Specialty Hospitals to Take On EMTALA Duties

The technical advisory group examining the Emergency Medical Treatment and Labor Act put its efforts to rest in April with a final report that its physician members hope will make on-call service more workable and improve the statute's effects in the trenches.

The report recommends “community call” plans that share resources to fulfill EMTALA responsibilities, and emphasizes the obligations of specialty hospitals in meeting the on-call crisis. The advisory panel met seven times over 3 years to advise the Secretary of the Department of Health and Human Services on how to improve guidance and enforcement of EMTALA. The 19-member advisory group included Centers for Medicare and Medicaid Services (CMS) staff, the inspector general of HHS, various patient and hospital representatives, and physician representation. Several of the panel's recommendations to improve on-call systems already have been implemented.

The CMS has begun to make it clear that specialty hospitals are not exempt from EMTALA obligations. Furthermore, in a draft Inpatient Prospective Payment System regulation for fiscal year 2009, the agency is now proposing that hospitals be allowed to group together and form community call to meet their on-call responsibilities.

The panel “had a fairly circumscribed charge, in that they weren't being asked to tackle the big problems lurking behind EMTALA,” said Barbara Tomar, director of federal affairs for the American College of Emergency Physicians. “They did a tremendous job in dealing with some incredibly technical and complex issues … in simplifying and clarifying language, and in refining what [EMTALA] means.”

The panel did not let its limited charge—and the broader issues—go unnoticed. It included in its list of recommendations two “high-priority” items: HHS should amend EMTALA to include liability protection, and it should develop a funding mechanism for hospitals and physicians who provide care covered by the statute.

Like other TAG recommendations, the request for CMS to clarify its position on “shared or community call” and permit formal arrangements is a recognition of local variations. It's also a reflection of how the emergency care environment has changed overall since 2003, when EMTALA regulations were revised to allow on-call physicians more flexibility.

The advisory panel's conclusion that participation in community call plans can “satisfy [hospitals'] on-call coverage obligations”—a notion that CMS is now seeking comment on—is “a new option on the table,” said Ms. Tomar.

“It's a recognition of the fact that you no longer have full contingents of on-call doctors waiting at every hospital … that if you can get a community to pull together doctors to serve different hospitals on different days and connect that with your EMS system, you've got a potential plan,” she said.

It may not always be possible to implement such plans successfully—at least one solid regional effort recently collapsed, Tomar noted. In that light, the panel clearly stated in its recommendation that hospitals must have backup plans, and that a community call arrangement does not negate a hospital's obligation under EMTALA to perform medical screening exams.

The 2006 Inpatient Prospective Payment System final rule adopted another related recommendation: Hospitals with specialized capabilities but no EDs are bound by the same responsibilities under EMTALA as specialty hospitals with dedicated EDs.

The advisory group closed with heated debate, when questions were raised about whether EMTALA should apply to the transfer of inpatients who are never fully stabilized. The panel was presented with several scenarios, such as a patient who comes in with chest pain and is admitted with a probable diagnosis of angina—but who is found with additional testing to have a dissecting thoracic aneurysm or other life-threatening surgical emergency that the admitting hospital is unable to address.

The panel narrowly recommended that EMTALA be extended to cover inpatient transfers, but only if the patient has not been stabilized for the condition requiring admittance. And in the end, the CMS ran with the contentious recommendation. Like the community call recommendation, it made its way into the draft Inpatient Prospective Payment System regulation for fiscal year 2009.

The technical advisory group examining the Emergency Medical Treatment and Labor Act put its efforts to rest in April with a final report that its physician members hope will make on-call service more workable and improve the statute's effects in the trenches.

The report recommends “community call” plans that share resources to fulfill EMTALA responsibilities, and emphasizes the obligations of specialty hospitals in meeting the on-call crisis. The advisory panel met seven times over 3 years to advise the Secretary of the Department of Health and Human Services on how to improve guidance and enforcement of EMTALA. The 19-member advisory group included Centers for Medicare and Medicaid Services (CMS) staff, the inspector general of HHS, various patient and hospital representatives, and physician representation. Several of the panel's recommendations to improve on-call systems already have been implemented.

The CMS has begun to make it clear that specialty hospitals are not exempt from EMTALA obligations. Furthermore, in a draft Inpatient Prospective Payment System regulation for fiscal year 2009, the agency is now proposing that hospitals be allowed to group together and form community call to meet their on-call responsibilities.

The panel “had a fairly circumscribed charge, in that they weren't being asked to tackle the big problems lurking behind EMTALA,” said Barbara Tomar, director of federal affairs for the American College of Emergency Physicians. “They did a tremendous job in dealing with some incredibly technical and complex issues … in simplifying and clarifying language, and in refining what [EMTALA] means.”

The panel did not let its limited charge—and the broader issues—go unnoticed. It included in its list of recommendations two “high-priority” items: HHS should amend EMTALA to include liability protection, and it should develop a funding mechanism for hospitals and physicians who provide care covered by the statute.

Like other TAG recommendations, the request for CMS to clarify its position on “shared or community call” and permit formal arrangements is a recognition of local variations. It's also a reflection of how the emergency care environment has changed overall since 2003, when EMTALA regulations were revised to allow on-call physicians more flexibility.

The advisory panel's conclusion that participation in community call plans can “satisfy [hospitals'] on-call coverage obligations”—a notion that CMS is now seeking comment on—is “a new option on the table,” said Ms. Tomar.

“It's a recognition of the fact that you no longer have full contingents of on-call doctors waiting at every hospital … that if you can get a community to pull together doctors to serve different hospitals on different days and connect that with your EMS system, you've got a potential plan,” she said.

It may not always be possible to implement such plans successfully—at least one solid regional effort recently collapsed, Tomar noted. In that light, the panel clearly stated in its recommendation that hospitals must have backup plans, and that a community call arrangement does not negate a hospital's obligation under EMTALA to perform medical screening exams.

The 2006 Inpatient Prospective Payment System final rule adopted another related recommendation: Hospitals with specialized capabilities but no EDs are bound by the same responsibilities under EMTALA as specialty hospitals with dedicated EDs.

The advisory group closed with heated debate, when questions were raised about whether EMTALA should apply to the transfer of inpatients who are never fully stabilized. The panel was presented with several scenarios, such as a patient who comes in with chest pain and is admitted with a probable diagnosis of angina—but who is found with additional testing to have a dissecting thoracic aneurysm or other life-threatening surgical emergency that the admitting hospital is unable to address.

The panel narrowly recommended that EMTALA be extended to cover inpatient transfers, but only if the patient has not been stabilized for the condition requiring admittance. And in the end, the CMS ran with the contentious recommendation. Like the community call recommendation, it made its way into the draft Inpatient Prospective Payment System regulation for fiscal year 2009.

The technical advisory group examining the Emergency Medical Treatment and Labor Act put its efforts to rest in April with a final report that its physician members hope will make on-call service more workable and improve the statute's effects in the trenches.

The report recommends “community call” plans that share resources to fulfill EMTALA responsibilities, and emphasizes the obligations of specialty hospitals in meeting the on-call crisis. The advisory panel met seven times over 3 years to advise the Secretary of the Department of Health and Human Services on how to improve guidance and enforcement of EMTALA. The 19-member advisory group included Centers for Medicare and Medicaid Services (CMS) staff, the inspector general of HHS, various patient and hospital representatives, and physician representation. Several of the panel's recommendations to improve on-call systems already have been implemented.

The CMS has begun to make it clear that specialty hospitals are not exempt from EMTALA obligations. Furthermore, in a draft Inpatient Prospective Payment System regulation for fiscal year 2009, the agency is now proposing that hospitals be allowed to group together and form community call to meet their on-call responsibilities.

The panel “had a fairly circumscribed charge, in that they weren't being asked to tackle the big problems lurking behind EMTALA,” said Barbara Tomar, director of federal affairs for the American College of Emergency Physicians. “They did a tremendous job in dealing with some incredibly technical and complex issues … in simplifying and clarifying language, and in refining what [EMTALA] means.”

The panel did not let its limited charge—and the broader issues—go unnoticed. It included in its list of recommendations two “high-priority” items: HHS should amend EMTALA to include liability protection, and it should develop a funding mechanism for hospitals and physicians who provide care covered by the statute.

Like other TAG recommendations, the request for CMS to clarify its position on “shared or community call” and permit formal arrangements is a recognition of local variations. It's also a reflection of how the emergency care environment has changed overall since 2003, when EMTALA regulations were revised to allow on-call physicians more flexibility.

The advisory panel's conclusion that participation in community call plans can “satisfy [hospitals'] on-call coverage obligations”—a notion that CMS is now seeking comment on—is “a new option on the table,” said Ms. Tomar.

“It's a recognition of the fact that you no longer have full contingents of on-call doctors waiting at every hospital … that if you can get a community to pull together doctors to serve different hospitals on different days and connect that with your EMS system, you've got a potential plan,” she said.

It may not always be possible to implement such plans successfully—at least one solid regional effort recently collapsed, Tomar noted. In that light, the panel clearly stated in its recommendation that hospitals must have backup plans, and that a community call arrangement does not negate a hospital's obligation under EMTALA to perform medical screening exams.

The 2006 Inpatient Prospective Payment System final rule adopted another related recommendation: Hospitals with specialized capabilities but no EDs are bound by the same responsibilities under EMTALA as specialty hospitals with dedicated EDs.

The advisory group closed with heated debate, when questions were raised about whether EMTALA should apply to the transfer of inpatients who are never fully stabilized. The panel was presented with several scenarios, such as a patient who comes in with chest pain and is admitted with a probable diagnosis of angina—but who is found with additional testing to have a dissecting thoracic aneurysm or other life-threatening surgical emergency that the admitting hospital is unable to address.

The panel narrowly recommended that EMTALA be extended to cover inpatient transfers, but only if the patient has not been stabilized for the condition requiring admittance. And in the end, the CMS ran with the contentious recommendation. Like the community call recommendation, it made its way into the draft Inpatient Prospective Payment System regulation for fiscal year 2009.