Get Full Government Meeting Transcripts, Videos, & Alerts Forever!
Get email alerts on the Advance Care Planning topic
No spam. Unsubscribe anytime.
Advisory group to release updated MOLST form, policies and training together; digital-first approach planned
Summary
A Department of Public Health advisory group reviewed training slides and agreed the updated MOLST form, revised policies and training should be released as a single package; members also moved to remove paper‑color and witness‑signature requirements and to host a digital form on the MOLST website.
An advisory group convened by the Department of Public Health reviewed a new training slide deck and agreed the updated medical orders for life‑sustaining treatment (MOLST) form, revised policies and training should be released together rather than in separate steps.
Members said the package will include a new single‑page form (both sides), updated policies and a revised training module and that release should be timed so the training materials match the policy and the form. The group discussed a digital‑first approach and asked that the downloadable digital form be hosted on the MOLST website with a notice that eligible providers must complete the required training before using the form on behalf of a patient.
Why it matters: MOLST forms document patients’ end‑of‑life treatment preferences and are used by clinicians and emergency responders. The committee’s decisions change what paperwork is required and how providers will access and learn the updated process.
The committee reviewed a nine‑slide draft intended as a common base for different audiences (providers, recipients and the public). Participants asked editorial and layout changes (larger font, fewer duplicate slides, removal of underlining and some adjectives) and agreed to remove the word “green” from the slide text so the deck does not imply a required paper color.
Members recalled that a pilot had used a lime‑green paper; the group agreed the new form should be color‑agnostic and that existing valid forms printed on lime green would still be acceptable unless otherwise specified in policy. The committee also confirmed the new MOLST form will not require a witness signature; members said the no‑witness change must be reflected in both the training and the policies so providers do not receive conflicting guidance.
Several participants emphasized implementation steps and dependencies. The policies and procedures document guides whether a form change can be rolled out and the group agreed the “digital first” element cannot be implemented until those policies direct the new process. Members said the policies, the digital form and the updated training should be launched together to avoid confusion where training and policy disagree.
Legal context and training requirements were discussed but not formally resolved in code or statute language. One attendee asked the group to ensure policy language clarifies that existing MOLST forms marked “pilot” or completed by untrained staff may not meet validity requirements; the committee flagged at least one consumer complaint about an ineligible provider using a nonstandard form during the pilot.
The committee identified operational details for follow up: the training should be updated on CT Train (the state training platform), the downloadable digital form should be available on the MOLST website, and a visible notice should state that only trained, authorized providers may complete a MOLST on behalf of a patient. The slide author agreed to make the editorial changes and circulate a revised deck to members.
The group scheduled its next meeting for March 10 at 11 a.m. and set a tentative follow‑up meeting two weeks later; members agreed to circulate meeting invitations and the revised slide deck before the next session.
