Background: Patients in palliative care need rapid-acting pharmacological options for psychological distress. N-methyl-D-aspartate antagonist ketamine is known to have a fast onset of anti-depressant and anxiolytic action. Its S-enantiomer S-ketamine (or esketamine) is an analgesic used as a routine treatment for refractory pain as an intravenous infusion (0.25 mg/kg over 45 min). This study investigates whether S-ketamine pain therapy has a positive impact on psychological distress caused by anxiety and depression in palliative care. Methods: Patient routine data from a palliative care unit of a tertiary care hospital were used in a retrospective analysis after positive ethics approval. Eight patients, who received analgesic S-ketamine treatment, were compared to a control group matched by gender and age. The main analysis was conducted using three-way mixed MANOVA followed by two-way mixed ANOVA. Target variables were the values for anxiety and depression in the state-trait anxiety-depression inventory STADI. The predictor variables were the time of measurement before (T1) and after (T2) S-ketamine application and group membership. Results: Comparison of the S-ketamine group (n = 8; 4 male, 4 female; average age 52 years) with the control group (n = 8; 3 male, 5 female; average age 55 years) revealed a significant multivariate effect on anxiety and depression F(1, 14) = 4.78; p = 0.046; r = 0.50. The univariate comparisons showed a significant reduction of the anxiety scores from T1 to T2 in the S-ketamine group compared to the control group F(1, 14) = 10.14; p = 0.007; r = 0.65. With regard to depression, there was no significant reduction from T1 to T2 in the group comparison F(1, 14) = 1.60; p = 0.23; r = 0.32. No long-lasting effects on pain were found. Conclusions: Our findings show that psychological distress of patients in palliative care may improve after a single administration of S-ketamine, which mainly alleviates anxiety in those patients. Limitations of this study arise from non-randomization, retrospective analysis and low sample size. Therefore, further prospective and ideally randomized studies are necessary.

Background: As a result of demographic change, chronic and oncological diseases are gaining importance in the context of public health. Palliative care plays a crucial role in maintaining the quality of life of those affected. International guidelines demand access to palliative care not only for the elderly but also for younger people who face severe illnesses. It can be assumed that palliative care will become increasingly important for them. In order to develop public health strategies which are able to promote palliative care, it is important to assess the knowledge of, and attitude towards, palliative care as found among members of the general public and its specific target groups. In particular, little is known about young adults’ knowledge and perceptions of palliative care. Objectives and design: This work aimed to assess the understanding and viewpoints regarding palliative care among the general population and among young adults aged 18 to 24. We therefore conducted a systematic review, which, for this target population, could be seen as a novel approach. Methods: Exclusion and inclusion criteria were developed using the PICOS process. Literature was researched within MEDLINE (via PubMed), Google Scholar and Web of Science. A search string was developed and refined for all three databases. Grey literature was included. Duplicates were excluded using Mendeley. The literature was independently screened by two researchers. Narrative synthesis was used to answer the main research question. Results: For the general public, palliative care is still associated with death and dying and comforting sick people towards the end of their lives. Multiple social determinants are linked to better knowledge of palliative care: higher education, higher income, female gender, having relatives that received palliative care, and permanent employment. The population’s knowledge of palliative care structures increases, the longer such structures have been established within a country. Young adults are familiar with the term palliative care, yet their understanding lacks nuance. They associate palliative care with death and dying and perceive palliative care to be a medical discipline primarily for the elderly. Nevertheless, young adults demand participation within the planning of interventions to destigmatize palliative care. Conclusions: The general public still lacks a detailed understanding of palliative care. Palliative care faces stigma at multiple levels, which creates barriers for those who set out to implement it. However, addressing young adults as a crucial peer group can help break down barriers and promote access to palliative care.

Background: The SARS-CoV-2 pandemic has presented major challenges to the health system. Despite high acute case numbers, patients without Covid-19 still need to be cared for. Due to the severity of the disease and a possible stressful overall situation, patients with palliative care needs also require comprehensive care during pandemic times. In addition to specialized palliative care facilities, this also takes place in non palliative care wards. In order to ensure this general palliative care also in pandemic times, the experience of the staff should be used. The aim of this paper is to examine challenges and possible solutions for general palliative care inpatients in relation to the care of seriously ill and dying patients and their relatives. Methods: Qualitative semi-structured focus groups were conducted online for the study. Participants were staff from intensive care or isolation wards or from units where vulnerable patients (e.g. with cognitive impairment) are cared for. The focus groups were recorded and subsequently transcribed. The data material was analysed with the content structuring content analysis according to Kuckartz. Results: Five focus groups with four to eight health care professionals with various backgrounds were conducted. Fifteen main categories with two to eight subcategories were identified. Based on frequency and the importance expressed by the focus groups, six categories were extracted as central aspects: visiting regulations, communication with relatives, hygiene measures, cooperation, determination of the patients will and the possibility to say good bye. Conclusion: The pandemic situation produced several challenges needing specific solutions in order to manage the care of seriously ill and dying patients. Especially visiting needs regulation to prevent social isolation and dying alone. Finding alternative communication ways as well as interprofessional and interdisciplinary cooperation is a precondition for individualised care of seriously ill and dying patients and their relatives. Measures preventing infections should be transparently communicated in hospitals.