Department of Public Health, Erasmus University Medical Center, Rotterdam, the Netherlands.
Julius Center, Department of Medical Humanities, UMC Utrecht, Utrecht, the Netherlands.
J Am Med Dir Assoc. 2019 Nov;20(11):1367-1372. doi: 10.1016/j.jamda.2019.06.012. Epub 2019 Aug 1.
In the Netherlands, the use of continuous deep sedation at the end of life has sharply increased from 8.2% of all deaths in 2005 to 12.3% in 2010 to 18.3 % in 2015. We describe its clinical characteristics in 2015 and compare it with 2010 and 2005.
Questionnaire study in random samples of death reported to a central death registry.
A nationwide study in the Netherlands among physicians attending reported deaths.
Continuous deep sedation characteristics (patient characteristics, drugs, duration, estimated shortening of life, and palliative consultation) from the Netherlands in 2015 were compared with continuous deep sedation characteristics of 2010 and 2005.
The response rate was 78% (n = 7277) in 2015, 74% (n = 6263) in 2010, and 78% (n = 6860) in 2005. The increased frequency of continuous deep sedation was notable in all patient subgroups, but mainly occurred among deaths attended by general practitioners, particularly in patients older than 80 years and patients with cancer. In 2015, continuous deep sedation was performed in 93% of the patients through administration of benzodiazepines. In 3% of the patients, the sedation lasted more than 1 week. Furthermore, 60% of the physicians reported that they had no intention to hasten death, 38% reported that they have taken hastening of death into account, and 2% reported their intention was to hasten death. For 1 in 5 patients, a palliative care expert was consulted prior to the start of sedation. These characteristics were comparable between 2015 and 2010.
The increase in continuous deep sedation mainly occurred in deaths attended by general practitioners, especially in older patients and patients with cancer. As there are no major shifts in demographic and epidemiologic patterns of dying, future studies should investigate possible explanations for the increase predominantly in societal developments, such as increased attention to sedation in education and society, a broader interpretation of the concept of refractoriness, and an increased need of patients and physicians to control the dying process.
在荷兰,生命末期的持续深度镇静的使用从 2005 年的所有死亡人数的 8.2%急剧增加到 2010 年的 12.3%,到 2015 年增加到 18.3%。我们描述了 2015 年的临床特征,并将其与 2010 年和 2005 年进行了比较。
向中央死亡登记处报告的死亡随机样本的问卷调查研究。
荷兰全国范围内对报告的死亡人数进行的医生参与研究。
比较 2015 年荷兰持续深度镇静的特征(患者特征、药物、持续时间、估计生命缩短和姑息治疗咨询)与 2010 年和 2005 年的持续深度镇静特征。
2015 年的回复率为 78%(n=7277),2010 年为 74%(n=6263),2005 年为 78%(n=6860)。持续深度镇静的频率在所有患者亚组中都明显增加,但主要发生在全科医生治疗的死亡患者中,特别是 80 岁以上的患者和癌症患者。2015 年,93%的患者通过给予苯二氮䓬类药物进行持续深度镇静。3%的患者镇静时间超过 1 周。此外,60%的医生报告说他们没有加速死亡的意图,38%的医生报告说他们已经考虑到加速死亡,2%的医生报告说他们的意图是加速死亡。在 1/5 的患者中,在开始镇静之前咨询了姑息治疗专家。这些特征在 2015 年和 2010 年之间是可比的。
持续深度镇静的增加主要发生在全科医生治疗的死亡患者中,特别是在老年患者和癌症患者中。由于死亡的人口统计学和流行病学模式没有重大变化,未来的研究应该调查主要发生在社会发展方面的可能原因,例如在教育和社会中对镇静的关注增加,对难治性概念的更广泛解释,以及患者和医生控制死亡过程的需求增加。