Related Experiment Video
Updated: Apr 17, 2026

Setting Up a Stroke Team Algorithm and Conducting Simulation-based Training in the Emergency Department - A Practical Guide
Published on: January 15, 2017
TRIAD VI: how well do emergency physicians understand Physicians Orders for Life Sustaining Treatment (POLST) forms?
Ferdinando L Mirarchi1, Ankur A Doshi, Samuel W Zerkle
1From the *Department of Emergency Medicine, University of Pittsburgh Medical Center Hamot, Erie; †University of Pittsburgh School of Medicine, Pittsburgh; and ‡Basic Science Research, University of Pittsburgh Medical Center Hamot, Erie, Pennsylvania.
Background:
Physician Orders for Life-Sustaining Treatment (POLST) documents are active medical orders to be followed with intention to bridge treatment across health care systems. We hypothesized that these forms can be confusing and jeopardize patient safety.
Objectives:
The aim of this study was to determine whether POLST documents are confusing in the emergency department setting and how confusion impacts the provision or withholding of lifesaving interventions.
Methods:
Members of the Pennsylvania chapter of the American College of Emergency Physicians were surveyed between September and October 2013. Respondents were to determine code status and treatment decisions in scenarios of critically ill patients with POLST documents who emergently arrest. Combinations of resuscitations (do not resuscitate [DNR], cardiopulmonary resuscitation) and levels of treatment (full, limited, comfort measures) were represented. Responses were summarized as percentages and analyzed by subgroup using the Fisher exact test. P = 0.05 was considered significant. We defined confusion in response as absence of consensus (supermajority of 95%).
Results:
Our response rate was 26% (223/855). For scenarios specifying DNR and either full or limited treatment, most chose DNR (59%-84%) and 25% to 75% chose resuscitation. When the POLST specified DNR with comfort measures, 90% selected DNR and withheld resuscitation. When cardiopulmonary resuscitation/full treatment was presented, 95% selected "full code" and resuscitation. Physician age and experience significantly affected response rates; prior POLST education had no impact. In most scenarios depicted, responses reflected confusion over its interpretation.
Conclusions:
Significant confusion exists among members of the Pennsylvania chapter of the American College of Emergency Physicians regarding the use of POLST in critically ill patients. This confusion poses risk to patient safety. Additional training and/or safeguards are needed to allow patient choice as well as protect their safety.
More Related Videos
06:59A Novel Approach for the Administration of Medications and Fluids in Emergency Scenarios and Settings
Published on: November 9, 2016
10:38Observational Study Protocol for Repeated Clinical Examination and Critical Care Ultrasonography Within the Simple Intensive Care Studies
Published on: January 16, 2019
Related Concept Videos
Standards of Care II
Types of Reports III: Telephone and Verbal Reports
Here's an overview of each type:
Telephone Orders
Ethical Issues
Ethical Concerns in Healthcare:
Methods of Documentation II: POMR
Obedience
Ethical Dilemmas II