Research highlights▶ Levels of sensory-motor predictions vary gradually in the healthy population. ▶ Deficient predictions are related to a delusion-like style of thinking. ▶ The continuum between health and psychosis exists even on a sensory-motor level.

BackgroundClinically assisted hydration (CAH) can be provided in the last days of life as drinking declines. The impact of this practice on quality of life or survival in the last days of life is unclear. Practice varies worldwide concerning this emotive issue.MethodSystematic literature review and narrative synthesis of studies evaluating the impact of, or attitudes toward, CAH in the last days of life. Databases were searched up to December 2019. Studies were included if the majority of participants were in the last 7 days of life, and were evaluated using Gough’s 'Weight of Evidence' framework. Review protocol registered with PROSPERO, registration number CRD42019125837.ResultsFifteen studies were included in the synthesis. None were judged to be both of high quality and relevance. No evidence was found that the provision of CAH has an impact on symptoms or survival. Patient and family carer attitudes toward assisted hydration were diverse.ConclusionThere is currently insufficient evidence to draw firm conclusions on the impact of CAH in the last days of life. Future research needs to focus on patients specifically in the last days of life, include those with non-malignant diagnoses, and evaluate best ways to communicate effectively about this complex topic with patients and their families.

No abstract

Background: The impact of assisted hydration on symptoms and survival at the end of life is unclear. Little is known about optimal strategies for communicating and decision-making about this ethically complex topic. Hydration near end of life is known to be an important topic for family members, but conversations about assisted hydration occur infrequently despite guidance suggesting these should occur with all dying people. Aim: To explore the views and experiences of doctors experienced in end-of-life care regarding communicating with patients and families and making decisions about assisted hydration at the end of life. Design: Qualitative study involving framework analysis of data from semi-structured interviews. Setting/participants: Sixteen UK-based Geriatrics and Palliative Medicine doctors were recruited from hospitals, hospices and community services from October 2019 to October 2020. Results: Participants reported clinical, practical and ethical challenges associated with this topic. The hospital setting provides barriers to high-quality communication with dying patients and their families about assisted hydration, which may contribute to the low incidence of documented assisted hydration-related conversations. Workplace culture in some hospices may make truly individualised decision-making about this topic more difficult. Lack of inclusion of patients in decision-making about assisted hydration appears to be common practice. Conclusions: Proactive, routine discussion with dying people about hydration-related issues is indicated in all cases. There is room for debate regarding the limits of shared decision-making and the benefits of routine discussion of assisted hydration with all dying people. Clinicians have to navigate multiple barriers as they strive to provide individualised care.

Much is unknown about assisted hydration at the end of life: why rates of usage vary so highly between institutions, cultures and countries, what beneficial or burdensome effects this treatment has, whether there is a place for subcutaneous hydration in the home setting, and how best to communicate about this difficult topic with dying people and their families. In light of a recently published systematic review concerning the impact of assisted hydration at the end of life, this article explores these questions and related issues, concluding that individualisation and shared decision-making are essential aspects of high-quality end-of-life care.