Refractory psycho-existential distress and continuous deep sedation until death in palliative care: The French perspective.

OBJECTIVE: Since February 2016, French Claeys-Leonetti law has recognized patients' right to confront incurable diseases with short-term prognosis and refractory physical or psychological or existential symptoms by requesting continuous deep sedation until death (CDSUD). Determining when psychological or existential distress is refractory and unbearable remains complex and controversial.This review provides a comprehensive thought on CDSUD for advanced incurable patients with refractory psychological and/or existential distress in palliative care settings. It offers guidance on psychiatric or psychological diagnosis for explaining patients' requests for CDSUD. METHOD: A narrative literature review (2000-2019) was conducted on the MedLine search about the use of palliative sedation in cases of refractory psychological and/or existential distress. RESULTS: (1) Definitions of "refractory symptom," "refractory psychological distress," and "refractory existential distress" are inconsistent; (2) alternative diagnoses might obscure or be obscured by psycho-existential distress; and (3) criteria on meanings, reasons for requests, decision-making processes, and functions are evolving in practice. SIGNIFICANCE OF RESULTS: Before implementing CDSUD, palliative healthcare professionals should seek input from psycho-oncologists in palliative care. Mental health professionals should analyze and assess the reasons for psychological and/or existential distress, consider the intentionality processes of requests, and explore alternative diagnoses, such as depressive or adjustment disorders, demoralization syndrome, desire to hasten death, and desire for euthanasia. Therapeutic responses (e.g., pharmacological and psychotherapeutic) should be implemented before deciding that psycho-existential distress is refractory.

Moral identity and palliative sedation: A systematic review of normative nursing literature.

BACKGROUND: In the last two decades, nursing authors have published ethical analyses of palliative sedation-an end-of-life care practice that also receives significant attention in the broader medical and bioethics literature. This nursing literature is important, because it contributes to disciplinary understandings about nursing values and responsibilities in end-of-life care. RESEARCH AIM: The purpose of this project is to review existing nursing ethics literature about palliative sedation, and to analyze how nurses' moral identities are portrayed within this literature. RESEARCH DESIGN: We reviewed discussion papers, written by nurses about the ethics of palliative sedation, which were cited in MEDLINE, CINAHL, Nursing and Allied Health, or Philosopher's Index (search date March 2018). Twenty-one papers met selection criteria. We performed a comprehensive review and analysis (using the Qualitative Analysis Guide of Leuven), of the values, responsibilities, and relationships reflected in authors' portrayal of the nursing role. FINDINGS: Two different tones are apparent in the extant nursing ethics literature. One is educational, while the other is critically reflective. Irrespective of tone, all authors agree on the alleviation of suffering as a fundamental nursing responsibility. However, they differ in their analysis of this responsibility in relation to other values in end-of-life care, including those that depend on consciousness. Finally, authors emphasize the importance of subjective and experience-based understandings of palliative sedation, which they argue as depending on nurses' proximity to patients and families in end-of-life care. DISCUSSION AND CONCLUSION: Based on our findings, we develop three recommendations for future writing by nurses about palliative sedation. These relate to the responsibility of recognizing how consciousness might matter in (some) peoples' moral experiences of death and dying, to the importance of moral reflectiveness in nursing practice, and to the value of a relational approach in conceptualizing the nursing ethics of palliative sedation.

Analgesia, sedation, and delirium in pediatric surgical critical care.

The alleviation of discomfort and distress is an essential component of the management of critically ill surgical patients. Pain and anxiety have multifocal etiologies that may be related to an underlying disease or surgical procedure, ongoing medical therapy, invasive monitors, an unfamiliar, complex and chaotic environment, as well as fear. Pharmacologic and non-pharmacologic therapies have complex risk benefit profiles. A fundamental understanding of analgesia, sedation, and delirium is essential for optimizing important outcomes in critically ill pediatric surgical patients. There has been a recent emphasis on goal directed, evidence based, and patient-centered management of the physical and psychological needs of these children. The purpose of this article is to review and summarize recent advances and describe current practice of these important subjects in the pediatric surgical intensive care environment.

Palliative sedation: clinical context and ethical questions.

Practitioners of palliative medicine frequently encounter patients suffering distress caused by uncontrolled pain or other symptoms. To relieve such distress, palliative medicine clinicians often use measures that result in sedation of the patient. Often such sedation is experienced as a loss by patients and their family members, but sometimes such sedation is sought as the desired outcome. Peace is wanted. Comfort is needed. Sedation appears to bring both. Yet to be sedated is to be cut off existentially from human experience, to be made incapable of engaging self-consciously in any human action. To that extent, it seems that to lose consciousness is to lose something of real value. In this paper, I describe how sedation and the question of intentionally bringing about sedation arise in the care of patients with advanced illness, and I propose heuristics to guide physicians, including Christian physicians, who seek to relieve suffering without contradicting their profession to heal.

Comfort in palliative sedation (Compas): a transdisciplinary mixed method study protocol for linking objective assessments to subjective experiences.

BACKGROUND: In case of untreatable suffering at the end of life, palliative sedation may be chosen to assure comfort by reducing the patient's level of consciousness. An important question here is whether such sedated patients are completely free of pain. Because these patients cannot communicate anymore, caregivers have to rely on observation to assess the patient's comfort. Recently however, more sophisticated techniques from the neurosciences have shown that sometimes consciousness and pain are undetectable with these traditional behavioral methods. The aim of this study is to better understand how unconscious palliative sedated patients experience the last days of their life and to find out if they are really free of pain. METHODS: In this study we will observe 40 patients starting with initiation of palliative sedation until death. Assessment of comfort based on behavioral observations will be related with the results from a NeuroSense monitor, an EEG-based monitor used for evaluation of the adequacy of anesthesia and sedation in the operating room and an ECG-based Analgesia Nociception Index (ANI) monitor, which informs about comfort or discomfort condition, based on the parasympathetic tone. An innovative and challenging aspect of this study is its qualitative approach; "objective" and "subjective" data will be linked to achieve a holistic understanding of the study topic. The following data will be collected: assessment of pain/comfort by the patients themselves (if possible) by scoring a Visual Analogue Scale (VAS); brain function monitoring; monitoring of parasympathetic tone; caregivers' assessment (pain, awareness, communication); relatives' perception of the quality of the dying process; assessment by 2 trained investigators using observational scales; video and audio registration. DISCUSSION: Measuring pain and awareness in non-communicative dying patients is both technically and ethically challenging. ANI and EEG have shown to be promising technologies to detect pain that otherwise cannot be detected with the "traditional" methods. Although these technologies have the potential to provide objective quantifiable indicators for distress and awareness in non-communicative patients, strikingly they have not yet been used to check whether the current assessments for non-communicative patients are reliable. TRIAL REGISTRATION: The study is registered on ClinicalTrials.gov (Identifier: NCT03273244 ; registration date: 7.9.2017).

Euthanasia and palliative sedation in Belgium.

The aim of this article is to use data from Belgium to analyse distinctions between palliative sedation and euthanasia. There is a need to reduce confusion and improve communication related to patient management at the end of life specifically regarding the rapidly expanding area of patient care that incorporates a spectrum of nuanced yet overlapping terms such as palliative care, sedation, palliative sedation, continued sedation, continued sedation until death, terminal sedation, voluntary euthanasia and involuntary euthanasia. Some physicians and nurses mistakenly think that relieving suffering at the end of life by heavily sedating patients is a form of euthanasia, when indeed it is merely responding to the ordinary and proportionate needs of the patient. Concerns are raised about abuse in the form of deliberate involuntary euthanasia, obfuscation and disregard for the processes sustaining the management of refractory suffering at the end of life. Some suggestions designed to improve patient management and prevent potential abuse are offered.

A Nationwide Survey About Palliative Sedation Involving Japanese Palliative Care Specialists: Intentions and Key Factors Used to Determine Sedation as Proportionally Appropriate.

CONTEXT: Although there has long been debate about physicians' intentions and what physicians consider to be proportionally appropriate when performing palliative sedation, few large studies have been performed. OBJECTIVES: To identify physicians' intentions when starting continuous deep sedation and to clarify what factors determine whether physicians regard sedation as proportionally appropriate in relation to expected survival, the patients' wishes, and refractoriness. METHODS: A nationwide questionnaire survey of Japanese palliative care specialists was performed from August to December 2016. We defined continuous deep sedation as the continuous use of sedatives to relieve intolerable and refractory symptoms with the loss of consciousness until death. RESULTS: Of the 695 palliative care specialists enrolled, 440 were analyzed (response rate, 69%). A total of 95% and 87% of the physicians reported that they explicitly intended to perform symptom palliation and decrease consciousness levels, respectively. Moreover, 38% answered that they explicitly intended to maintain unconsciousness until death, and 11% reported that they intended to shorten survival to some extent. The respondents considered that continuous deep sedation is more appropriate when the predicted survival is shorter, the patients' wishes are consistent and clear, and confidence in the refractoriness of symptoms is higher. CONCLUSIONS: Japanese palliative care specialists explicitly intend to control symptoms and reduce the level of consciousness when performing continuous deep sedation, but there are differences in their intentions with regard to maintaining unconsciousness until death. Predicted survival, patients' wishes, and confidence in refractoriness are associated with physicians' judgment that sedation is proportionally appropriate.

Continuous Palliative Sedation for Existential Distress? A Survey of Canadian Palliative Care Physicians' Views.

BACKGROUND: Palliative sedation can be used for refractory symptoms during end-of-life care. However, continuous palliative sedation (CPS) for existential distress remains controversial due to difficulty determining when this distress is refractory. OBJECTIVES: The aim was to determine the opinions and practices of Canadian palliative care physicians regarding CPS for existential distress. METHODS: A survey focusing on experience and views regarding CPS for existential distress was sent to 322 members of the Canadian Society of Palliative Care Physicians. RESULTS: Eighty-one surveys returned (accessible target, 314), resulting in a response rate of 26%. One third (31%) of the respondents reported providing CPS for existential distress. On a 5-point Likert-type scale, 40% of participants disagreed, while 43% agreed that CPS could be used for existential distress alone. CONCLUSION: Differing opinions exist regarding this complex and potentially controversial issue, necessitating the education of health-care professionals and increased awareness within the general public.

Non-anesthesiologist-administered Propofol is not Related to an Increase in Transcutaneous CO2 Pressure During Flexible Bronchoscopy Compared to Guideline-based Sedation: A Randomized Controlled Trial.

INTRODUCTION: Evidence for the use of non-anesthesiologist-administered propofol for sedation during flexible bronchoscopy is scarce. The main objective of this study was to determine whether non-anesthesiologist-administered propofol balanced sedation was related to higher transcutaneous CO2 pressure compared with current guideline-based sedation (combination midazolam and opioid). Secondary outcomes were post-procedural recuperation time, patient satisfaction and frequency of adverse events. METHODS: In this randomized controlled trial we included data from outpatients aged 18 years or older with an indication for flexible bronchoscopy in a university hospital in northern Mexico. RESULTS: Ninety-one patients were included: 42 in the midazolam group and 49 in the propofol group. During 60min of transcutaneous capnometry monitoring, mean transcutaneous CO2 pressure values did not differ significantly between groups (43.6 [7.5] vs. 45.6 [9.6]mmHg, P=.281). Propofol was related with a high Aldrete score at 5, 10, and 15min after flexible bronchoscopy (9 [IQR 6-10] vs. 10 [9,10], P=.006; 9 [8-10] vs. 10 [IQR 10-10], P<.001 and 10 [IQR 9-10] vs. 10 [10], respectively) and with high patient satisfaction on a visual analogue scale of 1 (not satisfied) to 10 (very satisfied) (8.41 [1.25] vs. 8.97 [0.98], P=.03). Frequency of adverse events was similar among groups (30.9% vs. 22.4%, P=.47). CONCLUSION: Compared with guideline-recommended sedation, non-anesthesiologist-administered propofol balanced sedation is not associated with higher transcutaneous CO2 pressure or with more frequent adverse effects. Propofol use is associated with faster sedation recovery and with high patient satisfaction. CLINICAL TRIAL REGISTRATION: NCT02820051.

Opinions about the new law on end-of-life issues in a sample of french patients receiving palliative care.

BACKGROUND: In February 2nd 2016, the French government enacted the Claeys-Leonetti law that forbade euthanasia and established the right to deep and continuous sedation for end-of-life patients. Moreover, the law also obliges clinicians to abide by any advance directives regarding treatment and investigation, except in cases where they are "obviously inappropriate" in a given medical situation, or in cases of emergency, in order to allow medical staff to take time to assess the patient's situation. Artificial feeding and hydration are considered as treatment. The aim of this report is to investigate individuals receiving palliative care about their opinion about euthanasia, about advance directives, about the right to deep and continuous sedation, and the right to stopping artificial feeding and hydration. METHODS: The study was an opinion survey conducted among patients treated in two different palliative care institutions: a palliative care unit at the University Hospital (Timone, Marseille, France) and a non-profit association palliative care home ("La Maison", Gardanne, France). Face-to-face interviews were performed by two investigators. The survey included sociodemographics, clinical data, and opinions about euthanasia, deep and continuous sedation, stopping artificial feeding and hydration, and advance directives. RESULTS: Forty patients were interviewed. The mean age was 59.8 years (standard deviation 12). Fifty three percent reported opposition to legalized euthanasia. Eighty three percent were in favour of the right to deep and continuous sedation in patients with refractory pain, 75% when it concerns a patient unable to express their wishes, and 68% when the patient decides to stop vital treatment. Fifty eight percent reported that artificial nutrition and hydration should be considered as care. Fifty eight percent of the patients interviewed would like to see doctors follow the express wishes contained in advance care directives and 53% that advance directives should be subject to a validity period. CONCLUSIONS: This work demonstrates the feasibility of discussing sensitive issues such as euthanasia, continuous and deep sedation and cessation of care with patients receiving palliative care. These preliminary results point to the need to perform a larger study in order to find determinant factors in this specific situation and to incorporate them into thinking about end-of-life laws.

Physicians in Postgraduate Training Characteristics and Support of Palliative Sedation for Existential Distress.

INTRODUCTION: Palliative sedation for refractory existential distress (PS-ED) is ethically troubling but potentially critical to quality end-of-life (EOL) care. Physicians' in postgraduate training support toward PS-ED is unknown nor is it known how empathy, hope, optimism, or intrinsic religious motivation (IRM) affect their support. These knowledge gaps hinder efforts to support physicians who struggle with patients' EOL care preferences. METHODS: One hundred thirty-four postgraduate physicians rated their support of PS for refractory physical pain (PS-PP) or PS-ED, ranked the importance of patient preferences in ethically challenging situations, and completed measures of empathy, hope, optimism, and IRM. Predictors of PS-ED and PS-PP support were examined using binary and multinomial logistic regression. RESULTS: Only 22.7% of residents were very supportive of PS-ED, and 82.0% were very supportive of PS-PP. Support for PS-PP or PS-ED did not correlate with levels of empathy, hope, optimism, or IRM; however, for residents with lower IRM, greater optimism was associated with greater PS-ED support. In contrast, among residents with higher IRM, optimism was not associated with PS-ED support. CONCLUSIONS: Comparing current results to published surveys, a similar proportion of residents and practicing physicians support PS-ED and PS-PP. In contrast to practicing physicians, however, IRM does not directly influence residents' supportiveness. The interaction between optimism and IRM suggests residents' beliefs and characteristics are salient to their EOL decisions. End-of-life curricula should provide physicians opportunities to reflect on the personal and ethical factors that influence their support for PS-ED.

Experiences of Family Members of Dying Patients Receiving Palliative Sedation.

PURPOSE/OBJECTIVES: To describe the experience of family members of patients receiving palliative sedation at the initiation of treatment and after the patient has died and to compare these experiences over time.
. DESIGN: Descriptive comparative study.
. SETTING: Oncology ward at Shaare Zedek Medical Center in Jerusalem, Israel.
. SAMPLE: A convenience sample of 34 family members of dying patients receiving palliative sedation. 
. METHODS: A modified version of a questionnaire describing experiences of family members with palliative sedation was administered during palliative sedation and one to four months after the patient died. Descriptive statistics were used to describe the results of the questionnaire, and appropriate statistical analyses were conducted for comparisons over time.
. MAIN RESEARCH VARIABLES: Experiences of family members and time.
. FINDINGS: Most relatives were satisfied with the sedation and staff support. Palliative sedation was experienced as an ethical way to relieve suffering. However, one-third felt that it shortened the patient's life. An explanation of the treatment was given less than half of the time and was usually given on the same day treatment was started. This explanation was given by physicians and nurses. Many felt that they were not ready for changes in the patient's condition and wanted increased opportunities to discuss the treatment with oncology care providers. No statistically significant differences in experiences were found over time. 
. CONCLUSIONS: Relatives' experiences of palliative sedation were generally positive and stable over time. Important experiences included timing of the initiation of sedation, timing and quality of explanations, and communication.
. IMPLICATIONS FOR NURSING: Nurses should attempt to initiate discussions of the possible role of sedation in the event of refractory symptoms and follow through with continued discussions. The management of refractory symptoms at the end of life, the role of sedation, and communication skills associated with decision making related to palliative sedation should be a part of the core nursing curriculum. Nursing administrators in areas that use palliative sedation should enforce good nursing clinical practice as recommended by international practice guidelines, such as those of the European Association for Palliative Care.

Physician-assisted suicide, euthanasia and palliative sedation: attitudes and knowledge of medical students.

OBJECTIVES: In November 2015, the German Federal Parliament voted on a new legal regulation regarding assisted suicide. It was decided to amend the German Criminal Code so that any "regular, repetitive offer" (even on a non-profit basis) of assistance in suicide would now be considered a punishable offense. On July 2, 2015, a date which happened to be accompanied by great media interest in that it was the day that the first draft of said law was presented to Parliament, we surveyed 4th year medical students at the Technical University Munich on "physician-assisted suicide," "euthanasia" and "palliative sedation," based on a fictitious case vignette study. METHOD: The vignette study described two versions of a case in which a patient suffered from a nasopharyngeal carcinoma (physical suffering subjectively perceived as being unbearable vs. emotional suffering). The students were asked about the current legal norms for each respective course of action as well as their attitudes towards the ethical acceptability of these measures. RESULTS: Out of 301 students in total, 241 (80%) participated in the survey; 109 answered the version 1 questionnaire (physical suffering) and 132 answered the version 2 questionnaire (emotional suffering). The majority of students were able to assess the currently prevailing legal norms on palliative sedation (legal) and euthanasia (illegal) correctly (81.2% and 93.7%, respectively), while only a few students knew that physician-assisted suicide, at that point in time, did not constitute a criminal offense. In the case study that was presented, 83.3% of the participants considered palliative sedation and the simultaneous withholding of artificial nutrition and hydration as ethically acceptable, 51.2% considered physician-assisted suicide ethically legitimate, and 19.2% considered euthanasia ethically permissible. When comparing the results of versions 1 and 2, a significant difference could only be seen in the assessment of the legality of palliative sedation: it was considered legal more frequently in the physical suffering version (88.1% vs. 75.8%). CONCLUSION: The majority of the students surveyed wrongly assumed that physician-assisted suicide is a punishable offense in Germany. However, a narrow majority considered physician-assisted suicide ethically acceptable in the case study presented. Compared to euthanasia, more than twice as many participants considered physician-assisted suicide acceptable. There was no significant difference between personal attitudes towards palliative sedation, physician-assisted suicide or euthanasia in light of physical or emotional suffering. Educational programs in this field should be expanded both qualitatively and quantitatively, especially considering the relevance of the subject matter, the deficits within the knowledge of legal norms and the now even higher complexity of the legal situation due to the new law from December 2015.

Continuous palliative sedation: not only a response to physical suffering.

BACKGROUND: Palliative sedation is a medical intervention aimed at relieving symptoms that can no longer be controlled by conventional treatment. Ample knowledge is available regarding the nature of such symptoms, but there is no in-depth information regarding how health care workers decide about palliative sedation. OBJECTIVE: The study objective was to investigate considerations concerning the indications for continuous palliative sedation (CPS) and issues that influence these considerations. DESIGN: The study consisted of qualitative interviews regarding patients who had recently received CPS. SETTING/SUBJECTS: The study involved physicians and nurses working in general practice, nursing homes, and hospitals. MEASUREMENT: Analyses by a multidisciplinary research team used the constant comparative method. RESULTS: Together with physical symptoms, psychological and existential suffering may combine to produce a refractory state for which other treatment options than CPS were not available or considered inappropriate. A limited life expectancy was by many considered crucial (e.g., to avoid hastening death) and by some less important (e.g., because the patient's suffering was considered to be key). Issues influencing the decision to use CPS related to patient preferences (e.g., dignity, not wanting to experience further suffering) or family issues (impact of suffering on family, family requesting CPS). CONCLUSIONS: The indication for CPS typically originates from physical symptoms and nonphysical problems producing a refractory state in which a patient suffers unbearably. In such states, preferences of patients and families and the life expectancy criterion are weighed against the severity of refractory symptoms. Therefore the use of CPS is not only a response to the physical suffering of patients in the dying phase.

French Swiss physicians' attitude toward palliative sedation: Influence of prognosis and type of suffering.

OBJECTIVE: Palliative sedation is a last resort medical act aimed at relieving intolerable suffering induced by intractable symptoms in patients at the end-of-life. This act is generally accepted as being medically indicated under certain circumstances. A controversy remains in the literature as to its ethical validity. There is a certain vagueness in the literature regarding the legitimacy of palliative sedation in cases of non-physical refractory symptoms, especially "existential suffering." This pilot study aims to measure the influence of two independent variables (short/long prognosis and physical/existential suffering) on the physicians' attitudes toward palliative sedation (dependent variable). METHODS: We used a 2 × 2 experimental design as described by Blondeau et al. Four clinical vignettes were developed (vignette 1: short prognosis/existential suffering; vignette 2: long prognosis/existential suffering; vignette 3: short prognosis/physical suffering; vignette 4: long prognosis/physical suffering). Each vignette presented a terminally ill patient with a summary description of his physical and psychological condition, medication, and family situation. The respondents' attitude towards sedation was assessed with a six-point Likert scale. A total of 240 vignettes were sent to selected Swiss physicians. RESULTS: 74 vignettes were completed (36%). The means scores for attitudes were 2.62 ± 2.06 (v1), 1.88 ± 1.54 (v2), 4.54 ± 1.67 (v3), and 4.75 ± 1.71 (v4). General linear model analyses indicated that only the type of suffering had a significant impact on the attitude towards sedation (F = 33.92, df = 1, p = 0.000). Significance of the results: The French Swiss physicians' attitude toward palliative sedation is more favorable in case of physical suffering than in existential suffering. These results are in line with those found in the study of Blondeau et al. with Canadian physicians and will be discussed in light of the arguments given by physicians to explain their decisions.

The effect of pre-procedure anxiety on sedative requirements for sedation during colonoscopy.

This study investigated the effects of pre-procedural anxiety (assessed using the Beck Anxiety Inventory) on sedative requirements in 135 patients undergoing sedation for colonoscopy. Deep sedation was defined as loss of consciousness and no response to colonoscopy, and was achieved by target-controlled infusion of propofol. Patients' characteristics, baseline haemodynamic profiles, Beck Anxiety Inventory scores, effect-site propofol concentration at loss of consciousness and characteristics of recovery were recorded. No correlations were found between Beck Anxiety Inventory scores and effect-site propofol concentration at loss of consciousness or baseline haemodynamic profiles. There was no statistical difference in the characteristics of recovery among patients with different levels of anxiety. In conclusion, in patients receiving deep sedation for colonoscopies, the level of pre-procedural anxiety did not relate to the sedative requirement or post-procedural recovery characteristics.

Moral differences in deep continuous palliative sedation and euthanasia.

In palliative care there is much debate about which end of life treatment strategies are legitimate and which are not. Some writers argue that there is an important moral dividing-line between palliative sedation and euthanasia, making the first acceptable and the latter not. We have questioned this. In a recent article, Lars Johan Materstvedt has argued that we are wrong on two accounts: first, that we fail to account properly for the moral difference between continuous deep palliative sedation at the end of life and euthanasia, and, second, that we fail to account properly for the difference between permanent loss of consciousness and death. Regarding the first objection, we argue that Materstvedt misses the point: we agree that there is a difference in terms of intentions between continuous deep palliative sedation and euthanasia, but we question whether this conceptual difference makes up for a moral difference. Materstvedt fails to show that it does. Regarding the second objection, we argue that if nothing else is at stake than the value of the patient's life, permanent unconsciousness and death are morally indifferent.

Flemish palliative-care nurses' attitudes to palliative sedation: a quantitative study.

Palliative sedation is an option of last resort to control refractory suffering. In order to better understand palliative-care nurses' attitudes to palliative sedation, an anonymous questionnaire was sent to all nurses (589) employed in palliative care in Flanders (Belgium). In all, 70.5% of the nurses (n = 415) responded. A large majority did not agree that euthanasia is preferable to palliative sedation, were against non-voluntary euthanasia in the case of a deeply and continuously sedated patient and considered it generally better not to administer artificial floods or fluids to such a patient. Two clusters were found: 58.5% belonged to the cluster of advocates of deep and continuous sedation and 41.5% belonged to the cluster of nurses restricting the application of deep and continuous sedation. These differences notwithstanding, overall the attitudes of the nurses are in accordance with the practice and policy of palliative sedation in Flemish palliative-care units.

Midazolam-ketamine combination for moderate sedation in upper GI endoscopy.

OBJECTIVES: The aim of the study was to compare the quality of sedation with 3 different sedation regimens in upper gastrointestinal endoscopy (UGIE) in pediatric patients. METHODS: One hundred fifty consecutive children who underwent UGIE were randomly assigned to 1 of the 3 medication regimens. Patients in group A (n = 49) received placebo. Forty-five minutes after the placebo was given, repeated intravenous (IV) doses of 0.1 mg/kg midazolam were administered titrated to achieve a level of deep sedation. Patients in group B (n = 51) received oral ketamine instead of placebo, and patients in group C (n = 50) received oral fentanyl instead of placebo with the same methodology and sedation endpoint. RESULTS: The mean dose of midazolam administered in group B patients was remarkably lower compared with that of groups A and C. Patients in group B showed less distress in IV line placement and separation from parents, higher comfort level, more endoscopist satisfaction, and higher sedation depth compared with groups A and C. The recovery time was significantly shorter in group B. All of the 3 regimens were safe. All of the complications were managed successfully. CONCLUSIONS: Our data suggest that synergistic sedation with oral ketamine and IV midazolam for UGIE in children is a suitable and safe sedation. The higher rate of vomiting in group B in contrast to previous studies must be caused mainly by the oral route of ketamine administration.