scholarly journals A Nationwide Survey on Palliative Sedation for Terminally Ill Cancer Patients By the Austrian Palliative Care (Aupac) Study Group

2014 ◽  
Vol 25 ◽  
pp. iv474
Author(s):  
S. Schur ◽  
E.K. Masel ◽  
M. Mayrhofer ◽  
H.H. Watzke
2021 ◽  
Author(s):  
Kengo Imai ◽  
Tatsuya Morita ◽  
Naosuke Yokomichi ◽  
Masanori Mori ◽  
Akemi Shirado Naito ◽  
...  

Abstract BackgroundPalliative sedation is sometimes needed for refractory symptoms, and the Richmond Agitation-Sedation Scale (RASS) is one of the key measures. The primary aim of this study was to explore the association between the RASS score and degree of distress quantified by other measures: Support Team Assessment Schedule, item 2 (STAS), Discomfort Scale for Dementia of Alzheimer Type (Discomfort Scale), and Non-communicative Patient’s Pain Assessment Instrument (NOPPAIN), as well as a communication capacity measured by the Communication Capacity Scale, item 4 (CCS).MethodsThis was a prospective observational study on terminally ill cancer patients who received continuous infusion of midazolam to relieve refractory symptoms in a palliative care unit of a designated cancer hospital. Primarily responsible palliative care physicians rated RASS, Discomfort Scale, NOPPAIN, and CCS just before starting infusion, and 1 hour, 4 hours, 24 hours, and 48 hours after midazolam infusion, and ward nurses rated STAS at the same time. Since the ward nurses regularly evaluated STAS to titrate midazolam during palliative sedation as routine work, we regarded STAS rated by ward nurses as a standard of distress measure.ResultsA total of 249 assessments were performed for 55 patients. The RASS score was moderately to highly associated with symptom intensity measured by STAS, discomfort measured by the Discomfort Scale, and pain measured by NOPPAIN (r = 0.63 to 0.73). On the other hand, communication capacity measured by CCS is not parallel with the RASS score, and demonstrated a valley-shape. In 82 assessments with RASS of -1 to -3, 11 patients (13%) were regarded as having physical symptoms of STAS of 2 or more.ConclusionsRASS can roughly estimate physical distress in patients receiving palliative sedation, but a measure to more precisely quantify the symptom experience is needed.


2014 ◽  
Vol 13 (2) ◽  
pp. 295-303 ◽  
Author(s):  
Ernest Güell ◽  
Adelaida Ramos ◽  
Tania Zertuche ◽  
Antonio Pascual

AbstractObjective:We aimed to address the prevalence of desire-to-die statements (DDSs) among terminally ill cancer patients in an acute palliative care unit. We also intended to compare the underlying differences between those patients who make desire-to-die comments (DDCs) and those who make desire-for-euthanasia comments (EUCs).Method:We conducted a one-year cross-sectional prospective study in all patients receiving palliative care who had made a DDC or EUC. At inclusion, we evaluated symptom intensity, anxiety and depression, and conducted a semistructured interview regarding the reasons for these comments.Results:Of the 701 patients attended to during the study period, 69 (9.8%; IC95% 7.7–12.3) made a DDS: 51 (7.3%) a DDC, and 18 (2.5%) an EUC. Using Edmonton Symptom Assessment Scale (ESAS) DDC group showed higher percentage of moderate-severe symptoms (ESAS > 4) for well-being (91 vs. 25%; p = 0.001), depression (67 vs. 25%; p = 0.055), and anxiety (52 vs. 13%; p = 0.060) than EUC group. EUC patients also considered themselves less spiritual (44 vs. 84%; p = 0.034). The single most common reason for a DDS was pain or physical suffering, though most of the reasons given were nonphysical.Significance of results:Almost 10% of the population receiving specific oncological palliative care made a DDC (7.3%) or EUC (2.5%). The worst well-being score was lower in the EUC group. The reasons for both a DDC and EUC were mainly nonphysical. We find that emotional and spiritual issues should be identified and effectively addressed when responding to a DDS in terminally ill cancer patients.


Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document