Evidence map›Paper›PMID 38902670›Full record

ArticleBMC palliative care2024

Report on palliative sedation medication usage: a survey of palliative care experts in Eight European countries.

Éva Pozsgai, Eduardo Garralda, Csilla Busa, Sheila Payne, Jeroen Hasselaar, Daniela Mosoiu, Séverine M Surges, Michaël Van der Elst, Sebastiano Mercadante, Carlos Centeno and 1 more

Abstract read
In one paragraph

Article in BMC palliative care, 2024. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 4 papers, 1 of them a synthesis that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
4citing papers in PubMed, 1 pooled it
–field-weighted citation impact
1 · What the graph read from it

What it found

Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.

The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.

2 · The registry

The trial behind it

Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.

Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.

3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

4 citing papers in PubMed, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it.

  1. Pooled it
  2. Article
  3. Article
  4. Article
4 · The record

Corrections and comments

PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

11 authors.

Éva PozsgaiDepartment of Primary Health Care, University of Pecs Medical School, Pécs, Hungary. pozsgay83@gmail.com.
Eduardo GarraldaATLANTES Global Observatory of Palliative Care, Institute for Culture and Society, University of Navarra, Pamplona, Spain.
Csilla BusaInstitute of Primary Health Care, University of Pécs Medical School, Pécs, Hungary.
Sheila PayneInternational Observatory On End of Life Care, Lancaster University, Lancaster, UK.
Jeroen HasselaarDepartment of Primary Healthcare, Radboud University Medical Center, Nijmegen, The Netherlands.
Daniela MosoiuTransylvania University Brasov, Hospice Casa Sperantei, Brasov, Romania.
Séverine M SurgesDepartment of Palliative Medicine, University Hospital Bonn, Bonn, Germany.
Michaël Van der ElstDepartment of Oncology, Laboratory of Experimental Radiotherapy, KU Leuven, Leuven, Belgium.
Sebastiano MercadanteMain Regional Center for Palliative Care, La Maddalena Cancer Center, Palermo, Italy.
Carlos CentenoATLANTES Global Observatory of Palliative Care, Institute for Culture and Society, University of Navarra, Pamplona, Spain.
Ágnes CsikósInstitute of Primary Health Care, University of Pécs Medical School, Pécs, Hungary.

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

backgroundThe practice of palliative sedation continues to raise ethical questions among people, which in turn leads to its varied acceptance and practice across regions. As part of the Palliative Sedation European Union (EU) project, the aim of the present study was to determine the perceptions of palliative care experts regarding the practice of palliative sedation in eight European countries (The Netherlands, Belgium, Germany, UK, Italy, Spain, Hungary, and Romania).

methodsA specifically designed survey, including questions on the most frequently used medications for palliative sedation, their availability per countries and settings, and the barriers and facilitators to the appropriate practice of palliative sedation was sent to expert clinicians involved and knowledgeable in palliative care in the indicated countries. A purposive sampling strategy was used to select at least 18 participating clinicians per consortium country. Descriptive statistical analysis was conducted on the survey data.

resultsOf the 208 expert clinicians invited to participate, 124 participants completed the survey. Midazolam was perceived to be the most frequently used benzodiazepine in all eight countries. 86% and 89% of expert clinicians in Germany and Italy, respectively, perceived midazolam was used "almost always", while in Hungary and Romania only about 50% or less of the respondents perceived this. Levomepromazine was the neuroleptic most frequently perceived to be used for palliative sedation in the Netherlands, Spain, Germany, and the United Kingdom. Between 38- 86% of all eight countries´ expert clinicians believed that opioid medications were "almost always" used during palliative sedation. The perceived use of IV hydration and artificial nutrition "almost always" was generally low, while the country where both IV hydration and artificial nutrition were considered to be "very often" given by a third of the expert clinicians, was in Hungary, with 36% and 27%, respectively.

conclusionsOur study provides insight about the differences in the perceived practice of medication during palliative sedation between eight European countries. In countries where palliative care services have been established longer perceptions regarding medication use during palliative sedation were more in line with the recommended European guidelines than in Central and Eastern European countries like Romania and Hungary.

Indexed as

Hypnotics and SedativesPalliative CareAdultAttitude of Health PersonnelBelgiumEuropeFemaleGermanyHumansHungaryItalyMaleMiddle AgedNetherlandsPractice Patterns, Physicians'RomaniaHypnotics and SedativesMedicationMedicineOpioidPalliative carePalliative sedation

Identifiers

PMID38902670
PMCPMC11188245

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY
Read underepoch 390

Registered trials

None linked

Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.