Author’s reply to Dawson

Dawson raises a question about the harms of repeated intravenous cannulation.1 As stated in our introduction,2 however, clinically assisted hydration is not synonymous with intravenous administration and, especially at the end of life, the subcutaneous route is often used in preference to the intravenous route (if a parenteral route is used). The latter is especially relevant for non-secondary care settings, such as hospice or home settings. Indeed, the subcutaneous route is the predominant route of administration in the ongoing Chelsea II trial.3 Importantly, subcutaneous cannulation is relatively atraumatic, and not generally associated with the problems outlined by Dawson.
Read Original Article: Author’s reply to Dawson »