Continuous Deep Sedation Until Death of Children at the End of Life: French Physicians' Opinions.

Abstract

Objectives: To evaluate physicians' opinions concerning continuous deep sedation until death (CDSUD) and implementation of Claeys-Leonetti; a law intended to be applicable to all patients, but without a specific framework for children thus giving rise to ethically and legally complex situations. The secondary objective was to identify if physicians' characteristics could influence their opinions. Study Design: This was a national, multicenter, noninterventional cross-sectional survey from January 30, 2020, until March 1, 2020. The target population consisted of French physicians involved in children's end-of-life situations. The validated questionnaire explored respondents' characteristics and their opinions on four hypothetical pediatric clinical cases. Results: Analysis was conducted on 391 respondents. The oncological situation was more easily recognized as end of life compared with the neurological pathology (77% vs. 40.4%). Dependence on mechanical ventilation was another major factor influencing physicians in identifying end-of-life situations. Physicians clearly recognized the difference in intention between CDSUD and euthanasia. They accepted to implement CDSUD more easily in newborns. The withdrawal of artificial nutrition and hydration gave rise to divergent opinions. Respondents were in favor of adolescents' decision-making autonomy and their access to drafting advance directives. The child's best interest prevailed in case of objection by parents, except in situations outside the law's framework or in cases of disagreement within the health care team. Conclusion: Results of our study showed differences in the interpretation of the law concerning the CDSUD application framework and provide elements for reflection, which may ultimately contribute to the development of specific guidelines in CDSUD in children at the end of life.