[Palliative sedation in a university hospital: experience after introducing a specific protocol]

Abstract

Patients and methods: A descriptive prospective study of palliative sedation (PS) records during a one year period after starting the PS protocol.

Inclusion criteria: Patients included in the PS protocol and those who had completed the "data registry form".

Data sources: Registry forms included in the PS protocol as Annex 5 (included as Annex 1 in this study).

Variables: Personal data, data regarding basal disease, prognosis, level of information. Refractory symptoms: type, time of evolution and treatments employed. Involvement of the patient and/or representatives in decision making. Type of sedation, continuity, depth, employed, duration and results, and readjustment of other therapeutic measures.

Statistical analysis: The SPSS 14.0 was used. For qualitative variables we studied absolute frequencies and proportions. For quantitative variables with normal distribution, we used means and standard deviations, and for non-normal distribution, medians and ranges.

Results: In the study period 90 cases of PS were counted. This represented 27.6% of the patients treated in the hospital palliative care support team (PCST), and 7.03% of the total deceased patients in our hospital. Mean age of patients undergoing PS was 59.22 years old, range between 40.86 and 77.58 years, and 68.1% were men. All patients were in an advanced or terminal stage of their condition, and 49.5% in an agonal phase. In 90.4% of the cases, the main pathology was oncological. Regarding PS indication, this was jointly made between the PCST physician and the patient's usual doctor in 60 cases (66.6%). Symptoms leading to sedation were mainly dyspnea, delirium and pain. The Ethics committee was consulted in five cases. Mean time under sedation was 134.02 hours (5.5 days). In 90% of the cases, duration ranged from 50 to 218.04 hours (2-9 days). Depth of PS after induction was registered in 88.8% of the cases. Informed consent (IC) was explicit in 11.2% of the cases,and given prior to the appearance of refractory symptoms and/or agonal phase. In 88.8% of sedation cases, the IC was given by a representative. Midazolam was the most used drug of choice in 87.8% of the cases, and levomepromazine in 10.2%. Up to 15% of sedations required drug changes or combinations.

Conclusion: 1) The application of a PS Protocol and the availability of a hospital PCST and an Ethical Care Committee favored a safe (correct) use of PS in a hospital lacking a palliative care unit (PCU), and a homogeneous data registry for their analysis, with quality criteria similar to those offered by a PCU. 2) We have detected areas of improvement that will be applied in the second version of our protocol.

Keywords: Cuidados paliativos; Ethics; Evaluación de la calidad; General Hospital; Hospital General; Palliative care; Palliative sedation; Quality assessment; Sedación paliativa; Ética.