End-of-Life Care Research Group, Ghent University and Vrije Universiteit Brussel, Brussels, Belgium.
Palliat Med. 2013 Jun;27(6):553-61. doi: 10.1177/0269216312462272. Epub 2012 Oct 26.
According to various guidelines about continuous sedation until death, this practice can and should be clearly distinguished from euthanasia, which is legalized in Belgium.
To explore professional caregivers' perceptions of the similarities and differences between continuous sedation until death and euthanasia.
Qualitative data were gathered through focus groups. Questions pertained to participants' perceptions of continuous sedation. The focus groups were recorded and transcribed verbatim. Analyses were conducted by a multidisciplinary research team using constant comparison analyses.
SETTING/PARTICIPANTS: We did four focus groups at Ghent University Hospital: two with physicians (n = 4 and n = 4) and two with nurses (n = 4 and n = 9). The participants could participate if they were ever involved in the use of continuous sedation until death.
Although the differences and similarities between continuous sedation until death and euthanasia were not specifically addressed in the questions addressed in the focus groups, it emerged as an important theme in the participants' accounts. Many caregivers elaborated on the differences between both practices, particularly with regard to patients' preferences and requests, decision-making and physicians' intentions. However, some stated that the distinction between the two sometimes becomes blurred, especially when the sedating medication is increased disproportionally or when sedation is used for patients with a longer life expectancy.
The differences and similarities between continuous sedation until death and euthanasia is an issue for several Flemish professional caregivers in their care for unbearably suffering patients at the end of life. Although guidelines strictly distinguish both practices, this may not always be the case in Flemish clinical practice.
根据各种关于直至死亡持续镇静的指南,这种做法可以而且应该与安乐死明确区分开来,后者在比利时是合法的。
探讨专业护理人员对直至死亡持续镇静与安乐死之间相似性和差异性的看法。
通过焦点小组收集定性数据。问题涉及参与者对持续镇静的看法。焦点小组进行了录音,并逐字记录。由一个多学科研究团队使用恒定性比较分析进行分析。
地点/参与者:我们在根特大学医院进行了四个焦点小组:两个小组是医生(n=4 和 n=4),两个小组是护士(n=4 和 n=9)。如果参与者曾经参与过持续镇静直至死亡的使用,则可以参与。
尽管焦点小组中的问题并未专门涉及直至死亡持续镇静与安乐死之间的差异和相似之处,但这在参与者的叙述中成为一个重要主题。许多护理人员详细阐述了这两种做法之间的差异,特别是在患者的偏好和请求、决策和医生的意图方面。然而,一些人表示,这两者之间的区别有时会变得模糊,尤其是当镇静药物的用量不成比例地增加或当镇静用于预期寿命较长的患者时。
直至死亡持续镇静与安乐死之间的差异和相似性是许多佛兰德专业护理人员在生命末期护理无法忍受痛苦的患者时关注的问题。尽管指南严格区分这两种做法,但在佛兰德的临床实践中情况可能并非如此。