 2013. PARTICIPANTS: Non-sudden and expected deaths (2001: N = 2281, 2013: N = 2256) based on a random sample of death certificates and followed by an anonymous survey on end-of-life practices among attending physicians. MAIN MEASURES: Physicians' reported proportion of patients continuously deeply sedated until death, socio-demographic and clinical characteristics, and possibly life-shortening medical end-of life decisions. KEY RESULTS: In 2013, physicians sedated four times more patients continuously until death (6.7% in 2001; 24.5.5% in 2013). Four out of five sedated patients died in hospitals, outside specialized palliative care units, or in nursing homes. Sedation was more likely among patients younger than 65 (odds ratio 2.24, 95% CI 1.6 to 3.2) and those dying in specialized palliative care (OR 2.2, 95% CI 1.3 to 3.8) or in hospitals (1.7, 95% CI 1.3 to 2.3). Forgoing life-prolonging treatment with the explicit intention to hasten or not to postpone death combined with intensified alleviation of symptoms was very strongly associated with continuous deep sedation (OR 6.8, 95% CI 4.7 to 9.8). CONCLUSIONS: In Swiss clinical practice, continuously deeply sedated patients predominantly died outside specialized palliative care. The increasing trend over time appears to be related to changes in medical end-of-life practice rather than to patient's clinical characteristics.

Palliative sedation in Germany: factors and treatment practices associated with different sedation rate estimates in palliative and hospice care services.

BACKGROUND: Clinical practice of Palliative Sedation (PS) varies between institutions worldwide and sometimes includes problematic practices. Little available research points at different definitions and frameworks which may contribute to uncertainty of healthcare professionals in the application of PS. This analysis investigates what demographic factors and characteristics of treatment practices differ between institutions with high versus low sedation rates estimates in Palliative and Hospice Care in Germany. METHODS: Data sets from 221 organisations from a prior online survey were separated into two sub-groups divided by their estimated sedation rate A) lower/equal to 16% (n = 187; 90.8%) and B) higher than 16% (n = 19; 9.2%) for secondary analysis. Demographic factors and characteristics of PS treatment practices between the two groups were compared using T-Tests and Chi2/ Fisher Exact Tests and considered significant (*) at two-sided p < .05. RESULTS: Organisations in group B report that they discuss PS for a higher proportion of patients (38.5%/10.2%, p < 0.000**), rate agitation more often as an indications for PS (78.9%/ 53.5%, p = 0.050*), and are more likely to use Lorazepam (63.2%/ 37.4%, p = 0.047*), Promethazin (26.3%/ 9.6%, p = 0.044*), and (Es-)Ketamin (31.6%/ 12.8%, p = 0.039*) than representatives in group A. Both groups differ significantly in their allocation of three case scenarios to different types of PS. CONCLUSIONS: Both definitions and patterns of clinical practice between palliative and hospice care representatives show divergence, which may be influenced one by another. A comprehensive framework considering conceptual, clinical, ethical, and legal aspects of different definitions of PS could help to better distinguish between different types and nuances of PS.

Do sedation and analgesia contribute to long-term cognitive dysfunction in critical care survivors? / ¿Contribuye la sedación y la analgesia a la disfunción cognitiva en supervivientes de una enfermedad crítica?

Deep sedation during stay in the Intensive Care Unit (ICU) may have deleterious effects upon the clinical and cognitive outcomes of critically ill patients undergoing mechanical ventilation. Over the last decade a vast body of literature has been generated regarding different sedation strategies, with the aim of reducing the levels of sedation in critically ill patients. There has also been a growing interest in acute brain dysfunction, or delirium, in the ICU. However, the effect of sedation during ICU stay upon long-term cognitive deficits in ICU survivors remains unclear. Strategies for reducing sedation levels in the ICU do not seem to be associated with worse cognitive and psychological status among ICU survivors. Sedation strategy and management efforts therefore should seek to secure the best possible state in the mechanically ventilated patient and lower the prevalence of delirium, in order to prevent long-term cognitive alterations (AU)

La sedación profunda durante la estancia en una Unidad de Cuidados Intensivos (UCI) puede afectar negativamente al estado clínico y cognitivo de los pacientes críticos sometidos a ventilación mecánica. En la última década ha aparecido gran cantidad de literatura sobre diferentes estrategias dirigidas a reducir los niveles de sedación en el paciente crítico. Además, ha aumentado el interés sobre la disfunción cerebral aguda o delirium. Sin embargo, el efecto de la sedación sobre los déficits cognitivos a largo plazo continúa siendo poco conocido. Las estrategias centradas en reducir los niveles de sedación en UCI no parecen estar asociadas con un peor estado cognitivo y psicológico de los supervivientes. Por lo tanto, las estrategias de manejo de la sedación en UCI deberían focalizarse en mejorar el estado del paciente ventilado, así como en disminuir el delirium, con el fin de prevenir las alteraciones cognitivas a largo plazo (AU)

Continuous palliative sedation for patients with advanced cancer at a tertiary care cancer center.

BACKGROUND: Palliative sedation (PS) is an intervention to treat refractory symptoms and to relieve suffering at the end of life. Its prevalence and practice patterns vary widely worldwide. The aim of our study was to evaluate the frequency, clinical indications and outcomes of PS in advanced cancer patients admitted to our tertiary comprehensive cancer center. METHODS: We retrospectively studied the use of PS in advanced cancer patients who died between March 1st, 2012 and December 31st, 2014. PS was defined as the use of continuous infusion of midazolam or neuroleptics for refractory symptoms in the end of life. This study was approved by the Research Ethics Committee of our institution (project number 2481-15). RESULTS: During the study period, 552 cancer patients died at the institution and 374 met the inclusion criteria for this study. Main reason for exclusion was death in the Intensive Care Unit. Among all included patients, 54.2% (n = 203) received PS. Patients who received PS as compared to those not sedated were younger (67.8 vs. 76.4 years-old, p < 0.001) and more likely to have a diagnosis of lung cancer (23% vs. 14%, p = 0.028). The most common indications for sedation were dyspnea (55%) and delirium (19.7%) and the most common drugs used were midazolam (52.7%) or midazolam and a neuroleptic (39.4%). Median initial midazolam infusion rate was 0.75 mg/h (interquartile range - IQR - 0.6-1.5) and final rate was 1.5 mg/h (IQR 0.9-3.0). Patient survival (length of hospital stay from admission to death) of those who had PS was more than the double of those who did not (33.6 days vs 16 days, p < 0.001). The palliative care team was involved in the care of 12% (n = 25) of sedated patients. CONCLUSIONS: PS is a relatively common practice in the end-of-life of cancer patients at our hospital and it is not associated with shortening of hospital stay. Involvement of a dedicated palliative care team is strongly recommended if this procedure is being considered. Further research is needed to identify factors that may affect the frequency and outcomes associated with PS.

Sulodexida: un nuevo fármaco antitrombótico / Sulodexide: a new antithrombotic agent

No disponible

Anesthesia Service Use During Outpatient Gastroenterology Procedures Continued to Increase From 2010 to 2013 and Potentially Discretionary Spending Remained High.

OBJECTIVES: Previous studies have identified an increasing number of gastroenterology (GI) procedures using anesthesia services to provide sedation, with a majority of these services delivered to low-risk patients. The aim of this study was to update these trends with the most recent years of data. METHODS: We used Medicare and commercial claims data from 2010 to 2013 to identify GI procedures and anesthesia services based on CPT codes, which were linked together using patient identifiers and dates of service. We defined low-risk patients as those who were classified as ASA (American Society of Anesthesiologists) physical status class I or II. For those patients without an ASA class listed on the claim, we used a prediction algorithm to impute an ASA physical status. RESULTS: Over 6.6 million patients in our sample had a GI procedure between 2010 and 2013. GI procedures involving anesthesia service accounted for 33.7% in 2010 and 47.6% in 2013 in Medicare patients, and 38.3% in 2010 and 53.0% in 2013 in commercially insured patients. Overall, as more patients used anesthesia services, total anesthesia service use in low-risk patients increased 14%, from 27,191 to 33,181 per million Medicare enrollees. Similarly, we observed a nearly identical uptick in commercially insured patients from 15,871 to 22,247 per million, an increase of almost 15%. During 2010-2013, spending associated with anesthesia services in low-risk patients increased from US$3.14 million to US$3.45 million per million Medicare enrollees and from US$7.69 million to US$10.66 million per million commercially insured patients. CONCLUSIONS: During 2010 to 2013, anesthesia service use in GI procedures continued to increase and the proportion of these services rendered for low-risk patients remained high.

Anestesia en el síndrome Potocki-Lupski / Anesthesia in Potocki-Lupski syndrome

No disponible

On the Horizon: The Future of Procedural Sedation.

Sedation plays an integral part in endoscopy. By achieving patient comfort, it allows for a better examination and enhances patient satisfaction. Various medications have been used, propofol being the current favorite. With emphasis on patient safety and quality of endoscopy, various new medications in different combinations are being used to achieve adequate sedation and not escalate the cost of the procedure. With the advent of newer medications and newer modalities to administer these medications, there is need for more specialized training for the endoscopist to feel comfortable while using these medications.

Análisis de la sedación paliativa en pacientes mayores hospitalizados: efectividad de un protocolo / Analysis of palliative sedation in hospitalised elderly patients: Effectiveness of a protocol

Objetivo. Evaluar los cambios producidos en la práctica de la sedación paliativa en la agonía en pacientes mayores hospitalizados antes y después de la implantación de un protocolo hospitalario de sedación paliativa. Material y métodos. Estudio retrospectivo descriptivo tipo antes-después de pacientes mayores de 65 años que fueron tratados con midazolam y fallecieron durante la hospitalización en un hospital terciario en 2 trimestres, uno previo y otro posterior a la implantación del protocolo. Se excluyó a aquellos en quienes la indicación de midazolam no fue la sedación paliativa y los ingresados en cuidados intensivos. Se registraron las características de los pacientes y su servicio de ingreso, el consentimiento, la limitación del esfuerzo terapéutico y el proceso de sedación (síntoma refractario, dosis, evaluación y otros medicamentos). Se analizaron las asociaciones empleando la prueba de la chi al cuadrado y la t de Student. Resultados. Se incluyó a 143 pacientes sin diferencias relevantes entre ambos grupos en cuanto a características demográficas ni sintomatología. Se registró la indicación de no reanimación cardiopulmonar en aproximadamente el 70% de cada grupo y el consentimiento para la sedación en el 91% antes y el 84% después del protocolo. Las dosis de inducción y de mantenimiento de midazolam se adecuaban a las recomendaciones en el 1,31% de los pacientes antes y el 10,4% después del protocolo (p = 0,02) y las dosis de rescate en el 1,31 y el 11,9%, respectivamente (p = 0,01). La dosis de midazolam utilizada en pacientes en quienes se usó el protocolo fue significativamente menor que cuando no se empleó (9,86 mg vs. 18,67 mg, p < 0,001). La escala de Ramsay fue utilizada en el 8 y el 12% y el Equipo de Soporte Hospitalario de Cuidados Paliativos intervino en el 36 y el 16% de los casos, respectivamente (p = 0,008). Conclusiones. El uso de midazolam en la sedación paliativa en la agonía mejoró ligeramente tras la instauración de un protocolo hospitalario de sedación paliativa. El porcentaje de sedaciones adecuadas y el proceso general apenas mejoró con el protocolo. Es necesario continuar el proceso de formación y reevaluar la efectividad de estas medidas en el futuro (AU)

Objective. To measure changes in the practice of palliative sedation during agony in hospitalised elderly patients before and after the implementation of a palliative sedation protocol. Material and methods. A retrospective before-after study was performed in hospitalised patients over 65 years old who received midazolam during hospital admission and died in the hospital in two 3-month periods, before and after the implementation of the protocol. Non-sedative uses of midazolam and patients in intensive care were excluded. Patient and admission characteristics, the consent process, withdrawal of life-sustaining treatments, and the sedation process (refractory symptom treated, drug doses, assessment and use of other drugs) were recorded. Association was analysed using the Chi2 and Student t tests. Results. A total of 143 patients were included, with no significant differences between groups in demographic characteristics or symptoms. Do not resuscitate (DNR) orders were recorded in approximately 70% of the subjects of each group, and informed consent for sedation was recorded in 91% before vs. 84% after the protocol. Induction and maintenance doses of midazolam followed protocol recommendations in 1.3% before vs 10.4% after the protocol was implemented (P=.02) and adequate rescue doses were used in 1.3% vs 11.9% respectively (P=.01). Midazolam doses were significantly lower (9.86 mg vs 18.67 mg, P<.001) when the protocol was used than when it was not used. Ramsay sedation score was used in 8% vs. 12% and the Palliative Care Team was involved in 35.5% and 16.4% of the cases (P=.008) before and after the protocol, respectively. Conclusions. Use of midazolam slightly improved after the implementation of a hospital protocol on palliative sedation. The percentage of adequate sedations and the general process of sedation were mostly unchanged by the protocol. More education and further assessment is needed to gauge the effect of these measures in the future (AU)

Sedación en endoscopia en el año 2016: ¿es segura la sedación con propofol dirigida por el endoscopista en situaciones complejas? / Sedation for endoscopy in 2016. Is endoscopist-guided sedation safe in complex situations?

No disponible

Valoración de la tolerancia y seguridad de 5 modelos de sedación durante la realización de la ecobroncoscopia / Tolerance and Safety of 5 Models of Sedation During Endobronchial Ultrasound

Introducción: La sedación durante la ecobroncoscopia es importante debido a la duración prolongada de esta exploración. Evaluamos distintos modelos de sedación y sus complicaciones. Método: Se realizó un estudio multicéntrico, prospectivo y observacional en el que recogieron distintas variables en 307 pacientes con distintos modelos de sedación: a) midazolam en bolo; b)propofol en perfusión; c) midazolam en bolo y propofol en perfusión; d) propofol en perfusión y remifentanilo en perfusión, y e) midazolam en bolo y fentanilo en bolo. Finalizada la prueba, los pacientes contestaron una encuesta de satisfacción. Resultados: Los pacientes por modelo de sedación fueron: A 24, B 37, C 107, D 62 y E 77. Las puntuaciones de las sensaciones percibidas de recuerdo, dolor, tos, disnea y exploración prolongada (0,65 ± 1,11; 0,3 ± 0,73; 0,46 ± 0,9; 0,29 ± 0,73; 0,59 ± 0,96) fueron menores frente a miedo y nerviosismo antes de la exploración (1,26 ± 1,37 y 1,5 ± 1,41). Los valores elevados de indiferencia ante la repetición (1,49 ± 1,3) y de sensación agradable de la prueba (1,23 ± 1,17), junto con cifras bajas la sensación de angustia (0,49 ± 0,85) e incomodidad de la exploración (0,62 ± 1,1), muestran que los distintos modelos de sedación fueron bien tolerados. El 46,6% de los pacientes no encontraron ningún momento malo y el 89,6% se repetiría la prueba. Los modelos E y C fueron los que menos complicaciones presentaron (12,9 y 31,7%) y, en todos los casos, se resolvieron con medidas terapéuticas sencillas. Conclusiones: Los modelos de sedación analizados fueron bien tolerados y la mayoría aceptarían la repetición de la ecobroncoscopia. Las complicaciones fueron escasas y sencillas de resolver

Introduction: Sedation during endobronchial ultrasound (EBUS) is essential due to the long duration of this procedure. We evaluated different models of sedation and their complications. Method: A multicenter, prospective, observational study of 307 patients undergoing EBUS was conducted. Patients were sedated with: a) midazolam bolus; b) propofol infusion; c) midazolam bolus and propofol infusion; d) propofol infusion and remifentanil infusión, or e)midazolam bolus and fentanyl bolus, and clinical variables were collected. Patients were asked to complete a satisfaction survey following the test. Results: Patients per sedation model were: A 24, B 37, C 107, D 62 and E 77. Scores for perceived sensations of recall, pain, cough, dyspnea and prolonged examination (0.65 ± 1.11; 0 3 ± 0.73, 0.46 ± 0.9, 0.29 ± 0.73, and 0.59 ± 0.96, respectively) were lower compared to fear and nervousness before the examination (1.26 ± 1.37 and 1.5 ± 1.41, respectively). High levels of indifference to repeating the procedure (1.49±1.3) and a reported pleasant feeling during the test (1.23±1.17), with low levels of anxiety (0.49 ± 0.85) and discomfort (0.62 ± 1.1), show that different models of sedation were well tolerated. Almost half the patients (46.6%) did not report any "worst momento" during the procedure, and 89.6% were willing to undergo a repeat test. The E and C models presented fewest complications (12.9 and 31.7%, respectively), and all were resolved with simple therapeutic measures. Conclusions: The models of sedation evaluated were well tolerated and most patients were willing to undergo repeat EBUS. Complications were few and easily resolved

Early deep sedation is associated with decreased in-hospital and two-year follow-up survival.

INTRODUCTION: There is increasing evidence that deep sedation is detrimental to critically ill patients. The aim of this study was to examine effects of deep sedation during the early period after ICU admission on short- and long-term survival. METHODS: In this observational, matched-pair analysis, patients receiving mechanical ventilation that were admitted to ICUs of a tertiary university hospital in six consecutive years were grouped as either lightly or deeply sedated within the first 48 hours after ICU admission. The Richmond Agitation-Sedation Score (RASS) was used to assess sedation depth (light sedation: -2 to 0; deep: -3 or below). Multivariate Cox regression was conducted to investigate the impact of early deep sedation within the first 48 hours of admission on in-hospital and two-year follow-up survival. RESULTS: In total, 1,884 patients met inclusion criteria out of which 27.2% (n = 513) were deeply sedated. Deeply sedated patients had longer ventilation times, increased length of stay and higher rates of mortality. Early deep sedation was associated with a hazard ratio of 1.661 (95% CI: 1.074 to 2.567; P = 0.022) for in-hospital survival and 1.866 (95% CI: 1.351 to 2.576; P < 0.001) for two-year follow-up survival. CONCLUSIONS: Early deep sedation during the first 48 hours of intensive care treatment was associated with decreased in-hospital and two-year follow-up survival. Since early deep sedation is a modifiable risk factor, this data shows an urgent need for prospective clinical trials focusing on light sedation in the early phase of ICU treatment.

Early sedation and clinical outcomes of mechanically ventilated patients: a prospective multicenter cohort study.

INTRODUCTION: Sedation overuse is frequent and possibly associated with poor outcomes in the intensive care unit (ICU) patients. However, the association of early oversedation with clinical outcomes has not been thoroughly evaluated. The aim of this study was to assess the association of early sedation strategies with outcomes of critically ill adult patients under mechanical ventilation (MV). METHODS: A secondary analysis of a multicenter prospective cohort conducted in 45 Brazilian ICUs, including adult patients requiring ventilatory support and sedation in the first 48 hours of ICU admissions, was performed. Sedation depth was evaluated after 48 hours of MV. Multivariate analysis was used to identify variables associated with hospital mortality. RESULTS: A total of 322 patients were evaluated. Overall, ICU and hospital mortality rates were 30.4% and 38.8%, respectively. Deep sedation was observed in 113 patients (35.1%). Longer duration of ventilatory support was observed (7 (4 to 10) versus 5 (3 to 9) days, P = 0.041) and more tracheostomies were performed in the deep sedation group (38.9% versus 22%, P = 0.001) despite similar PaO2/FiO2 ratios and acute respiratory distress syndrome (ARDS) severity. In a multivariate analysis, age (Odds Ratio (OR) 1.02; 95% confidence interval (CI) 1.00 to 1.03), Charlson Comorbidity Index >2 (OR 2.06; 95% CI, 1.44 to 2.94), Simplified Acute Physiology Score 3 (SAPS 3) score (OR 1.02; CI 95%, 1.00 to 1.04), severe ARDS (OR 1.44; CI 95%, 1.09 to 1.91) and deep sedation (OR 2.36; CI 95%, 1.31 to 4.25) were independently associated with increased hospital mortality. CONCLUSIONS: Early deep sedation is associated with adverse outcomes and constitutes an independent predictor of hospital mortality in mechanically ventilated patients.

Sedación paliativa: situación actual y áreas de mejora / Palliative sedation: current situation and areas of improvement

Objetivo. Conocer la prevalencia, las características epidemiológicas y la calidad del registro relativos a la sedación paliativa (SP) en un hospital universitario. Establecer áreas de mejora. Material y método. nálisis descriptivo retrospectivo de los registros clínicos de pacientes oncológicos fallecidos en nuestro centro entre octubre y diciembre de 2010. Las variables analizadas incluyeron: datos epidemiológicos y ubicación de los pacientes, presencia de SP, síntoma que la motivó, grado de participación del paciente y la familia en la toma de decisiones, fármacos y dosis utilizados. El análisis cualitativo se desarrolló mediante 2 rondas Delphi en las que cada participante recibió los resultados globales del grupo. Fueron seleccionados aquellos ítems en los que existía un consenso completo o elevado. Resultados. Identificamos 53 defunciones por cáncer, el 51% recibieron SP. La edad media fue de 67 años, y el 64% fueron varones. El cáncer de pulmón supuso el 32%. Quince pacientes dependían de Oncología, 7 de Hematología y 4 del Servicio de Urgencias. En el 53,85% existió intervención de cuidados paliativos. Los síntomas que motivaron la SP fueron: disnea en 11 casos y delirium en 5. El tiempo medio ingreso-SP fue de 9,5 días (duración media, 1,2 días). La media de fármacos utilizados fue de 2,6, con empleo de morfina en el 100% y midazolam en el 98%. En 20 casos constatamos el registro de consentimiento para su inicio (100% verbal). Doce profesionales participaron en el análisis cualitativo fruto del cual consensuamos una plantilla para mejorar los registros de selección, toma de decisiones y evolución en los casos de SP. Conclusiones. La SP fue motivada por disnea o delirium y se aplicó en la mitad de los pacientes fallecidos. Las áreas de mejora detectadas afectaban al registro de los criterios de selección, al tipo de sedación y a la participación del paciente en la toma de decisiones. Por ello hemos consensuado un conjunto mínimo de datos que facilitará la recogida de información de los profesionales (AU)

Objective. To determine the prevalence, epidemiology and registration status of palliative sedation (PS) prevalence in a teaching hospital, and to establish areas for improvement. Methods. A descriptive retrospective analysis was designed using the records from cancer patients who died between October and December 2010. The variables included were: epidemiological, inpatient unit, refractory symptom, drugs and dosages, and patient participation in the decision making process. The qualitative analysis followed a Delphi process: each participant received the overall performance of the group referred to as mean, median, 25th and 75th percentile. Items selected were those in which there was total or a high consensus. Results. A total of 53 deaths were identified. Just over half (51.92%) received PS. The mean age was 67.46 and 64% were males. The most frequent diagnosis was lung cancer (32.14%). Fifteen of the patient patients were in the Oncology ward, 7 in Hematology, and 4 at the Emergency Department. The PC team took part in 14 of the sedations performed. A refractory symptom was identified in 20. There were 11 cases of dyspnea and 5 cases of delirium. The mean time between admission and PS was 9.5 days. The mean duration of PS was 1.2 days, with a mean number of 2.6 drugs used. There were 20 informed consents which were all verbal. The mean time from last chemotherapy to death was 82 days. For the Delphi process, 12 oncology or palliative care health professionals were included. A consensus was reached on the minimum data to be recorded in case of PS. This list includes: selection criteria, decision-making process and the sedation evolution. Conclusions. PS was applied in half of the patients who died due to dyspnea or delirium. Selection criteria were identified, as well as the type of PS and patient involvement in decision making process. A consensus was also reached on a minimum dataset that would help the clinician to record relevant information in PS (AU)