Fearing Pain at the End of Life: A Review of Advance Directives.

IF 1.5 4区 医学 Q3 HEALTH CARE SCIENCES & SERVICES
George Luck, Terry Lynn Eggenberger, Adriana Bautista, Darian Peters, Ross T Mellman, Kathryn B Keller, Mario Jacomino
{"title":"Fearing Pain at the End of Life: A Review of Advance Directives.","authors":"George Luck, Terry Lynn Eggenberger, Adriana Bautista, Darian Peters, Ross T Mellman, Kathryn B Keller, Mario Jacomino","doi":"10.1177/10499091231190063","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><strong>Background: </strong>Patients, caregivers, and healthcare professionals often describe a \"good death\" as a pain-free process. However, many patients experience pain during their last weeks of life. Advance directives (ADs) are legally binding documents that allow individuals to express their wishes for end-of-life care which should include management of their pain.</p><p><strong>Methods: </strong>An interprofessional team conducted a comprehensive analysis of ADs from all 50 states and the District of Columbia to assess the inclusion of language that reflects patients' wishes for pain relief at the end of life.</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>Thirty-seven (73%) of the 51 entities examined reflected the prototypical directive, containing explicit instructions for withholding or withdrawing interventions that may prolong suffering rather than options for treating pain. Of these, 12 (24%) did not include the word \"pain\". Only 14 states (27%) provided clear guidance for managing pain. Unexpectantly, researchers found that 13 (25%) addressed the common fears of patients, caregivers, and healthcare teams when using opioids to relieve suffering, such as addiction, sedation, appetite, or respiratory suppression, and hastening death.</p><p><strong>Conclusion: </strong>The majority of ADs reviewed lacked clear and comprehensive measures for addressing pain relief. This deficiency may contribute to the undertreatment of pain and amplify the anxiety felt by patients, families, and healthcare providers when making end-of-life decisions. The results highlight the need for improvements in ADs to help ensure that patients' wishes regarding pain management are adequately addressed, documented and respected.</p>","PeriodicalId":50810,"journal":{"name":"American Journal of Hospice & Palliative Medicine","volume":" ","pages":"824-830"},"PeriodicalIF":1.5000,"publicationDate":"2024-06-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"American Journal of Hospice & Palliative Medicine","FirstCategoryId":"3","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1177/10499091231190063","RegionNum":4,"RegionCategory":"医学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"2023/7/25 0:00:00","PubModel":"Epub","JCR":"Q3","JCRName":"HEALTH CARE SCIENCES & SERVICES","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

Background: Patients, caregivers, and healthcare professionals often describe a "good death" as a pain-free process. However, many patients experience pain during their last weeks of life. Advance directives (ADs) are legally binding documents that allow individuals to express their wishes for end-of-life care which should include management of their pain.

Methods: An interprofessional team conducted a comprehensive analysis of ADs from all 50 states and the District of Columbia to assess the inclusion of language that reflects patients' wishes for pain relief at the end of life.

Results: Thirty-seven (73%) of the 51 entities examined reflected the prototypical directive, containing explicit instructions for withholding or withdrawing interventions that may prolong suffering rather than options for treating pain. Of these, 12 (24%) did not include the word "pain". Only 14 states (27%) provided clear guidance for managing pain. Unexpectantly, researchers found that 13 (25%) addressed the common fears of patients, caregivers, and healthcare teams when using opioids to relieve suffering, such as addiction, sedation, appetite, or respiratory suppression, and hastening death.

Conclusion: The majority of ADs reviewed lacked clear and comprehensive measures for addressing pain relief. This deficiency may contribute to the undertreatment of pain and amplify the anxiety felt by patients, families, and healthcare providers when making end-of-life decisions. The results highlight the need for improvements in ADs to help ensure that patients' wishes regarding pain management are adequately addressed, documented and respected.

临终前害怕痛苦:临终前预嘱回顾》。
背景:患者、护理人员和医护人员通常将 "美好的死亡 "描述为无痛的过程。然而,许多病人在生命的最后几周会感到疼痛。预嘱(ADs)是具有法律约束力的文件,它允许个人表达自己对临终关怀的愿望,其中应包括对疼痛的管理:一个跨专业团队对来自美国 50 个州和哥伦比亚特区的预嘱进行了全面分析,以评估预嘱中是否包含反映患者临终前止痛愿望的语言:在所研究的 51 个实体中,有 37 个(73%)反映了原型指令,其中包含了明确的指示,即暂停或撤销可能延长痛苦的干预措施,而不是治疗疼痛的选择。其中 12 个州(24%)没有包含 "疼痛 "一词。只有 14 个州(27%)提供了管理疼痛的明确指导。令人意想不到的是,研究人员发现有 13 个州(25%)解决了患者、护理人员和医疗团队在使用阿片类药物缓解痛苦时普遍担心的问题,如成瘾、镇静、食欲或呼吸抑制以及加速死亡:结论:所审查的大多数辅助用药缺乏明确而全面的止痛措施。这一缺陷可能会导致疼痛治疗不足,并加重患者、家属和医疗服务提供者在做出临终决定时的焦虑感。研究结果突出表明,有必要对《临终关怀指南》进行改进,以帮助确保患者有关疼痛治疗的意愿得到充分考虑、记录和尊重。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 求助全文
来源期刊
American Journal of Hospice & Palliative Medicine
American Journal of Hospice & Palliative Medicine HEALTH CARE SCIENCES & SERVICES-
CiteScore
3.80
自引率
5.30%
发文量
169
审稿时长
6-12 weeks
期刊介绍: American Journal of Hospice & Palliative Medicine (AJHPM) is a peer-reviewed journal, published eight times a year. In 30 years of publication, AJHPM has highlighted the interdisciplinary team approach to hospice and palliative medicine as related to the care of the patient and family. This journal is a member of the Committee on Publication Ethics (COPE).
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
确定
请完成安全验证×
copy
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
右上角分享
点击右上角分享
0
联系我们:info@booksci.cn Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。 Copyright © 2023 布克学术 All rights reserved.
京ICP备2023020795号-1
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术官方微信