ArticlePalliative care and social practice2026
Healthcare professionals' perceptions of ethical issues in palliative sedation: A moral case deliberation study in eight European countries.
Article in Palliative care and social practice, 2026. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Not yet cited in PubMed.
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.
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.
Who cites it
0 citing papers in PubMed.
No citing paper in PubMed yet.
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
13 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Background: Palliative sedation is a last-resort intervention designed to alleviate refractory suffering at the end of life. Healthcare professionals frequently encounter ethically complex situations when deciding whether and how to apply palliative sedation. Moral case deliberation supports healthcare professionals in discussing ethical issues in a structured way. Objectives: To describe healthcare professionals' perceptions of ethical issues about the practice of palliative sedation. Design: This qualitative study was designed as part of the five-year Palliative Sedation project conducted in eight European countries (Belgium, Germany, Hungary, Italy, the Netherlands, Romania, Spain, and the United Kingdom). Methods: Thirty-two moral case deliberation sessions were held in 16 clinical sites with the participation of 231 healthcare professionals. During the sessions, healthcare professionals discussed relevant clinical cases where ethical questions arose regarding the practice of palliative sedation for the management of refractory symptoms. The sessions were audio-recorded and transcribed verbatim. Framework analysis was performed on the data. Results: Ethical issues related to palliative sedation were centred on patient autonomy as a fundamental principle. Healthcare professionals identified several ethical concerns about mental capacity, deferring autonomy, and competing ethical principles. Most of the ethical issues arose in the context of decision-making, and participants often experienced moral distress in these challenging situations. Healthcare professionals agreed that shared decision-making represented the optimal approach. Conclusion: Healthcare professionals have varying levels of understanding and address ethical issues differently. This study showed that palliative sedation is an ethically dense practice that requires moving beyond individualistic models of autonomy toward a more relational approach. Shared decision-making through timely and open communication enhances patient autonomy in the context of palliative sedation.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What OpenQuestion holds
Registered trials
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.