ABSTRACT
Patients who sign out or choose to leave the emergency department (ED) against medical advice (AMA) present important challenges. The current approach to the complex legal, ethical, and medical challenges that arise when adult patients decline medical care in the ED would benefit from a systematic best-practice strategy to maximize patient care outcomes, minimize legal risk, and reach the optimal ethical standard for this at-risk population. Professional responsibilities generated during an AMA encounter include determination of patient decision-making capacity, balancing protection of patient autonomy with prevention of harm, providing the best alternatives for patients who decline some or all of the proposed plan, negotiating to encourage patients to stay, planning for subsequent care, and documenting what transpired. We present two cases that illustrate key insights into a best-practice approach for emergency physicians (EPs) to address problems arising when patients want or need to leave the ED prior to completion of their care. We propose a practical, systematic framework, "AIMED" (assess, investigate, mitigate, explain, and document), that can be consistently applied in situations where patients consider leaving or do leave before their evaluations and urgent treatment are complete. Our goal is to maximize patient outcomes, minimize legal risk, and encourage a consistent and ethical approach to these vulnerable patients.
