Physician-assisted Death: Ethical Implications for Emergency Physicians.

Physician-assisted death (PAD) has long been a strongly debated moral and public policy issue in the United States, and an increasing number of jurisdictions have legalized this practice under certain circumstances. In light of changing terminology, laws, public and professional attitudes, and the availability of published data about the practice, we review key concepts and terms in the ongoing PAD debate, moral arguments for and against PAD, the current legal status of PAD in the United States and in other nations, and data on the reported experience with PAD in those U.S. jurisdictions where it is a legal practice. We then identify situations in which emergency physicians (EPs) may encounter patients who request PAD or have attempted to end their lives with physician assistance and consider EP responses in those situations. Based on our analysis, we offer recommendations for emergency medical practice and professional association policy.

Physician orders for life-sustaining treatment and emergency medicine: ethical considerations, legal issues, and emerging trends.

Since its original development in Oregon in 1993, Physician Orders for Life-Sustaining Treatment (POLST) is quickly growing in popularity and prevalence as a method of communicating the end-of-life care preferences for the seriously ill and frail nationwide. Early evidence has suggested significant advantages over advance directives and do-not-resuscitate/do-not-intubate documents both in accuracy and penetration within relevant populations. POLST also may contribute to the quality of end-of-life care administered. Although it was designed to be as clear as possible, unexpected challenges in the interpretation and use of POLST in the emergency department do exist. In this article, we will discuss the history, ethical considerations, legal issues, and emerging trends in the use of POLST documents as they apply to emergency medicine.

A model for emergency department end-of-life communications after acute devastating events--part II: moving from resuscitative to end-of-life or palliative treatment.

The model for emergency department (ED) end-of-life communications after acute devastating events addresses decision-making capacity, surrogates, and advance directives, including legal definitions and application of these steps. Part II concerns communications moving from resuscitative to palliative and end-of-life treatments. After completing the steps involved in determining decision-making, emergency physicians (EPs) should consider starting palliative measures versus continuing resuscitative treatment. As communications related to these end-of-life decisions increasingly fall within the scope of emergency medicine (EM) practice, we need to become educated about and comfortable with them.

A model for emergency department end-of-life communications after acute devastating events--part I: decision-making capacity, surrogates, and advance directives.

Making decisions for a patient affected by sudden devastating illness or injury traumatizes a patient's family and loved ones. Even in the absence of an emergency, surrogates making end-of-life treatment decisions may experience negative emotional effects. Helping surrogates with these end-of-life decisions under emergent conditions requires the emergency physician (EP) to be clear, making medical recommendations with sensitivity. This model for emergency department (ED) end-of-life communications after acute devastating events comprises the following steps: 1) determine the patient's decision-making capacity; 2) identify the legal surrogate; 3) elicit patient values as expressed in completed advance directives; 4) determine patient/surrogate understanding of the life-limiting event and expectant treatment goals; 5) convey physician understanding of the event, including prognosis, treatment options, and recommendation; 6) share decisions regarding withdrawing or withholding of resuscitative efforts, using available resources and considering options for organ donation; and 7) revise treatment goals as needed. Emergency physicians should break bad news compassionately, yet sufficiently, so that surrogate and family understand both the gravity of the situation and the lack of long-term benefit of continued life-sustaining interventions. EPs should also help the surrogate and family understand that palliative care addresses comfort needs of the patient including adequate treatment for pain, dyspnea, or anxiety. Part I of this communications model reviews determination of decision-making capacity, surrogacy laws, and advance directives, including legal definitions and application of these steps; Part II (which will appear in a future issue of AEM) covers communication moving from resuscitative to end-of-life and palliative treatment. EPs should recognize acute devastating illness or injuries, when appropriate, as opportunities to initiate end-of-life discussions and to implement shared decisions.