• Nigel Sykes and Andrew Thorns.
• St Christopher's Hospice, London, UK. n.sykes@stchristophers.org.uk <n.sykes@stchristophers.org.uk>
• Lancet Oncol. 2003 May 1; 4 (5): 312318312-8.

AbstractOpioids and sedative drugs are commonly used to control symptoms in patients with advanced cancer. However, it is often assumed that the use of these drugs inevitably results in shortening of life. Ethically, this outcome is excused by reference to the doctrine of double effect. In this review, we assess the evidence for patterns of use of opioids and sedatives in palliative care and examine whether the doctrine of double effect is needed to justify their use. We conclude that patients are more likely to receive higher doses of both opioids and sedatives as they get closer to death. However, there is no evidence that initiation of treatment, or increases in dose of opioids or sedatives, is associated with precipitation of death. Thus, we conclude that the doctrine of double effect is not essential for justification of the use of these drugs, and may act as a deterrent to the provision of good symptom control.

20 keywords...

hide…