Reply to Twycross et al. Comment on "Ramos-Rincon et al. Palliative Sedation in COVID-19 End-of-Life Care. Retrospective Cohort Study. Medicina 2021, 57, 873".

First of all, we want to thank Twycross, Wong, and Vivat [...].

Palliative Sedation in COVID-19 End-of-Life Care. Retrospective Cohort Study.

Background and Objectives: Descriptions of end-of-life in COVID-19 are limited to small cross-sectional studies. We aimed to assess end-of-life care in inpatients with COVID-19 at Alicante General University Hospital (ALC) and compare differences according to palliative and non-palliative sedation. Material and Methods: This was a retrospective cohort study in inpatients included in the ALC COVID-19 Registry (PCR-RT or antigen-confirmed cases) who died during conventional admission from 1 March to 15 December 2020. We evaluated differences among deceased cases according to administration of palliative sedation. Results: Of 747 patients evaluated, 101 died (13.5%). Sixty-eight (67.3%) died in acute medical wards, and 30 (44.1%) received palliative sedation. The median age of patients with palliative sedation was 85 years; 44% were women, and 30% of cases were nosocomial. Patients with nosocomial acquisition received more palliative sedation than those infected in the community (81.8% [9/11] vs 36.8% [21/57], p = 0.006), and patients admitted with an altered mental state received it less (20% [6/23] vs. 53.3% [24/45], p = 0.032). The median time from admission to starting palliative sedation was 8.5 days (interquartile range [IQR] 3.0-14.5). The main symptoms leading to palliative sedation were dyspnea at rest (90%), pain (60%), and delirium/agitation (36.7%). The median time from palliative sedation to death was 21.8 h (IQR 10.4-41.1). Morphine was used in all palliative sedation perfusions: the main regimen was morphine + hyoscine butyl bromide + midazolam (43.3%). Conclusions: End-of-life palliative sedation in patients with COVID-19 was initiated quite late. Clinicians should anticipate the need for palliative sedation in these patients and recognize the breathlessness, pain, and agitation/delirium that foreshadow death.

Perceptions of health professionals on subcutaneous hydration in palliative care: A qualitative study.

BACKGROUND: Evidence indicates that hypodermoclysis is as safe and effective as intravenous rehydration in the treatment of the symptomatology produced by mild to moderate dehydration in patients for whom oral route administration is not possible. However, the knowledge about the use of the subcutaneous hydration and its correlates is still limited. AIM: To explore the perceptions, attitudes and opinions of health professionals in palliative care on the administration of subcutaneous hydration. DESIGN: This is a qualitative focus group study with health professionals of palliative care. Four focus groups were carried out until data saturation. A qualitative content analysis was performed. SETTING/PARTICIPANTS: A total of 37 participants, physicians and nurses, were recruited from different services of palliative care in Spain. RESULTS: In all, 856 meaning units were identified, from which 56 categories were extracted and grouped into 22 sub-themes, which were distributed among four themes: 'factors which influence the hydration decision', 'factors related to the choice of the subcutaneous route for hydration', 'the subcutaneous hydration procedure' and 'performance guidelines and/or protocols'. CONCLUSIONS: Variables which most often influence the use of subcutaneous route to hydration are those that are linked to the characteristics of the patient, the team and the family, and other like the context and professionals' subjective perceptions about this medical practice.