Examining EMTALA in the era of the patient protection and Affordable Care Act

Emergency Medical Treatment and Labor Act: Impact on Health Care, Nursing, Quality, and Safety

Nurse knowledge and expertise in Emergency Medical Treatment and Labor Act (EMTALA) are a prerequisite to meet emergency department practice laws and regulatory standards. EMTALA is a federal law that requires anyone coming to an emergency department for care to be stabilized and treated, regardless of their insurance status or ability to pay. Regulatory standard infractions resulting from an EMTALA violation complaint may include (1) penalties and/or fines, (2) future unannounced Centers for Medicare & Medicaid Services surveys, (3) documented Centers for Medicare & Medicaid Services deficiencies that require timely response, action plans, and audit for expected outcomes, (4) Medicare/Medicaid nonpayment for services, and (5) termination of a hospital's Medicare agreement. The consequences of EMTALA violations target physicians and hospitals; however, nurses are most often the first provider the patient encounters upon arrival to the emergency department. It is therefore essential that nurses maintain a proficient understanding of EMTALA laws, which requires special training, monitoring, periodic competency assessment strategies, and continuing education throughout their career. Furthermore, additional clinician education is needed on how to manage the complex expectations that are imposed on health care providers by regulatory policy. Doing this promotes safe, effective, patient-centered, timely, and efficient health care regulations from the beginning of one's introduction to the health care industry and throughout his or her career. This article seeks to ( a ) emphasize nursing staff's responsibility for EMTALA adherence, ( b ) identify the gaps among health care quality, safety, and nursing workforce competency standards that are imposed to meet the demands of EMTALA laws, and ( c ) provide recommendations for continuing education, monitoring, and periodic competency assessment strategies that may strengthen EMTALA compliance.

A Conceptual Framework for Optimizing the Equity of Hospital-Based Emergency Care: The Structure of Hospital Transfer Networks

Policy Points Current pay-for-performance and other payment policies ignore hospital transfers for emergency conditions, which may exacerbate disparities. No conceptual framework currently exists that offers a patient-centered, population-based perspective for the structure of hospital transfer networks. The hospital transfer network equity-quality framework highlights the external and internal factors that determine the structure of hospital transfer networks, including structural inequity and racism.

CONTEXT

Emergency care includes two key components: initial stabilization and transfer to a higher level of care. Significant work has focused on ensuring that local facilities can stabilize patients. However, less is understood about transfers for definitive care. To better understand how transfer network structure impacts population health and equity in emergency care, we proposea conceptual framework, the hospital transfer network equity-quality model (NET-EQUITY). NET-EQUITY can help optimize population outcomes, decrease disparities, and enhance planning by supporting a framework for understanding emergency department transfers.

METHODS

To develop the NET-EQUITY framework, we synthesized work on health systems and quality of health care (Donabedian, the Institute of Medicine, Ferlie, and Shortell) and the research framework of the National Institute on Minority Health and Health Disparities with legal and empirical research.

FINDINGS

The central thesis of our framework is that the structure of hospital transfer networks influences patient outcomes, as defined by the Institute of Medicine, which includes equity. The structure of hospital transfer networks is shaped by internal and external factors. The four main external factors are the regulatory, economic environment, provider, and sociocultural and physical/built environment. These environments all implicate issues of equity that are important to understand to foster an equitable population-based system of emergency care. The framework highlights external and internal factors that determine the structure of hospital transfer networks, including structural racism and inequity.

CONCLUSIONS

The NET-EQUITY framework provides a patient-centered, equity-focused framework for understanding the health of populations and how the structure of hospital transfer networks can influence the quality of care that patients receive.

The Implications of the Emergency Medical Treatment and Labor Act and the No Surprises Act for Plastic and Reconstructive Surgeons

SUMMARY

The Emergency Medical Treatment and Labor Act (EMTALA) was enacted by Congress in 1986 to protect uninsured patients against economic discrimination. Although this law has been established for several decades, recent passage of the No Surprises Act may invoke new implications for the health care system under EMTALA. Therefore, it is worthwhile to review EMTALA's applications to the practice of plastic surgery and review EMTALA in the context of the recently passed No Surprises Act. First, providers are mandated by EMTALA to administer a medical screening examination to any patient presenting for emergent care. Second, providers must administer medical stabilization if the medical screening examination reveals an emergent condition. If the hospital lacks specialized capabilities to provide stabilizing care, they are required to transfer the patient to a facility that can provide care. Although EMTALA's provisions protect patients and provide them with leverage to obtain emergency care, the act has been associated with out-of-network, or "surprise," medical bills for the insured population and, ultimately, may be detrimental to plastic surgeons in emergency settings. The concerns related to EMTALA within plastic surgery involve the overburdening of surgeons at tertiary care centers because of uncompensated care and high rates of interfacility transfers. In addition, the recent passage of the No Surprises Act to end out-of-network emergency bills may further impact care provided by plastic surgeons in emergency settings under EMTALA's mandate. Potential methods to address these concerns include increasing on-call reimbursement rates and implementation of emergency department telemedicine services.

Vascular surgery-related violations of the Emergency Medical Treatment and Labor Act

OBJECTIVE

The Emergency Medical Treatment and Labor Act (EMTALA) is a federal law established in 1986 to ensure that patients who present to an emergency department receive medical care regardless of means. Violations are reported to the Centers for Medicare and Medicaid Services and can result in significant financial penalties. Our objective was to assess all available EMTALA violations for vascular-related issues.

METHODS

EMTALA violations in the Centers for Medicare and Medicaid Services publicly available hospital violations database from 2011 to 2018 were evaluated for vascular-related issues. Details recorded were case type, hospital type, hospital region, reasons for violation, disposition, and mortality.

RESULTS

There were 7001 patients identified with any EMTALA violation and 98 (1.4%) were deemed vascular related. The majority (82.7%) of EMTALA violations occurred at urban/suburban hospitals. Based on the Association of American Medical Colleges United States region, vascular-related EMTALA violations occurred in the Northeast (7.1%), Southern (56.1%), Central (18.4%), and Western (18.4%) United States. Case types included cerebrovascular (28.6%), aortic related (22.4%; which consisted of ruptured aortic aneurysms [8.2%], aortic dissection [11.2%], and other aortic [3.1%]), vascular trauma (15.3%), venous-thromboembolic (15.3%), peripheral arterial disease (9.2%), dialysis access (5.1%), bowel ischemia (3.1%), and other (1%) cases. Patients were transferred to another facility in 41.8% of cases. The most common reasons for violation were specialty refusal or unavailability (30.6%), inappropriate documentation (29.6%), misdiagnosis (18.4%), poor communication (17.3%), inappropriate triage (13.3%), failure to obtain diagnostic laboratory tests or imaging (12.2%), and ancillary or nursing staff issues (7.1%). The overall mortality was 19.4% and 31.6% died during the index emergency department visit. Vascular conditions associated with death were venous thromboembolism (31.6%), ruptured aortic aneurysm (21.1%), aortic dissection (21.1%), other aortic causes (10.5%), vascular trauma (10.5%), and bowel ischemia (5.3%).

CONCLUSIONS

Although the frequency of vascular-related EMTALA violations was low, improvements in communication, awareness of vascular disease among staff, specialty staffing, and the development of referral networks and processes are needed to ensure that patients receive adequate care and that institutions are not placed at undue risk.

Examining the Emergency Medical Treatment and Active Labor Act: impact on telemedicine for neurotrauma

The Emergency Medical Treatment and Active Labor Act (EMTALA) protects patient access to emergency medical treatment regardless of insurance or socioeconomic status. A significant result of the COVID-19 pandemic has been the rapid acceleration in the adoption of telemedicine services across many facets of healthcare. However, very little literature exists regarding the use of telemedicine in the context of EMTALA. This work aimed to evaluate the potential to expand the usage of telemedicine services for neurotrauma to reduce transfer rates, minimize movement of patients across borders, and alleviate the burden on tertiary care hospitals involved in the care of patients with COVID-19 during a global pandemic. In this paper, the authors outline EMTALA provisions, provide examples of EMTALA violations involving neurosurgical care, and propose guidelines for the creation of telemedicine protocols between referring and consulting institutions.

The Association Between Hospital Characteristics and Emergency Medical Treatment and Labor Act Citation Events

OBJECTIVES

The Emergency Medical Treatment and Labor Act (EMTALA) is a federal law enacted in 1986 prohibiting patient dumping (refusing or transferring patients with emergency medical conditions without appropriate stabilization), and discrimination based upon ability to pay. We evaluate hospital-level features associated with citation for EMTALA violation.

MATERIALS AND METHODS

A retrospective analysis of observational data on EMTALA enforcement (2005-2013). Regression analysis evaluates the association between facility-level features and odds of EMTALA citation by hospital-year.

RESULTS

Among 4916 EMTALA-obligated hospitals there were 1925 EMTALA citation events at 1413 facilities between 2005 and 2013, with 4.3% of hospitals cited per year. In adjusted analyses, increased odds of EMTALA citations were found at hospitals that were: for-profit [odds ratio (OR): 1.61; 95% confidence interval (CI): 1.32-1.96], in metropolitan areas (OR: 1.32; 95% CI: 1.11-1.57); that admitted a higher proportion of Medicaid patients (OR: 1.01; 95% CI: 1.0-1.01); and were in the top quartiles of hospital size (OR: 1.48; 95% CI: 1.10-1.99) and emergency department (ED) volume (OR: 1.56; 95% CI: 1.14-2.12). Predicted probability of repeat EMTALA citation in the year following initial citation was 17% among for-profit and 11% among other hospital types. Among citation events for patients presenting to the same hospital's ED, there were 1.30 EMTALA citation events per million ED visits, with 1.04 at private not-for-profit, 1.47 at government-owned, and 2.46 at for-profit hospitals.

CONCLUSIONS

For-profit ownership is associated with increased odds of EMTALA citations after adjusting for other characteristics. Efforts to improve EMTALA might be considered to protect access to emergency care for vulnerable populations, particularly at large, urban, for-profit hospitals admitting high proportions of Medicaid patients.

Penalties for Emergency Medical Treatment and Labor Act Violations Involving Obstetrical Emergencies

INTRODUCTION

The Emergency Medical Treatment and Labor Act (EMTALA) was intended to prevent inadequate, delayed, or denied treatment of emergent conditions by emergency departments (ED). While controversies exist regarding the scope of the law, there is no question that EMTALA applies to active labor, a key tenet of the statute and the only medical condition - labor - specifically included in the title of the law. In light of rising maternal mortality rates in the United States, further exploration into the state of emergency obstetrical (OB) care is warranted. Understanding civil monetary penalty settlements levied by the Office of the Inspector General (OIG) related to EMTALA violations involving labor and other OB emergencies will help to inform the current state of access to and quality of OB emergency care.

METHODS

We reviewed descriptions of all EMTALA-related OIG civil monetary penalty settlements from 2002-2018. OB-related cases were identified using keywords in settlement descriptions. We described characteristics of settlements including the nature of the allegation and compared them with non-OB settlements.

RESULTS

Of 232 EMTALA-related OIG settlements during the study period, 39 (17%) involved active labor and other OB emergencies. Between 2002 and 2018 the proportion of settlements involving OB emergencies increased from 17% to 40%. Seven (18%) of these settlements involved a pregnant minor. Most OB cases involved failure to provide screening exam (82%) and/or stabilizing treatment (51%). Failure to arrange appropriate transfer was more common for OB (36%) compared with non-OB settlements (21%) (p = 0.041). Fifteen (38%) involved a provider specifically directing a pregnant woman to proceed to another hospital, typically by private vehicle.

CONCLUSION

Despite inclusion of the term "labor" in the law's title, one in six settlements related to EMTALA violations involved OB emergencies. One in five settlements involved a pregnant minor, indicating that providers may benefit from education regarding obligations to evaluate and stabilize minors absent parental consent. Failure to arrange appropriate transfer was more common among OB settlements. Findings suggesting need for providers to understand EMTALA-specific requirements for appropriate transfer and for EDs at hospitals without dedicated OB services to implement policies for evaluation of active labor and protocols for transfer when indicated.