[German "Triage Act"-Regulation with fatal consequences]. / "Triagegesetz" ­ Regelung mit fatalen Folgen.

With the coming into force of § 5c of the Infection Protection Act (IfSG), the so-called Triage Act, on 14 December 2022, a protracted discussion has come to a provisional conclusion, the result of which physicians and social associations but also lawyers and ethicists are equally dissatisfied. The explicit exclusion of the discontinuation of treatment that has already begun in favor of new patients with better chances of success (so-called tertiary or ex-post triage) prevents allocation decisions with the aim of enabling as many patients as possible to beneficially participate in medical care under crisis conditions. The result of the new regulation is de facto a first come first served allocation, which is associated with the highest mortality even among individuals with limitations or disabilities and was rejected by a large margin as unfair in a population survey. Mandating allocation decisions based on the likelihood of success but which are not permitted to be consistently implemented and prohibiting, for example the use of age and frailty as prioritization criteria, although both factors most strongly determine the short-term probability of survival according to evident data, shows the contradictory and dogmatic nature of the regulation. The only remaining possibility is the consistent termination of treatment that is no longer indicated or desired by the patient, regardless of the current resource situation; however, if a different decision is made in a crisis situation than in a situation without a lack of resources, this practice would not be justified and would be punishable. Accordingly, the highest efforts must be set on legally compliant documentation, especially in the stage of decompensated crisis care in a region. The goal of enabling as many patients as possible to beneficially participate in medical care under crisis conditions is in any case thwarted by the new German Triage Act.

Ruthless Utilitarianism? COVID-19 State Triage Protocols May Subject Patients to Racial Discrimination and Providers to Legal Liability.

As the coronavirus pandemic intensified, many communities in the United States experienced shortages of ventilators, intensive care beds, and other medical supplies and treatments. Currently, there is no single national response to provide guidance on allocation of scarce health care resources. Accordingly, states have formulated various "triage protocols" to prioritize those who will receive care and those who may not have the same access to health care services when the population demand exceeds the supply. Triage protocols address general concepts of "fairness" under accepted medical ethics rules and the consensus is that limited medical resources "should be allocated to do the greatest good for the greatest number of people."1 The actual utility of this utilitarian ethics approach is questionable, however, leaving many questions about what is "fair" unanswered. Saving as many people as possible during a health care crisis is a laudable goal but not at the expense of ignoring patients's legal rights, which are not suspended during the crisis. This Article examines the triage protocols from six states to determine whose rights are being recognized and whose rights are being denied, answering the pivotal question: If there is potential for disparate impact of facially neutral state triage protocols against Black Americans and other ethnic groups, is this legally actionable discrimination? This may be a case of first impression for the courts to resolve."[B]lack Americans are 3.5 times more likely to die of COVID-19 than [W]hite Americans … . Latinx people are almost twice as likely to die of the disease, compared with [W]hite people." 2 "Our civil rights laws protect the equal dignity of every human life from ruthless utilitarianism … . HHS is committed to leaving no one behind during an emergency, and this guidance is designed to help health care providers meet that goal." - Roger Severino, Office of Civil Rights Director, U.S. Department of Health and Human Services. 3.

Comorbidity in context: Part 2. Ethicolegal considerations around HIV and tuberculosis during the COVID-19 pandemic in South Africa.

The COVID-19 pandemic has brought discussions around the appropriate and fair rationing of scare resources to the forefront. This is of special importance in a country such as South Africa (SA), where scarce resources interface with high levels of need. A large proportion of the SA population has risk factors associated with worse COVID-19 outcomes. Many people are also potentially medically and socially vulnerable secondary to the high levels of infection with HIV and tuberculosis (TB) in the country. This is the second of two articles. The first examined the clinical evidence regarding the inclusion of HIV and TB as comorbidities relevant to intensive care unit (ICU) admission triage criteria. Given the fact that patients with HIV or TB may potentially be excluded from admission to an ICU on the basis of an assumption of lack of clinical suitability for critical care, in this article we explore the ethicolegal implications of limiting ICU access of persons living with HIV or TB. We argue that all allocation and rationing decisions must be in terms of SA law, which prohibits unfair discrimination. In addition, ethical decision-making demands accurate and evidence-based strategies for the fair distribution of limited resources. Rationing decisions and processes should be fair and based on visible and consistent criteria that can be subjected to objective scrutiny, with the ultimate aim of ensuring accountability, equity and fairness.

Learning the developments in EMTALA jurisprudence through the lens of John West's "case law update".

This article covers three recurring issues concerning the federal law known as the Emergency Medical Treatment and Labor Act (EMTALA) that keep popping up in John West's Case Law Update case updates, and consistently bedevil hospital risk managers. First, what exactly constitutes an "appropriate" medical screening examination; second, when is a patient actually "stabilized' under EMTALA; and third, does the EMTALA obligation really "disappear" when a patient is admitted to the hospital? The editors wanted to analyze topics that challenge the courts to "get it right" on the law and that drive risk managers crazy. EMTALA is the "poster child" for such a topic.

View. The Dutch Critical Care Triage Guideline on Covid-19: Not Necessarily Discriminatory.

Recently, the Dutch Medical Doctors Association (Federatie Medisch Specialisten en de Koninklijke Nederlandsche Maatschappij tot bevordering der Geneeskunst) drafted the 'Covid-19 triage guideline ICU admission' that has age cut-offs that deprioritise or exclude the elderly. Such an age limit for intensive care unit (ICU) admission in case of a national emergency seems discriminatory, and thus, is it inappropriate to use, or not? The question is whether age in itself can be considered as an acceptable selection criterion.

Age discrimination in critical care triage in South Africa: The law and the allocation of scarce health resources in the COVID-19 pandemic.

No one may be refused emergency medical treatment in South Africa (SA). Yet score-based categorical exclusions used in critical care triage guidelines disproportionately discriminate against older adults, the cognitively and physically impaired, and the disabled. Adults over the age of 60, who make up 9.1% of the SA population, are most likely to present with disabilities and comorbidities at triage. Score-based models, drawn from international precedents, deny these patients admission to an ICU when resources are constrained, such as during influenza and COVID-19 outbreaks. The Critical Care Society of Southern Africa and the South African Medical Association adopted the Clinical Frailty Scale, which progressively withholds admission to ICUs based on age, frailty and comorbidities in a manner that potentially contravenes constitutional and equality prohibitions against unfair discrimination. The legal implications for healthcare providers are extensive, ranging from personal liability to hate speech and crimes against humanity. COVID-19 guidelines and score-based triage protocols must be revised urgently to eliminate unlawful discrimination against legally protected categories of patients in SA, including the disabled and the elderly. That will ensure legal certainty for health practitioners, and secure the full protections of the law to which the health-vulnerable and those of advanced age are constitutionally entitled.

Contemporary Obstetric Triage.

IMPORTANCE: The role of obstetric triage in the care of pregnant women has expanded significantly. Factors driving this change include the Emergency Medical Treatment and Active Labor Act, improved methods of testing for fetal well-being, increasing litigation risk, and changes in resident duty hour guidelines. The contemporary obstetric triage facility must have processes in place to provide a medical screening examination that complies with regulatory statues while considering both the facility's maternal level of care and available resources. OBJECTIVE: This review examines the history of the development of obstetric triage, current considerations in a contemporary obstetric triage paradigm, and future areas for consideration. An example of a contemporary obstetric triage program at an academic medical center is presented. RESULT: A successful contemporary obstetric triage paradigm is one that addresses the questions of "sick or not sick" and "labor or no labor," for every obstetric patient that presents for care. Failure to do so risks poor patient outcome, poor patient satisfaction, adverse litigation outcome, regulatory scrutiny, and exclusion from federal payment programs. CONCLUSIONS: Understanding the role of contemporary obstetric triage in the current health care environment is important for both providers and health care leadership. TARGET AUDIENCE: This study is for obstetricians and gynecologists as well as family physicians. LEARNING OBJECTIVES: After completing this activity, the learner should be better able to understand the scope of a medical screening examination within the context of contemporary obstetric triage; understand how a facility's level of maternal care influences clinical decision making in a contemporary obstetric triage setting; and understand the considerations necessary for the systematic evaluation of the 2 basic contemporary obstetric questions, "sick or not sick?" and "labor or no labor?"

Triage management, survival, and the law in the age of Ebola.

Liberia, Sierra Leone, and Guinea lack the public health infrastructure, economic stability, and overall governance to stem the spread of Ebola. Even with robust outside assistance, the epidemiological data have not improved. Vital resource management is haphazard and left to the discretion of individual Ebola treatment units. Only recently has the International Health Regulations (IHR) and World Health Organization (WHO) declared Ebola a Public Health Emergency of International Concern, making this crisis their fifth ongoing level 3 emergency. In particular, the WHO has been severely compromised by post-2003 severe acute respiratory syndrome (SARS) staffing, budget cuts, a weakened IHR treaty, and no unambiguous legal mandate. Population-based triage management under a central authority is indicated to control the transmission and ensure fair and decisive resource allocation across all triage categories. The shared responsibilities critical to global health solutions must be realized and the rightful attention, sustained resources, and properly placed legal authority be assured within the WHO, the IHR, and the vulnerable nations.

Obstetric triage: a systematic review of the past fifteen years: 1998-2013.

BACKGROUND: Triage concepts have shifted the focus of obstetric care to include obstetric triage units. The purpose of this systematic review is to examine the literature on use of triage concepts in obstetrics during a 15-year time frame. METHODS: A systematic review was completed of the obstetric triage literature from 1998 to 2013 using the electronic online databases from PubMed, CINHAL, Ovid, and Cochrane Library Reviews within the English language. Reference lists of articles were reviewed to identify other pertinent publications. Both peer-reviewed and non-peer-reviewed documents were used. INCLUSION CRITERIA: articles specifically related to obstetric triage or obstetric emergency practices in the hospital setting. Exclusion criteria included: manuscripts that focused on general, nonobstetric emergency and triage units, telephone triage, out-of-hospital practices, other clinical conditions, and references outside the time frame of 1998-2013. RESULTS: Key categories were identified: legal issues and impact of Emergency Medical Treatment and Active Labor Act (EMTALA); liability pitfalls; risk stratification (acuity tools); clinical decision aids; utilization, patient flow, and patient satisfaction; impact on interprofessional education and advanced nursing practice; and management of selected clinical conditions. Components of a best practice model for obstetric triage are introduced. CONCLUSION: Seven key triage categories from the literature were identified and best practices were developed for obstetric triage units from this systematic review. Both can be used to guide future practice and research within obstetric triage.

Role of telephone triage in obstetrics.

UNLABELLED: The telephone has become an indispensable method of communication in the practice of obstetrics. The telephone is one of the primary methods by which the patient makes her appointments and contacts her health care provider for advice, reassurance, and referrals. Current methods of telephone triage include personal at the physicians' office, telephone answering services, labor and delivery nurses, and a dedicated telephone triage system using algorithms. Limitations of telephone triage include the inability of the provider to see the patient and receive visual clues from the interaction and the challenges of obtaining a complete history over the telephone. In addition, there are potential safety and legal issues with telephone triage. To date, there is insufficient evidence to either validate or refute the use of a dedicated telephone triage system compared with a traditional system using an answering service or nurses on labor and delivery. TARGET AUDIENCE: Obstetricians and gynecologists, family physicians. LEARNING OBJECTIVES: After completing this CME activity, physicians should be better able to analyze the scope of variation in telephone triage across health care providers and categorize the components that go into a successful triage system, assess the current scope of research in telephone triage in obstetrics, evaluate potential safety and legal issues with telephone triage in obstetrics, and identify issues that should be addressed in any institution that is using or implementing a system of telephone triage in obstetrics.

ICU triage: the potential legal liability of withdrawing ICU care during a catastrophic event.

In the event of a catastrophic disaster, healthcare resources may be completely overwhelmed. To address this, the federal Agency for Healthcare Research and Quality has recommended using "crisis standards of care"during such an event. These standards would recommend allocating scarce medical resources to do the greatest good for the greatest number of patients. In a dire catastrophic event, such standards may include the allocation of intensive care unit (ICU) resources to maximize patient survival. Triage protocols that seek to efficiently allocate ICU resources during a disaster have been reviewed by the Institute of Medicine. Such protocols suggest the exclusion of patients with high mortality or high resource requirements from ICU care to do the most good for the greatest number of patients. In extreme circumstances, these protocols recommend withdrawing ICU resources from sicker patients in favor of more salvageable patients. However, if providers were to follow the earlier protocols in a disaster and withdraw and reallocate ICU care, criminal or civil liability could result. Two legal solutions to avoid this potential for liability have been suggested in this article.