Complexity in non-pharmacological caregiving activities at the end of life: an international qualitative study.

BACKGROUND: In late-stage palliative cancer care, relief of distress and optimized well-being become primary treatment goals. Great strides have been made in improving and researching pharmacological treatments for symptom relief; however, little systematic knowledge exists about the range of non-pharmacological caregiving activities (NPCAs) staff use in the last days of a patient's life. METHODS AND FINDINGS: Within a European Commission Seventh Framework Programme project to optimize research and clinical care in the last days of life for patients with cancer, OPCARE9, we used a free-listing technique to identify the variety of NPCAs performed in the last days of life. Palliative care staff at 16 units in nine countries listed in detail NPCAs they performed over several weeks. In total, 914 statements were analyzed in relation to (a) the character of the statement and (b) the recipient of the NPCA. A substantial portion of NPCAs addressed bodily care and contact with patients and family members, with refraining from bodily care also described as a purposeful caregiving activity. Several forms for communication were described; information and advice was at one end of a continuum, and communicating through nonverbal presence and bodily contact at the other. Rituals surrounding death and dying included not only spiritual/religious issues, but also more subtle existential, legal, and professional rituals. An unexpected and hitherto under-researched area of focus was on creating an aesthetic, safe, and pleasing environment, both at home and in institutional care settings. CONCLUSIONS: Based on these data, we argue that palliative care in the last days of life is multifaceted, with physical, psychological, social, spiritual, and existential care interwoven in caregiving activities. Providing for fundamental human needs close to death appears complex and sophisticated; it is necessary to better distinguish nuances in such caregiving to acknowledge, respect, and further develop end-of-life care.

Issues and needs in end-of-life decision making: an international modified Delphi study.

BACKGROUND: end-of-life decision making is an important aspect of end-of-life care that can have a significant impact on the process of dying and patients' comfort in the last days of life. AIM: the aim of our study was to identify issues and considerations in end-of-life decision making, and needs for more evidence among palliative care experts, across countries and professions. PARTICIPANTS: 90 palliative care experts from nine countries participated in a modified Delphi study. Participants were asked to identify important issues and considerations in end-of-life decision making and to rate the need for more evidence. RESULTS: experts mentioned 219 issues in end-of-life decision making related to the medical domain, 122 issues related to the patient wishes and 92 related to relatives' wishes, regardless of profession or country (p > 0.05). In accordance, more than 90% of the experts rated the comfort and wishes of the patient and the potential futility of treatment as important considerations in end-of-life decision making, although some variation was present. When asked about issues that are in need of more evidence, 87% mentioned appropriate indications for using sedatives and effects of artificial hydration at the end of life. A total of 83% mentioned adequate communication approaches. CONCLUSIONS: palliative care experts from different professions in different countries encounter similar issues in end-of-life decision making. Adequate communication about these issues is universally experienced as a challenge, which might benefit from increased knowledge. This shared experience enables and emphasizes the need for more international research.

Four essential drugs needed for quality care of the dying: a Delphi-study based international expert consensus opinion.

PURPOSE: The majority of dying patients do not have access to necessary drugs to alleviate their most common symptoms, despite evidence of drug efficacy. Our aim was to explore the degree of consensus about appropriate pharmacological treatment for common symptoms in the last days of life for patients with cancer, among physicians working in specialist palliative care. MATERIAL AND METHODS: Within OPCARE9, a European Union seventh framework project aiming to optimize end-of-life cancer care, we conducted a Delphi survey among 135 palliative care clinicians in nine countries. Physicians were initially asked about first and second choice of drugs to alleviate anxiety, dyspnea, nausea and vomiting, pain, respiratory tract secretions (RTS), as well as terminal restlessness. RESULTS: Based on a list of 35 drugs mentioned at least twice in the first round (n=93), a second Delphi round was performed to determine ≤ 5 essential drugs for symptom alleviation in the last 48 hours of life that should be available even outside specialist palliative care. There was ≥ 80% consensus among the participants (n=90) regarding morphine, midazolam, and haloperidol as essential drugs. For RTS, there was consensus about use of an antimuscarinic drug, with 9%-27% of the physicians each choosing one of four different drugs. CONCLUSION: Based on this consensus opinion and other literature, we suggest four drugs that should be made available in all settings caring for dying patients with cancer, to decrease the gap between knowledge and practice: morphine (i.e., an opioid), midazolam (a benzodiazepine), haloperidol (a neuroleptic), and an antimuscarinic.

Information of imminent death or not: does it make a difference?

PURPOSE: This study examines whether end-of-life care for patients with cancer who were informed about imminent death differs from care for those patients with cancer who were not informed. PATIENTS AND METHODS: This study included all cancer deaths between 2006 and 2008 for which the patient did not lose his or her decision-making capacities until hours or days before death (N=13,818). These patients were taken from a national quality register for end-of-life care. The majority of the patients-91% (n=12,609) -had been given information about imminent death; 9% (n=1,209) had not been informed. Because of the difference in sample size, a matching procedure was performed to minimize bias. This resulted in a comparison of 1,191 informed and 1,191 uniformed patients. Nonparametric methods were used for statistical analyses. RESULTS: Informed patients significantly more often had parenteral drugs prescribed as needed (ie, PRN), had his or her family informed, died in his or her preferred place, and had family who were offered bereavement support. There was no difference in symptom control (ie, pain, anxiety, confusion, nausea, and respiratory tract secretions) between the groups. CONCLUSION: Providing information of imminent death to a patient with cancer at the end of life does not seem to increase pain or anxiety, but it does seem to be associated with improved care and to increase the likelihood of fulfilling the principles of a good death.