Is Unconsciousness the Intention? Physicians’ Perspectives on Palliative Sedation Outside Specialized Palliative Care: A Qualitative Study

Background The principle of double effect is often invoked to interpret clinical intentions in palliative sedation (PS), considering that intended effect may differ from foreseen effect. Despite clarifications, intentions concerning patient consciousness remain ambiguous. Moreover, little is known about how non-palliative care specialists understand and apply these intentions. Methods This study aims to explore physicians' intentions regarding PS, with a particular focus on the relationship between their intentions and patients' consciousness. This qualitative study is based on twelve semi-structured interviews with physicians from a university hospital in France. The methodology combined hierarchical evocation, clinical vignettes, and semi-structured interviews. Results The study reveals considerable heterogeneity in physicians' intentions regarding patient unconsciousness. The distinction between intended and foreseen effects was often poorly understood. References to the doctrine of double effect were rare, whereas the principle of proportionality was more frequently acknowledged. Conclusion This study reveals important discrepancies between specialized frameworks and the conceptual models of clinical reasoning. We particularly highlighted the inadequacy of the principle of double effect to enable an explicit evaluation of the ethical significance of induced unconsciousness and proposed a more integrated approach to palliative sedation, grounded in contemporary evidence, and proportionality.