Core share and HTML view are not available for this content. However, as you have access to this content, a full PDF is available via the ‘Save PDF’ action button.
Introduction: Incapacitated patients who lack substitute decision-makers (SDM) are commonly encountered in the emergency department (ED). The number of these patients will rise dramatically as the Baby Boomers age. We can expect an influx of elderly patients who lack decisional capacity due to dementia and other illnesses, and who present without family. It is estimated that 3 to 4 percent of U.S. nursing home residents have no SDM or advance directives. Medical decision-making for this cohort poses an ethical challenge, particularly in the ED setting. Methods: A comprehensive review of the literature was conducted surrounding decision-making for incapacitated and unrepresented patients in the hospital setting. Articles were identified using MEDLINE (1946-October 2015) and Embase (1974-October 2015). The reference lists of relevant articles were hand searched. Articles describing decision-making processes that have been proposed, tested or applied in practice were chosen for full review. The aim of this review was to outline recognized medical decision-making processes for incapacitated and unrepresented patients, and to identify areas for future research. Results: The search yielded 20 articles addressing decision-making for incapacitated and unrepresented patients in the hospital setting. All of these articles focus on the intensive care unit and other hospital wards; no literature on the ED setting was found. Five types of formal consulting bodies exist to assist physicians in applying the best interest standard for this patient cohort: internal hospital ethics committees, external ethics committees, public guardians, court-appointed guardians, or judges. The majority of decisions for these patients, however, are made informally by a single physician or by a healthcare team, although it is well recognized that this approach lacks appropriate safeguards. There is no consensus surrounding the optimal approach to decision-making in these cases, and as such there is significant inconsistency in how medical decisions are made for these patients. Conclusion: There are several articles describing decision-making processes for incapacitated and unrepresented patients, none of which focus on the ED. These processes are not practical for use in the ED. Further inquiry is needed into the most ethical and respectful method of decision-making for this patient cohort in the ED.
