Jump to: Page Content, Site Navigation, Site Search,
You are seeing this message because your web browser does not support basic web standards. Find out more about why this message is appearing and what you can do to make your experience on this site better.
Hilary Pavis a Hayward House
Macmillan Specialist Palliative Care Unit, Nottingham City Hospital NHS
Trust, Nottingham NG5 1PB, b University of Nottingham and
Hayward House Macmillan Specialist Palliative Care Unit Correspondence to: A Wilcock
andrew.wilcock{at}nottingham.ac.uk
A quarter of all prescriptions in palliative medicine are
for licensed drugs that are used for unlicensed indications or that are
given by an unlicensed route. Such prescriptions may affect two thirds
of inpatients in specialist palliative care units.
1 2
Doctors have been recommended to record in the patient's notes the
reason for prescribing outside the licence; to explain, where possible,
the position to the patient (and carers, if appropriate) in sufficient
detail to allow informed consent to be given; and to inform other
professionals involved in the care of the patient of such prescribing,
so that misunderstandings are avoided.3 Given the
widespread use of drugs outside their licence in palliative care,
strict adherence to these recommendations may be impractical. In view
of the implications of these recommendations for doctors in palliative
medicine and other doctors they advise, a position statement endorsed
by the specialty would be helpful. We undertook a survey of current
practice to inform the debate.
All 182 palliative care services in the United Kingdom with a
medical director or consultant were asked to complete anonymously a
postal questionnaire in October 1999 (figure). Informed consent was
defined thus: "Patients have been given the information they asked
for or need about their treatment in a way they can understand so that
whenever possible the patients have understood the nature, purpose and
material risks of what is proposed and consent to it before you provide
treatment."
![]()
Participants, methods, and results
Top
Participants, methods, and...
Comment
References

View larger version (57K):
[in a new window]
Questionnaire on unlicensed use of drugs that was sent to
palliative medicine specialists, with numbers (percentages) of
responses (n=117) to multiple choice questions
One hundred and seventeen questionnaires (64%) were returned. When
unlicensed prescribing was limited to consultants, this was generally
in the context of a consultant based service. No respondents always
obtained written consent to unlicensed use, and only a minority (<5%)
always obtained verbal consent, documented unlicensed use in the
patient's notes, or informed other professionals of it. The drugs for
which these recommended practices were sometimes carried out were
ketamine (58 reports), octreotide (19), ketorolac (15), midazolam (10),
gabapentin (10), and amitriptylline (10). The only unlicensed drug use
for which three of the services sometimes obtained written consent was
gabapentin for neuropathic pain
an indication for which it became
licensed in 2000.
Invited comments covered three main themes. Firstly, respondents said
that, given the prevalence of unlicensed use, it is impractical to
obtain written consent routinely
and that discussion of unlicensed use
could create unnecessary anxiety for the patient or carer.
Secondly, some respondents sought consent only when prescribing drugs
whose unlicensed use was not established in the specialty. Finally,
other respondents made no distinction between licensed and unlicensed
use and did not obtain verbal informed consent for use of any drug.
| |
Comment |
|---|
|
|
|---|
When prescribing drugs for use outside their licence, most specialists in palliative medicine do not routinely obtain verbal or written informed consent, document the reason for unlicensed use in the patient's notes, or inform other involved professionals of unlicensed use. When they do obtain consent, it is likely to be for the use of less established drugs and to be verbal rather than written. Strict adherence to the recommendations is not welcomed by palliative care specialists because of the number of drugs involved and the burden to patients and carers.
This view is shared by the Royal College of Paediatrics and Child
Health
the use of drugs outside their licence is also common in
paediatrics
which has stated that in general it is not necessary to
obtain the explicit consent of parents, carers, or patients for
unlicensed use. The royal college has also stated that NHS trusts
and health authorities should support therapeutic practices that are
advocated by a respectable, responsible body of
professionals.
4 5
| |
Acknowledgments |
|---|
Contributors: AW conceived the survey. HP and AW collated and analysed the data and wrote the paper, and both will act as guarantors.
| |
Footnotes |
|---|
Competing interests: None declared.
| |
References |
|---|
|
|
|---|
| 1. |
Atkinson CV, Kirkham SR.
Unlicensed uses for medication in a palliative care unit.
Palliat Med
1999;
13:
145-152 |
| 2. | Todd J, Davies A. Use of unlicensed medication in palliative medicine. Palliat Med 1999; 13: 446. |
| 3. | Cohen PJ. Off-label use of prescription drugs: legal, clinical and policy considerations. Eur J Anaesthesiol 1997; 14: 231-235[CrossRef][Medline]. |
| 4. | Royal College of Paediatrics and Child Health. Medicines for children. London: RCPCH, 1999. |
| 5. |
Conroy S, Choonara I, Impicciatore P, Mohn A, Arnell H, Rane A, et al.
Survey of unlicensed and off label drug use in paediatric wards in European countries.
BMJ
2000;
320:
79-82 |
(Accepted 14 May 2001)
Read all Rapid Responses