The provision of inpatient respite care for patients with motor neurone disease (MND) in hospices is variable. Some institutions are concerned about accepting patients who may need long-term care. Some see 'respite' care as simply a short residential stay with little nursing or medical input being necessary. Others, however, feel that respite offers the potential for palliative care and should be provided within the spectrum of a hospice service. This retrospective study examines that group of MND patients requesting respite care in terms of demographic details, problems identified and medical and nursing interventions made during respite admissions. The results indicate a great need for symptom management in these patients as well as co-ordination of future community care. Most patients were discharged home after respite admissions and the median stay in the hospice (15 days) was identical to that of cancer patients. We conclude that respite admissions to the hospice were valuable both for MND patients and their carers. Units not currently involved in this work may wish to reconsider their position.

Patients who are in the last few days of life are often too frail to take oral fluids and nutrition. This may be due entirely to the natural history of their disease, although the use of sedative drugs for symptom relief may contribute to a reduced level of consciousness and thus a reduced oral intake. Rehydration with intravenous (i.v.) fluids is the usual response in acute care settings, whereas the hospice movement has often argued against this approach. The issues are complex and involve not only physical, psychological and social concerns, but also ethical dilemmas. A review of the literature gives conflicting reports of the physical discomfort that may be attributed to dehydration in dying patients. There are many confounding variables, including the concomitant use of antisecretory drugs, mouth breathing and oral infection. It remains unproven whether i.v. fluids offer symptomatic relief in this situation. Hospice doctors are concerned that the use of i.v. fluids gives confusing messages to relatives about the role of medical intervention at this stage in a patient's illness. A drip may cause a physical barrier between a patient and their loved one at this important time. The use of other methods of fluid replacement are discussed. In the absence of definitive research in this area, the balance of the burdens and benefits of such treatment remains subjective. The prime goal of any treatment in terminal care should be the comfort of the patient. Decisions should be made on an individual basis, involving both patients and their carers wherever possible. Prolonging life in such circumstances is of secondary concern and i.v. fluids given in this context may be futile. The ethical dilemmas of withholding and withdrawing medical treatment in addition to those of conducting research in this area are discussed.

No abstract

All doctors are required to undertake Continuing Professional development (CPD)--for good practice and for the purposes of annual appraisal and re-validation. The medical workforce in palliative medicine is diverse. Many doctors work on a part time basis, with the same CPD requirements as those working fulltime. This survey was undertaken: to establish whether doctors had fulfilled their CPD requirements in the year 2001-2002 and to identify problems or difficulties experienced by doctors in undertaking CPD. A questionnaire was sent to all doctors known to be working in non-training posts within palliative medicine in October 2002, requesting information on CPD undertaken between 1 April 2001 and 31 March 2002. Questions were also asked regarding knowledge and understanding of appraisal and revalidation. The response rate was 53% (381/721). Palliative medicine was the main post for 276 (72%) respondents and 169 were on the specialist register (44%). The subgroup most likely to have fulfilled CPD requirements were those on the Specialist Register (64%), and those least likely were those holding a contract with a charitable organisation (33%). Less than half of those not on the specialist register understood CPD and revalidation requirements. Overall, only 43% of respondents were meeting CPD requirements (median 25 credits; range 5-375 hours). This study has highlighted widespread barriers to the successful planning, participation in, and recording of, CPD for palliative medicine doctors, with those who are not on the specialist register appearing to be particularly disadvantaged. Individual doctors' information needs need to be addressed, but organisational support for CPD is also required. We believe many of these issues also apply in other specialities.

No abstract