Position Statements
Statement on Artificial Nutrition and Hydration Near the End of Life
Approved by the Board of Directors
December 8, 2006
(replaces 2001 Statement on Use of Nutrition and Hydration)
Background
Artificial nutrition and hydration (ANH) were originally developed
to provide short-term support for patients who were acutely ill. When
used in patients near the end of life, the available data suggest these
measures are seldom effective in preventing suffering or prolonging
life. Patients with advanced, life-limiting illness often lose the
capacity to eat and drink and/or the interest in food and fluids.
Ethical issues may arise when patients, families, or caregivers request
ANH even if there is no prospect of recovery from the underlying
illness.
Statement
The AAHPM endorses the ethically and legally accepted view that
artificial nutrition and hydration, whether delivered parenterally or
through the gastrointestinal tract via a tube, is a medical
intervention. Like other medical interventions, it should be evaluated
by weighing its benefits and burdens in light of the patient's clinical
circumstances and goals of care. ANH may offer benefits when
administered in the setting of acute, reversible illness. Near the end
of life, some widely assumed benefits of ANH, such as alleviation of
thirst, may be achieved by less invasive measures including good mouth
care or providing ice chips. The potential burdens of ANH depend on the
route used, and include sepsis (with total parenteral nutrition) and
diarrhea (with tube feeding). In addition, agitated or confused
patients receiving ANH may suffer the indignity of physical restraints,
which are often instituted to prevent them from removing a gastrostomy
tube or central intravenous line.
The AAHPM advocates respectful and informed discussions of the
effects of ANH near the end of life among physicians, other health care
professionals, patients, and families, preferably before the patient is
actively dying. Ideally, the patient will make his or her own decision
about the use of ANH based on a careful assessment of potential
benefits and burdens, consistent with legal and ethical norms that
permit patients to accept or forgo any medical interventions. Such
choices are best made in concert with family, and should routinely be
communicated to the patient's health care proxy. For patients who are
unable to make decisions, the evaluation of benefits and burdens should
be carried out by the patient's designated surrogate or next of kin,
using substituted judgment whenever possible, in accordance with local
laws.
The AAHPM recognizes that for some patients and families, ANH is of
symbolic importance, beyond any measurable effects on the patient's
physical well-being. Such views should be explored, understood, and
respected, in keeping with patient and family values, beliefs, and
culture. Good communication is necessary to allow caregivers to learn
about patient and family fears about "starvation" and other frequently
expressed concerns. At the same time, communication is essential to
clarify the patient's clinical condition and explain that inability to
eat and drink can be a natural part of dying that is generally not
associated with suffering. In some situations, particularly if there is
uncertainty about whether a patient will benefit from ANH, a
time-limited trial may be useful. The caregiving team should explain
that, as with other medical therapies, ANH can be withdrawn if it is
not achieving its desired purpose.
Key Elements
Recognize that ANH is a form of medical therapy which, like other
medical interventions, should be evaluated by weighing its benefits and
burdens in light of the patient's goals of care and clinical
circumstances
Acknowledge that ANH, like other medical interventions, can
ethically be withheld or withdrawn, consistent with the patient's
wishes and the clinical situation
Establish open communication between patients/families and
caregivers, to assure that their concerns are heard and that the
natural history of advanced illness is clarified
Respect patient's preferences for treatment, once the prognosis and
anticipated trajectory with and without ANH have been explained
Key References
D Casarett, J Kapo, and A Caplan, "Appropriate Use of Artificial
Nutrition and Hydration-Fundamental Principles and Recommendations,"
New England Journal of Medicine 2005; 353: 2607-12.
MP Fuhrmann and VM Herrmann, "Bridging the Continuum: Nutrition
Support in Palliative and Hospice Care," Nutrition in Clinical Practice
2006; 21: 134-41.
L Ganzini, ER Goy, LL Miller et al, "Nurses' Experiences with
Hospice Patients who Refuse Food and Fluids to Hasten Death," N Engl J
Med 2003; 349:359-65.
MR Gillick, "Rethinking the Role of Tube-Feeding in Patients with Advanced Dementia," N Engl J Med 2000; 342:206-10
R McCann, W Hall, A Groth-Juncker, "Comfort Care for Terminally Ill Patients," JAMA 1994; 272: 1263-6.
J Slomka, "What do Apple Pie and Motherhood Have to do with Feeding
Tubes and Caring for the Patient?" Arch Int Med 1995; 155: 1258-63.
|