Sedation from analgesics: patient preference survey.

BACKGROUND: The propensity for certain analgesics to cause sedation is well documented, yet physician-patient dialogue does not routinely include pre-emptive exploration of preferences regarding this side effect. OBJECTIVES: To investigate the extent to which palliative patients would accept sedation as a side effect of analgesia and to identify factors affecting decision-making. METHODS: Patients (n=76) known to a specialist palliative care services were given hypothetical scenarios regarding pain and asked about the acceptability of varying levels of sedation occurring as an analgesic side effect. Demographic data, including diagnosis, performance status and experience of pain and sedation, were collated for evaluation of the influence of these factors on patient opinion. RESULTS: Most patients (89.47%) would be quite or very likely to accept mild sedation. A significant minority (40.79%) would accept high levels of sedation. There is no significant association with the acceptability of sedation according to demographics. Almost half (40.79%) reported that their responses may change if the prognosis were extended, typically for less sedation with a longer prognosis. CONCLUSIONS: Increasing levels of sedation are less acceptable, although there is significant variation in views. Palliative care patients are likely to indicate preferences regarding their acceptability of sedation. Palliative physicians must explore preferences on an individualised basis.

Improving medical students' confidence in end-of-life consultations.

BACKGROUND: End-of-life discussions are associated with improved quality of care for patients. In the UK, the General Medical Council outlines a requirement for medical graduates to involve patients and their families in discussions on their care at the end-of-life. However medical students feel ill-equipped to conduct these discussions. METHODS: In 2018, Sheffield Medical School introduced a small group role-play session on end-of-life discussions for all final year medical students. Scenarios were devised to improve confidence in the following learning domains: communicating prognosis with patients and family; ascertaining patient's goals, values and preferred place of death; discussing escalation of treatment, discussing do not attempt resuscitation orders, care in the dying phase of illness and pre-emptive prescribing. Evaluation was conducted over 16 weeks with a before and after questionnaire. Students rated their confidence in the above learning domains on a Likert-style scale and explained their ratings in free-text boxes. RESULTS: There was a 76% response rate to the questionnaire and analysis showed statistically significant improvements in confidence across all learning domains following the session. Qualitative analysis of free-text responses showed that prior to the sessions, students expressed low confidence due to lack of experience and fear of upsetting patients. After the session students felt they had gained skills but expressed persistent anxiety and a desire for further practice. CONCLUSIONS: Our innovation suggests that the opportunity to experience End-of-life discussions through role-play can significantly improve students' confidence in conducting these conversations. However, repeated sessions are likely necessary for students to feel prepared upon graduation.

Naloxegol rescue with methylnaltrexone highly effective.

Opioid-induced constipation (OIC) is common and can significantly affect quality of life. Naloxegol and methylnaltrexone are peripherally acting µ-opioid receptor antagonists (PAMORAs) which are effective for the management of OIC. We report on a case in the palliative care setting where a patient with established OIC had an inadequate response to naloxegol but an effective and immediate response to methylnaltrexone at the dose recommended for her weight. This is the first reported case of two PAMORAs used concomitantly.