Use of Artificial Hydration at the End of Life: A Survey of Australian and New Zealand Palliative Medicine Doctors

Abstract

Background: Dying is ubiquitous, yet the optimal management of hydration in the terminal phase is undetermined. Palliative care (PC) doctors' practices may act as a de facto measure of the benefits and burdens of artificial hydration (AH) use.

Objective: To identify PC doctors' AH prescribing practices for imminently dying patients and possible influencing factors.

Methods: An online survey of doctors belonging to the Australian and New Zealand Society of Palliative Medicine.

Results: One hundred and thirty-six surveys were completed (30% response rate). AH use for patients in the prognosticated last week of life was low: 77% of respondents prescribed AH to 0-10% of patients and 3% of respondents prescribed to more than 20%. The most common reason for prescribing AH was palliation of family/patient concern rather than a physical symptom. The majority thought there was no effect of AH on survival, or on symptoms of fatigue (90%), reduced level of consciousness (88%), agitation (75%), nausea (69%), vomiting (68%), myoclonus (66%), thirst (65%), delirium (62%), cough (57%), or bowel obstruction (50%). AH was thought to worsen subcutaneous edema (94%), upper respiratory tract secretions (85%), ascites (73%), physical discomfort (72%), dyspnea (62%), and urinary symptoms (57%).

Conclusion: PC doctors from Australia and New Zealand reported lower use of AH for dying patients compared to international counterparts. The study showed high concordance in respondents' opinions: most thought AH was unlikely to provide clinical benefit and might cause harm. Further studies are needed to determine best practice of AH use at the end of life.

Keywords: Australia and New Zealand; artificial hydration; doctors; hydration; palliative care; terminal care.