National strategy for palliative care of severely ill and dying people and their relatives in pandemics (PallPan) in Germany - study protocol of a mixed-methods project.

BACKGROUND: In the SARS-CoV-2 pandemic, general and specialist Palliative Care (PC) plays an essential role in health care, contributing to symptom control, psycho-social support, and providing support in complex decision making. Numbers of COVID-19 related deaths have recently increased demanding more palliative care input. Also, the pandemic impacts on palliative care for non-COVID-19 patients. Strategies on the care for seriously ill and dying people in pandemic times are lacking. Therefore, the program 'Palliative care in Pandemics' (PallPan) aims to develop and consent a national pandemic plan for the care of seriously ill and dying adults and their informal carers in pandemics including (a) guidance for generalist and specialist palliative care of patients with and without SARS-CoV-2 infections on the micro, meso and macro level, (b) collection and development of information material for an online platform, and (c) identification of variables and research questions on palliative care in pandemics for the national pandemic cohort network (NAPKON). METHODS: Mixed-methods project including ten work packages conducting (online) surveys and qualitative interviews to explore and describe i) experiences and burden of patients (with/without SARS-CoV-2 infection) and their relatives, ii) experiences, challenges and potential solutions of health care professionals, stakeholders and decision makers during the SARS-CoV-2 pandemic. The work package results inform the development of a consensus-based guidance. In addition, best practice examples and relevant literature will be collected and variables for data collection identified. DISCUSSION: For a future "pandemic preparedness" national and international recommendations and concepts for the care of severely ill and dying people are necessary considering both generalist and specialist palliative care in the home care and inpatient setting.

[Indications and use of benzodiazepines in a palliative care unit]. / Indikationen und Gebrauch von Benzodiazepinen auf einer Palliativstation.

BACKGROUND: Benzodiazepines are often used in palliative care for symptom control, for example in treatment of dyspnea or anxiety. They are also used for palliative sedation, if symptoms are not controlled (fast) enough and a reduction of consciousness is therefore necessary. Incidence of palliative sedation has been reported to vary between 5-52% of all patients in a palliative care setting in several studies. METHOD: Information from the records of 160 patients treated in the palliative care unit from September 2003 to December 2004 was evaluated from an electronic database. Gender, age, diagnosis, symptoms and medication, especially benzodiazepine dosage and application were analyzed. RESULT: Of the patients 70% were treated with benzodiazepines but only 3.1% received deep and continuous sedation. Benzodiazepines were applied as required in oral or sublingual form in 71.8% of all cases. Lorazepam was given most often because of anxiety and agitation, oxazepam to induce sleep and midazolam in five cases of terminal sedation. Only rarely were diazepam and clonazepam prescribed to prevent or resolve convulsions. CONCLUSION: The majority of patients had been treated with benzodiazepines whereas only very few had received deep and continuous sedation.

Criteria for successful multiprofessional cooperation in palliative care teams.

INTRODUCTION: Team work is considered a central component of palliative care. Within this comparatively young field of medicine, the emergence of new institutions (eg, palliative care units) highlights the challenge of establishing a completely new team. METHODS: This study focuses on the factors, which enhance both the success and outcome criteria of good team work from the perception of team members in a palliative care unit. The palliative care team at the University Hospital of Aachen (n = 19) was interviewed 1 year after the unit's startup by the means of semistructured interviews. Interview texts were analysed using qualitative content analysis. RESULTS: Factors crucial to cooperation in the team members' views were close communication, team philosophy, good interpersonal relationships, high team commitment, autonomy and the ability to deal with death and dying. Moreover, close communication was by far the most frequently mentioned criteria for cooperation. Team performance, good coordination of workflow and mutual trust underpin the evaluation of efficient team work. Inefficient team work is associated with the absence of clear goals, tasks and role delegation, as well as a lack of team commitment. CONCLUSION: In a new team, close communication is particularly important for staff as they reorientate themselves to the dynamics of a new peer group. The results confirm the overwhelming importance of clarity, commitment and close, positive exchange among team members for successful team work.