Mercadante Sebastiano, Ferrera Patrizia, Girelli Davide, Casuccio Alessandra
Pain Relief and Palliative Care, University of Palermo, Palermo, Italy.
J Pain Symptom Manage. 2005 Oct;30(4):354-8. doi: 10.1016/j.jpainsymman.2005.04.004.
Hydration during palliative care is a controversial topic. Most of the arguments are based on anedoctal reports that have not been substantiated with scientific data. Given that the choice is problematic from a clinical perspective, preferences of patients and family should dictate whether intravenous fluids are administered. The aim of this study was to evaluate patient and family perceptions about hydration and two modes of providing hydration. Fifty-four consecutive patients admitted to an acute pain relief and palliative care unit who required hydration completed a questionnaire regarding their perceptions on hydration and modes of hydration. Similarly, the principal family carer was chosen and similar questions were posed. For most items, patients and relatives agreed, considering hydration as a useful medical treatment that is able to provide some nutrition. The intravenous route was considered able to improve the clinical condition and to have a positive psychological meaning, representing an acceptable burden. The subcutaneous route was considered less effective, and not less bothersome than the intravenous route. Most patients and relatives agreed with continuing hydration at home, if necessary, preferring the intravenous route. Other than technical considerations, which can be variable according to the clinical setting, the perceived benefits of artificial hydration by the caregivers and patients are central to the ethical, emotional, and cultural considerations involved in their decision making. Most patients and relatives surveyed accepted and were in favor of intravenous hydration.
姑息治疗期间的补液是一个有争议的话题。大多数争论基于未经科学数据证实的轶事报道。鉴于从临床角度来看这个选择存在问题,患者及其家属的偏好应决定是否给予静脉输液。本研究的目的是评估患者及其家属对补液以及两种补液方式的看法。连续54名入住急性疼痛缓解与姑息治疗病房且需要补液的患者完成了一份关于他们对补液及补液方式看法的问卷。同样,选取了主要家庭照顾者并提出了类似问题。对于大多数项目,患者和亲属意见一致,认为补液是一种有用的医疗手段,能够提供一些营养。静脉途径被认为能够改善临床状况并具有积极的心理意义,是可以接受的负担。皮下途径被认为效果较差,且不比静脉途径麻烦程度低。大多数患者和亲属同意如有必要可在家中继续补液,更倾向于静脉途径。除了技术方面的考虑(这可能因临床环境而异),照顾者和患者对人工补液的感知益处是他们决策中涉及的伦理、情感和文化考量的核心。大多数接受调查的患者和亲属接受并赞成静脉补液。