Changes in opinions on palliative sedation of palliative care specialists over 16 years and their effects on clinical practice
Despite extensive debate on palliative sedation over the last few decades, no studies have explored longitudinal changes in physicians’ opinion. Moreover, little is known about how physicians’ opinions affect their practice. This study aimed to clarify (1) changes in palliative care specialists’ opinions on palliative sedation and (2) the effects of these opinions on clinical practice.
In 2000 and 2016, nationwide questionnaire surveys involving Japanese palliative care specialists were performed: measurement was based on agreement with opinions on palliative sedation. In 2016, the physicians reported their practice of continuous deep sedation (CDS) and answered their thoughts on what factors lead to a good death as factors potentially affecting their practice.
Of the 695 physicians enrolled in the 2016 survey, 469 responded (67%) and 417 were analyzed (60%). Compared with 54 physicians in 2000, the present respondents were more likely to consider palliative sedation is difficult to perform based on appropriate indications (ES = 0.84, P < 0.001), is unnecessary if conventional palliative care is performed sufficiently (ES = 0.30, P = 0.013), and may result in legal action (ES = 0.35, P = 0.003). The physicians’ opinions more strongly affected their practice than their characteristics or thoughts on good death components.
Recently, palliative care specialists in Japan tend to encounter more difficulties determining what conventional palliative care is and what palliative sedation is. They also fear legal ramifications. It is necessary to standardize methods of alleviating patients’ suffering, to make CDS criteria clearer, and to create a legal basis that respects patients’ rights at their end of life.
KeywordsPalliative sedation Continuous deep sedation Legal framework Patients’ rights Good death End of life
The authors would like to thank all of the participants and participating institutions for taking part in this study.
This study was supported by the Japanese Society for Palliative Medicine and JSPS KAKENHI Grant Number 16H05212.
Compliance with ethical standards
The Institutional Review Board of Seirei Mikatahara General Hospital approved the ethical and scientific validity of this study.
Conflict of interest
The authors declare that they have no conflict of interest.
- 8.Maeda I, Morita T, Yamaguchi T, Inoue S, Ikenaga M, Matsumoto Y, Sekine R, Yamaguchi T, Hirohashi T, Tajima T, Tatara R, Watanabe H, Otani H, Takigawa C, Matsuda Y, Nagaoka H, Mori M, Tei Y, Kikuchi A, Baba M, Kinoshita H (2016) Effect of continuous deep sedation on survival in patients with advanced cancer (J-Proval): a propensity score-weighted analysis of a prospective cohort study. Lancet Oncol 17:115–122CrossRefGoogle Scholar
- 10.Rys S, Deschepper R, Mortier F, Deliens L, Atkinson D, Bilsen J (2012) The moral difference or equivalence between continuous sedation until death and physician-assisted death: word games or war games? A qualitative content analysis of opinion pieces in the indexed medical and nursing literature. J Bioeth Inq 9:171–183CrossRefGoogle Scholar
- 11.Radbruch L, Leget C, Bahr P, Müller-Busch C, Ellershaw J, de Conno F, vanden Berghe P, on behalf of the board members of the EAPC; Board Members of EAPC (2016) Euthanasia and physician-assisted suicide: a white paper from the European Association for Palliative Care. Palliat Med 30:104–116CrossRefGoogle Scholar
- 15.Seymour J, Rietjens J, Bruinsma S, Deliens L, Sterckx S, Mortier F, Brown J, Mathers N, van der Heide A, on behalf of the UNBIASED consortium, Addington-Hall J, Anquinet L, Brown J, Bruinsma S, Deliens L, Mathers N, Mortier F, Payne S, Raus K, Rietjens J, Seale C, Seymour J, Smithson WH, Sterckx S, Janssens R, van der Heide A (2015) UNBIASED consortium. Using continuous sedation until death for cancer patients: a qualitative interview study of physicians' and nurses' practice in three European countries. Palliat Med 29:48–59CrossRefGoogle Scholar
- 29.Kai K (2006) Euthanasia and death with dignity in Japanese law. Waseda Bull Comp Law 27:1–14Google Scholar
- 31.Onwuteaka-Philipsen BD, Brinkman-Stoppelenburg A, Penning C, de Jong-Krul GJ, van Delden JJ, van der Heide A (2012) Trends in end-of-life practices before and after the enactment of the euthanasia law in the Netherlands from 1990 to 2010: a repeated cross-sectional survey. Lancet 380:908–915CrossRefGoogle Scholar