Battle for the Soul of Emergency Medicine

This forum made possible through the generous support of SDN members, donors, and sponsors. Thank you.

docB

Chronically painful
Moderator Emeritus
Lifetime Donor
20+ Year Member
Joined
Nov 27, 2002
Messages
7,890
Reaction score
752
There will be decisions made in the near future that will determine what Emergency Medicine will be for the next several decades. These decisions will determine the soul of the specialty.

Two points before I explain myself:

First, these decisions will be made by administrators and financial people. Not clinicians.

Second, I not really saying that who makes the decisions or even the resultant path the specialty takes is good or bad. I just saying that this is how it will be.


Soon decisions will be made about how ED visits will be reimbursed in the future. These will either allow or disallow all the visits for things that really should have been taken care of in a primary care or other outpatient setting. I'm not even talking about the chest pain that turns out to be gastritis (i.e. I'm not talking about the "prudent layperson" concept). I mean the visits for refills, semi-urgent diagnostics, clinic over flow cases and so on.

Patients love using us for these issues because we are 24/7 without an appointment and we have a wide array of capabilities at our fingertips without preauthorization required. Primary care loves sending us these patient because not only do they get the patient what they need (usually) but someone else is responsible and liable for getting and acting on the results. ED groups and hospital administrators love these visits because they reimburse just as if they were real emergencies.

But...

We are expensive and inefficient at managing non-emergent patients.

Which is why the current system can't survive much longer.

Soon the system will have to make a choice. It can ration the use of EDs by denying visits for such things by stopping reimbursement for these cases, penalizing PMDs whose patients go to the ED for such issues, changing EMTALA or its interpretation or, more likely a mix of all of these. Or it can elect to continue as is with more and more of the function of primary care being transferred into the ED.

Which road is taken will determine which very different situation we all practice in for the rest of our careers.

If we ration we will see reduced ED patient volumes with fewer but more acute cases. We will see a return to small ~10 bed EDs with single coverage EPs. We won't need as many of us or the MLPs we currently use to extend ourselves. Pay will drop as well. A few high level cases doesn't reimburse as much as dozens of lower level cases. But the work will be a little more like what we all envisioned when we signed on to this.

If we shift primary care to the EDs we will see volumes continue to grow. Opportunities for EPs will continue to grow but we will also see more and more MLPs and primary care physicians used to cover that volume in a more cost effective way. We will likely continue along the path we have been on where we transition from direct patient care to managers of teams of providers.

As I said very different possible paths. These decisions will be made for us in the near future.

Members don't see this ad.
 
  • Like
Reactions: 1 user
I must admit, this type of question is Birdstrike bait. I'd love to comment, but my in depth comments on similar subjects have caused forum members to compare me to a double-agent spy recently (a sexy Russian one, at that). I'm going to hold off on commenting, unless personally invited by another forum member, so as to preserve the delicate balance between allied nations and the Soul of Emergency Medicine.





Bird, you're like EM's version of Anna Chapman.
 
Last edited:
Members don't see this ad :)
There is nothing we can do. Physicians have allowed medicine to be controlled by lawyers, bureaucrats and politicians. They have all the power, and it is gone forever. The politicians love the idea of a centrally-planned healthcare system because they can claim they are "providing access", "controlling costs", and "helping people". These are all lies of course, but it helps them get re-elected. The lawyers and bureaucrats love it because they stand to profit off of it.

Hopefully market economics will eventually work. There is not enough money in the "system" to pay for all of the promises made by politicians AND to pay physicians salaries. One or the other will have to give.

Depressing stuff? So what are the options for us:

1. Continue working and just accept the current environment where we have no control over our futures.
2. Fight against the system and have a STEMI at a young age
3. Quit medicine and do something else
4. Leave the country and practice where your skills and education may be appreciated.
 
  • Like
Reactions: 1 users
The sky is falling! The sky is falling!

I disagree that we're "inefficient" at anything. I can get a work-up done in 2 hours that takes 3 weeks as an outpatient. That's why the patients come. That's why the PCPs send them in. Could it be done as an outpatient many times? Of course. Is that going to make the system crash? Seems unlikely to me. Remember that emergency care is only something like 2% of the health care dollar. Even if you magically cut it in half it isn't going to solve our health care problems.
 
  • Like
Reactions: 4 users
saving money should be targeted at reducing
1. unnecessary surgeries -- see: spinal fusion in the US,
2. futile end of life care -- which means more discussions earlier on about goals of care, imho videos etc to better educate the public,
3. expansion of minimal security type mental health institutions with ability to monitor and administer meds to noncompliant repeat offenders
4. RISK FACTORS FOR PREVENTABLE DISEASE good god where do i start
 
  • Like
Reactions: 1 user
The sky is falling! The sky is falling!

I disagree that we're "inefficient" at anything. I can get a work-up done in 2 hours that takes 3 weeks as an outpatient. That's why the patients come. That's why the PCPs send them in. Could it be done as an outpatient many times? Of course. Is that going to make the system crash? Seems unlikely to me. Remember that emergency care is only something like 2% of the health care dollar. Even if you magically cut it in half it isn't going to solve our health care problems.

I have a tendency to be long winded so I consciously didn't expand on some of the things I said for the sake of brevity. This is one of the things I purposefully left hanging.

When I said we are inefficient I meant that to cover cost effectiveness. I can get a work up done fast but how often does it really need to be done fast? If it could have safely been done as an out patient and the trip to the ER has added a Level 5 ED physician charge and a $1300 facility charge irrespective of the cost of the diagnostics I argue that is not cost effective and not efficient.
 
Soon the system will have to make a choice. It can ration the use of EDs by denying visits for such things by stopping reimbursement for these cases, penalizing PMDs whose patients go to the ED for such issues, changing EMTALA or its interpretation or, more likely a mix of all of these. Or it can elect to continue as is with more and more of the function of primary care being transferred into the ED.

Unfortunately there is a third (worse) option which involves leaving emtala in place, cutting reimbursements for nonemergent visits, falling pay, and high volumes.

Whatever happens you can count on three certainties:

1. Your pay/benefits/lifestyle as a physician will take a hit before that of the c-suite.
2. Politicians will continue to pander to voters
3. Lawyers will continue to have the right to sue you.
 
  • Like
Reactions: 1 user
I have a tendency to be long winded so I consciously didn't expand on some of the things I said for the sake of brevity. This is one of the things I purposefully left hanging.

When I said we are inefficient I meant that to cover cost effectiveness. I can get a work up done fast but how often does it really need to be done fast? If it could have safely been done as an out patient and the trip to the ER has added a Level 5 ED physician charge and a $1300 facility charge irrespective of the cost of the diagnostics I argue that is not cost effective and not efficient.

Some people are willing to pay for convenience. Never forget that. Especially when a third party is bearing 80% of the cost of that convenience. Does it make their premiums higher? Of course. Do they see the connection? Not always, especially when an employer or the state is picking it up.

What's the incentive for a PCP to do a chest pain or belly pain work-up in clinic? It's a pain for them, easy for us. It's faster and safer for us to do it. Does that safety and speed cost something? You betcha.

If you want cost effectiveness, let the market fix the problem. That means cost-sharing and price transparency. Will that transparency lower our incomes? Probably. Will it make for a better system? I think so. Unless some people that ought to pay for emergency care choose not to and thus incur morbidity and mortality.
 
saving money should be targeted at reducing
1. unnecessary surgeries -- see: spinal fusion in the US,
2. futile end of life care -- which means more discussions earlier on about goals of care, imho videos etc to better educate the public,
3. expansion of minimal security type mental health institutions with ability to monitor and administer meds to noncompliant repeat offenders
4. RISK FACTORS FOR PREVENTABLE DISEASE good god where do i start

All pennies on the dollar.

The real savings come from eliminating administrative waste inherent in the U.S.'s version of third-party payment.

How much? This much: https://magic.piktochart.com/output/2353598-admin-cost . Your "charity" or "indigent" care provided in the ED would literally vanish and become fully paid (e.g. 100% collections).
 
Members don't see this ad :)
saving money should be targeted at reducing
1. unnecessary surgeries -- see: spinal fusion in the US,
2. futile end of life care -- which means more discussions earlier on about goals of care, imho videos etc to better educate the public,
3. expansion of minimal security type mental health institutions with ability to monitor and administer meds to noncompliant repeat offenders
4. RISK FACTORS FOR PREVENTABLE DISEASE good god where do i start

1. Good luck defining "unnecessary". You will have the patients (who want the spinal surgery) and the orthopedists (who make money doing them) complain.
2. Families are not usually able to make appropriate decisions about end-of-life care. The only way for this to work is for doctors to make unilateral decisions, and for them to have malpractice protection for doing so. Since neither of these things will happen, then reducing futile end of life care will be "futile>
3. There is no money in mental health, except for concierge addiction medicine.
4. Controlling hypertension, diabetes, and cholesterol is MORE expensive than letting someone die early of a heart attack. All the studies bear this out. The only factor for which prevention saves money is for tobacco cessation treatment.
 
DocB,

I think the title of your post and the content of it refer to 2 different things. When you bring up the "soul" of Emergency Medicine, that could mean a lot of things. It has a philosophical connotation, to some maybe even religious. What is going to happen, and what has already happened to the "soul" of Emergency Medicine (and Medicine in general) is a very important question. But I don't think the body of your post really touches on that. I could say alot about whether or not the "soul" of Emergency Medicine (and Medicine in general) live on, but I'll summarize it in a few sentences.

The soul of Emergency Medicine, or your soul as a physician in general, can only be destroyed by one person. That's you. No matter how many heaps of dung politicians, businessmen, and insurance companies heap on you and your patients, and no matter how much harder or miserable they try to make the job, the only person that can allow that flame to be snuffed out is you. Despite the increasing layers of mostly meaningless red tape and other burdens heaped upon your patients and yourself alike, it always boils down to you sitting down with a patient, listening to them, and in some way, with your skills whatever they are and in whatever setting, trying to make that person's life a least a little better, if you can. I know it sounds corny, but it's true. No amout of greed by businessmen, stupidity by administrators or career preserving behavior from a politician can kill that, unless you allow it to. God knows they will try every day, until you and I retire.
Soon decisions will be made about how ED visits will be reimbursed in the future. These will either allow or disallow all the visits for things that really should have been taken care of in a primary care or other outpatient setting. I'm not even talking about the chest pain that turns out to be gastritis (i.e. I'm not talking about the "prudent layperson" concept). I mean the visits for refills, semi-urgent diagnostics, clinic over flow cases and so on.

From where are you getting this prediction? I am as much a doom and gloomer as anyone else, but what has allowed you to conclude this? The politicians know that physician salaries are a tiny percentage of health care costs. They know that widespread physician strikes would be a death knell to anything they wish to accomplish. They also know that playing the "kill the rich, to help the little guy" sales pitch will get them elected, whether they actually follow through, or not.

But they also know that if they don't keep doctors salaries high, especially Emergency Physicians salaries high, their Healthcare House of Legos will crumble. Don't even buy into this BS. Plan on hearing the venom spewed over, and over and over again. But they've done nothing to control doctor's salaries with their 2000 page ACA. Nothing. Salaries will remain strong, and not only that, I predict they will go up. They know that payments to hospitals are massive and much greater than to doctors. Just look at the HOPD facility fees compared to payments to doctors doing the same procedures in their offices. They pay sometimes 5-6 times more for the same service in hospitals. And this past year they increased these HOPD fees even more! Yet at the same time, they drive doctors until the hospital employment model. It proves they really have very little will to actually cut spending, despite their talk. This money will be availible to be payed to attract physicians, as hospitals now need to do. Oh yes, you'll have to fight for it, negotiate for it, and grind through RVUs no matter what specialty you're in, but the money will be there.

They're not going to stop paying for ER visits that are non-urgent. It's not going to happen. I'm calling their bluff. They tried that crap out west a couple of years ago and we had some discussions here about it. You may have to take a weekend off to march on the steps of the capital building every couple of years to prevent it. Even so, so what if they do? You'll quit the crap job that cuts your pay, and work somewhere you get paid a decent wage, and they'll watch those EDs turn into bottomless hell holes. You'll go to a state that hasn't cut the funding, or open a concierge cash-pay urgent care and cut these fool's policies out at the knees.

Don't buy into this political crap-talk. We have a skill and we're going to do what it takes to get paid for it, no matter the setting. I don't care what specialty you're in. It might take relearning the fighting spirit that they tried to snuff out of you in medical school and residency. Are you really going to drain an arm pit abscess at 3am on a holiday if you're not paid an acceptable wage to do it? I know I'm not. Don't let these fools try to make you think you have to. You're not trapped as much as EMTALA makes you feel.

the system can't survive any longer

I call bullsh-t on this one too. Yes, you keep hearing this. I'm telling you, it's a load of crap. Show me one healthcare "system" that died. Show me one, in any country of the world. What does that even mean, "it won't survive"? It's political panic-speak to motivate people to accept drastic policy changes they wouldn't tolerate otherwise. Sure, they'll have to tweak the system many, many times to get it to survive, but it's not going to die. Regardless, you (and I) don't need to survive forever, do we? We only need it to survive until we retire. That's anywhere from 1-35 years for anyone on this board. Then the next generating can save it for the next 30. You and I can't save all of the future.

Obamacare has committed over $1 Trillion dollars into the system. Yes, they are going to pit various specialties against each other through the AMA RUC fee schedules creating in-fghting to get the dollars, but these doom and gloom scenarios, where the "system won't survive" are crap. Every few years you hear, "Medicare will be bankrupt in 10-15 years, oh no!" and "Social security will be insolvent in 10-15 more years, oh no!" Bulls--t. I'm not even that old, and I've been hearing those predictions for at least 30 years, since my Dad had the TV news blaring when I as a kid. The predictions 30 years ago were, "We'll be bankrupt in 10-15 years." Thirty years later the predictions are still, "We'll be bankrupt in 10-15 years." It's political panic-speak and should be ignored as much as possible. It's just asymptomatic PVCs. Turn on the "ignore" button, and don't allow these fools to manipulate.

Have you looked at an MGMA doctor survey lately? Look at one. Salaries are strong as hell. Every year as an EP the trend was that my salary went up. It's going up this year and my calculations are that it will again next year. Though I don't work in the traditional ER setting currently, I'm still a "doctor. " MGMA supports this for many specialties. I don't know how much inflation corrects down those numbers!(certainly some) but the bottoming out of salaries has not happened as predicted. It won't unless you let it! You're a doctor. You have tremendous skills. Don't assume you have to let some fool tell you you're salary has to drop 50% and take it. If they do, go find someone to pay you a decent wage, that you earned. Somewhere. Or make the opportunity for yourself.

We are expensive and inefficient at managing non-emergent patients.

So what. We're the only people crazy enough to work when everyone else is sleeping, celebrating and take care of the people no one else is willing enough, awake enough, or courageous enough to take care of. This is your best asset. In today's Medicine on Demand culture, Emergency Physicians are ready, willing and able to provide what 300,000 Americans want: Medicine on Demand. Do you think Americans want to give up the ability to get 24-hr medical care on demand? Do you think pcp's that are moving to conceirge care and specialists in cushy niche specialties want to start pulling night shifts in the ED again like they did 40 years ago? If they want to stop paying a premium for this 24 hr on demand care, I'm saying, "I call your bluff. Stop paying for it. Go right ahead." They can go right ahead and see the Armageddon of protests, crying and whining when Medicine on Demand ends, and they can't find anyone to staff their EDs. It's an entitlement now. It's not going away.

I wrote this 2 years ago, and I still feel I was on to something that even I didn't fully grasp then:

http://www.kevinmd.com/blog/2012/12/obamacare-create-normal-medicine.html

I do agree in every way that politicians, administrators and insurance companies are going to be fighting a tug of war back and forth with dollars and their own self intersts and doctors will get caught in the middle. But I really don't see any overall cost containment in any policy changes they've made in any of these recent years, including salaries. Do you? Heathcare spending continues to go up, costs are inflating, physicians salaries remain strong and more and more patients are being churned throught the system. A rising tide lifts all boats, and I think as costs continue to bloat, doctors will do well. That may not get Press Ganey and your C suite off your back, it may not stop the government from heaping on more stupid regulations, Obamacare may continue to have major flaws, and working nights, weekends and holidays won't get any easier. But the opportunities and dollars are going to be there.

You may have to think outside the box of traditional doctor think like "Get the perfect job. Plant roots. Stay with perfect unchanging traditional job for 30 years. Retire." Look a PCPs. They're flipping the whole system on its head and cutting out insurance companies, medicare and medicaid entirely and most seem to love it. The opportunities are going to be there. You've just got to be smart about it, and take control over your own practice life. Count on the fact that you're just as smart, if not smarter than these people.

Whether or not policies have changed the "soul" of the specialty into something entirely different than "Emergency" Medicine or not, and whether they threaten the core of that is another discussion, that I think Mr Hat touched on the best in the "Convenience Department" thread. Also, whether or not increasing regulation and policy changes will make working in an Emergency Department environment itself intolerable, I can't rule out. But economically, the predictors of the bottom falling out on reimbursements and salaries are crying wolf, in my opinion, or they're just repeating the political talk they keep hearing without thinking it through. I think reimbursement and salaries are going up, but only time will tell.

My advice, if you're worried about this stuff, is to diversify. I did a fellowship. I talked to another guy recently who did hyperbarics. He now only has to work two clinical shifts a month unless he wants more. He seemed happy. I talked to another guy recently, who did an EM cardiovascular fellowship. He runs an obs unit and works about 8-10 shifts per month. I talked to another guy recently who's starting some side business selling pain creams and medical equipment. I talked to another guy who's doing some work with wound care. Many have been opening up free standings or urgent cares for a long time now. Think about a direct pay or concierge practice. Don't tell me you don't know how. There's no patient or "chief complaint" you can't handle. All you need is to call an accountant, a healthcare attorney, and go. Diversify, and then if EMTALA and the suits make the hospital-based ED environment or employment model intolerable, you don't have to wear their handcuffs. Or, if you choose to take the traditional path and deal with their crap, I think the salaries are going to be there if you're wiling to adapt. I really do.
 
  • Like
Reactions: 3 users
Anna, you sexy beast. I knew you couldn't resist...

I'm currently on a block of shifts with limited time to reply on here but it's good to see that things are as lively as ever.
 
  • Like
Reactions: 2 users
This thread isn't about physician reimbursement, but about the "soul" of Emergency Medicine. Salaries are high right now, especially if you have mobility and can practice in a competitive state. As far as the "soul" goes, it has been wiped away some time ago. We are no longer valued members of the medical team. We are not treated as professionals. We make no decisions with regards to national policy on healthcare, or within our own hospitals. These decisions are made by others, and we freely relinquished our decision-making ability a long time ago. As I stated above, we will never get these abilities back.

The proof is that every hospital wants you to lie to your patients. If a patient with an extremely minor complaint (like asymptomatic high BP) asks me if they should come in for that complaint, I am forced to lie to them and tell them that they should always come in for every complaint no matter how trivial or non-urgent. If I tell the patient the truth, and administration finds out, I could lose my job. THAT is the loss of the "soul".

I view our job now as essentially highly paid nurses. We have a specific skillset, certification, and a pulse. Both the hospitals and CMGs want us there to fill a spot and do a job with the least amount of complaining and strife. They do not want our opinions on patient flow. They don't want us complaining about the orthopedist who won't return our calls. They don't want to know how we could improve care. They want your warm body, greeting patients within 30 minutes, admitting/dispositioning them within 180 minutes, and generating no complaints from staff, patients or other physicians. The sooner we all realize this, the happier we will be. I now work my shifts, try not to piss anyone off, go home, and hopefully collect a fat check. To do otherwise would probably result in leaving the field entirely.
 
  • Like
Reactions: 1 user
This thread isn't about physician reimbursement, but about the "soul" of Emergency Medicine. Salaries are high right now, especially if you have mobility and can practice in a competitive state. As far as the "soul" goes, it has been wiped away some time ago. We are no longer valued members of the medical team. We are not treated as professionals. We make no decisions with regards to national policy on healthcare, or within our own hospitals. These decisions are made by others, and we freely relinquished our decision-making ability a long time ago. As I stated above, we will never get these abilities back.

The proof is that every hospital wants you to lie to your patients. If a patient with an extremely minor complaint (like asymptomatic high BP) asks me if they should come in for that complaint, I am forced to lie to them and tell them that they should always come in for every complaint no matter how trivial or non-urgent. If I tell the patient the truth, and administration finds out, I could lose my job. THAT is the loss of the "soul".

I view our job now as essentially highly paid nurses. We have a specific skillset, certification, and a pulse. Both the hospitals and CMGs want us there to fill a spot and do a job with the least amount of complaining and strife. They do not want our opinions on patient flow. They don't want us complaining about the orthopedist who won't return our calls. They don't want to know how we could improve care. They want your warm body, greeting patients within 30 minutes, admitting/dispositioning them within 180 minutes, and generating no complaints from staff, patients or other physicians. The sooner we all realize this, the happier we will be. I now work my shifts, try not to piss anyone off, go home, and hopefully collect a fat check. To do otherwise would probably result in leaving the field entirely.
The entire OP is about reimbursement, pretty much.
 
This thread isn't about physician reimbursement, but about the "soul" of Emergency Medicine. Salaries are high right now, especially if you have mobility and can practice in a competitive state. As far as the "soul" goes, it has been wiped away some time ago. We are no longer valued members of the medical team. We are not treated as professionals. We make no decisions with regards to national policy on healthcare, or within our own hospitals. These decisions are made by others, and we freely relinquished our decision-making ability a long time ago. As I stated above, we will never get these abilities back.

The proof is that every hospital wants you to lie to your patients. If a patient with an extremely minor complaint (like asymptomatic high BP) asks me if they should come in for that complaint, I am forced to lie to them and tell them that they should always come in for every complaint no matter how trivial or non-urgent. If I tell the patient the truth, and administration finds out, I could lose my job. THAT is the loss of the "soul".

I view our job now as essentially highly paid nurses. We have a specific skillset, certification, and a pulse. Both the hospitals and CMGs want us there to fill a spot and do a job with the least amount of complaining and strife. They do not want our opinions on patient flow. They don't want us complaining about the orthopedist who won't return our calls. They don't want to know how we could improve care. They want your warm body, greeting patients within 30 minutes, admitting/dispositioning them within 180 minutes, and generating no complaints from staff, patients or other physicians. The sooner we all realize this, the happier we will be. I now work my shifts, try not to piss anyone off, go home, and hopefully collect a fat check. To do otherwise would probably result in leaving the field entirely.

No.

While sucking it up and keeping your head down is a valid (if soul crushing) strategy, to act like there's nothing that you can do to improve the job because no one cares what you think is BS. No one wants to hear unfocused whining (especially as it relates to your personal satisfaction) but every place I've worked has been desperate for answers and direction. It requires massive amounts of work and things that we think should take days take months but we can make a difference. In the absence of boots on the ground leadership, someone else will step in and they will f%#@ things up.
 
4. Controlling hypertension, diabetes, and cholesterol is MORE expensive than letting someone die early of a heart attack. All the studies bear this out. The only factor for which prevention saves money is for tobacco cessation treatment.

That's very interesting--first I've ever heard of it being the other way around. Do you have any studies to back this up?

Also, you guys are neglecting to mention the patient that is pretty sure she is pregnant but not sure, makes up some BS complaint but the real reason she comes to the ER is to get a pregnancy test and/or an US. Who cares that it costs way more for that kind of workup than just peeing on a freaking stick? Oh wait, Press-Ganey just wants to make sure mom and newly diagnosed baby are very satisfied with your care.

I think the real question is what is do be done in terms of advocacy? What are ACEP and AAEM doing about it?
 
No.

While sucking it up and keeping your head down is a valid (if soul crushing) strategy, to act like there's nothing that you can do to improve the job because no one cares what you think is BS. No one wants to hear unfocused whining (especially as it relates to your personal satisfaction) but every place I've worked has been desperate for answers and direction. It requires massive amounts of work and things that we think should take days take months but we can make a difference. In the absence of boots on the ground leadership, someone else will step in and they will f%#@ things up.

I'd love to work at your shop. The CMGs I have worked for in the past were interested in having no conflict or complaints. They simply wanted patients to be seen, so that they could collect their 43% management fee off the top. The goal of the directors was not to solve problems related to improving care, but it was to promote harmony in the ranks, and keep providers from causing problems. They also were required to listen to every directive from hospital management and answer not with questions, comments, or ways to improve things, but a "Yes sir we can do it, please don't cancel our contract!".
 
I'd love to work at your shop. The CMGs I have worked for in the past were interested in having no conflict or complaints. They simply wanted patients to be seen, so that they could collect their 43% management fee off the top. The goal of the directors was not to solve problems related to improving care, but it was to promote harmony in the ranks, and keep providers from causing problems. They also were required to listen to every directive from hospital management and answer not with questions, comments, or ways to improve things, but a "Yes sir we can do it, please don't cancel our contract!".

Ah, the "easy yes". It works for getting business but it doesn't tend to be sustainable for keeping business because eventually you're agreeing to things you can't possible accomplish.
 
I think the real question is what is do be done in terms of advocacy? What are ACEP and AAEM doing about it?

Good question and one that points to why I felt this topic rose to the level of equating it with the "soul" of the specialty rather than just another how will we get paid for x discussion.

ACEP (and AAEM to a lesser degree) present opinion, do studies and make policy based on wanting to keep the paying customers with primary care complaints coming to the EDs. Without them we will need many fewer EPs. Look at the studies showing that the uninsured don't abuse the ED (in direct contradiction to our collective daily experience). Those are designed to keep the public from understanding why their costs are so high and cutting off the ability to do transfer payments. Look at the experience with WA Medicaid and the movement to stop balance billing. I also point to ACEPs opposition to the AAFPs "Medical Home" model. We didn't want the home for the paying patients to be somewhere else. Finally ACEPs stance against urgent cares as skimming the cream from the urgent patient population yet supporting free standing EDs is telling. Most urgent cares, not staffed by EPs. Most free standing EDs, staffed by EPs. ACEP knows how our bread is buttered and they are acting accordingly. They seem to be greatly favoring the "bring all the primary care into the ED" option I outlined originally.

Again note I'm not taking exception to what ACEP is doing. They are doing it for very real and immediate reasons and they are doing it for my benefit. I'm not saying they're wrong. I'm saying they're right and it supports my initial statement. Right or wrong it does go to the soul of what we do. Will we be a small group doing high acuity emergency medicine for lower pay or a bigger group of mostly managers overseeing the emergent, urgent and even routine care of more people?

Like I said, I'm not taking a side. I'm just saying we're headed for one or the other.
 
  • Like
Reactions: 1 user
Will we be ... a bigger group of mostly managers overseeing the emergent, urgent and even routine care of more people?
This above, is exactly what you'll be. 1 EP, managing 4 mid levels, signing 10-15 charts per hour, while managing the high acuity patients on your own. ACEP will go along with whatever is most politically expedient at the time, for themselves. They have no power to stop anything EPs would consider soul-less.
 
Last edited:
This above, is exactly what you'll be. 1 EP, managing 4 mid levels, signing 10-15 charts per hour, while managing the high acuity patients on your own. ACEP will go along with whatever is most politically expedient at the time, for themselves. They have no power to stop anything EPs would consider soul-less.

You forgot the part where you assume liability for all of those 10-15 charts/hour that you are signing.
 
I feel your exstistential pain, but like GeneralVeers says, we'll have to accept some truths:

--get used to doing primary care in the ED. Treating gastroenteritis, stuffy noses, headaches, sprains and lacs pay our salaries in Suburban Community centers. If you don't write people for BP, asthma, or DM meds when appropriate (b/c of some misguided principle), you're gonna struggle
--things will get busier, and margins will decrease. Speed and efficiency will be king--you won't diagnose that tertiary syphillis as cause of AMS...sorry
--"Primary Care", as referenced by politicians and the media, is some panacea ideal, like world peace or end of racisim or end of poverty. It doesn't exist. There is no magic doctor who coordinates 20 chronic illnesses, gets his patients to lose weight and exercise more, minimize risk factors for DM and CAD, direct admit patients, refill meds on phone, talk patients down who call with questions, and attempt to work up complicated CC's before refering to 12 doctors. I'd be happy for an average doc who can see a pt within the week and w/u vague chest pain or remove packing from an abscess or refer back pain pt's to PT, but those are few and far between.
--If you don't like something, at least get involved with ACEP/AAEM/your group/hospital and work on slow, small incremental improvements. There will not be any bloody revolutions. Enpowerment at least increases your satisfaction and fights off some of the exstistential dread
--I'd love to work in some ideal EM world where I tube patients all day, do lines, diagnose interesting and complex diseases, and my patients are polite and appreciative, but like the ideal Primary Doc, that world never really existed. We have to take the good and bad, and take joy every once in a while when you get a complex yet satisfying patient
 
  • Like
Reactions: 1 user
You forgot the part where you assume liability for all of those 10-15 charts/hour that you are signing.
No I didn't. In my current practice setting, I personally co-sign zero midlevel charts and that's the way I like it. I could bring on a midlevel at some point but I'd prefer not to. That's why I say, "Let them work independently," like NPs in many settings. If an earache is an earache, and you're qualified to see it and treat it, you don't need me to cosign your chart and pad your liability policy. I'm all for midlevels, but I'm not in favor of the mindset that midlevels are just as good for non-urgents, but still need me as backup if their earache turns out to be otitis media, with MRSA mastoiditis and septic cavernous sinus thrombosis. That's the way it "should be," in my opinion. The way it likely will be, is that EPs will likely be required to supervise and sign off on increasing numbers of mid level co-managed patients, with little control over who those midlevels are. Why? It's more profitable for the CMGs and hospitals.

Don't try to have your cake and it it too. If midlevels are just as good for non-urgents, fine. Then they don't need me.
 
No I didn't. In my current practice setting, I personally co-sign zero midlevel charts and that's the way I like it. I could bring on a midlevel at some point but I'd prefer not to. That's why I say, "Let them work independently," like NPs in many settings. If an earache is an earache, and you're qualified to see it and treat it, you don't need me to cosign your chart and pad your liability policy. I'm all for midlevels, but I'm not in favor of the mindset that midlevels are just as good for non-urgents, but still need me as backup if their earache turns out to be otitis media, with MRSA mastoiditis and septic cavernous sinus thrombosis. That's the way it "should be," in my opinion. The way it likely will be, is that EPs will likely be required to supervise and sign off on increasing numbers of mid level co-managed patients, with little control over who those midlevels are. Why? It's more profitable for the CMGs and hospitals.

Don't try to have your cake and it it too. If midlevels are just as good for non-urgents, fine. Then they don't need me.

I guess I'm confused about your prior post unless you were being sarcastic. You said we'd become more like managers, signing charts for an army of midlevels (10-15/hr). Right now I supervise 2 PAs at work and am expected to sign off on all of their charts. Fortunately they give me a brief case summary before sending the patient home, so I can intervene if necessary. Still there is risk associated with it, and the lawyers will certainly come after me if there's an issue.
 
I guess I'm confused about your prior post unless you were being sarcastic. You said we'd become more like managers, signing charts for an army of midlevels (10-15/hr). Right now I supervise 2 PAs at work and am expected to sign off on all of their charts. Fortunately they give me a brief case summary before sending the patient home, so I can intervene if necessary. Still there is risk associated with it, and the lawyers will certainly come after me if there's an issue.
It wasn't sarcastic. My point was that I think the direction will go more towards EPs supervising greater numbers of midlevels. I didn't say I like that or agree with it. It's more profitable, but not necessarily what I agree with should happen. I do think it's what will happen. Anesthesia did this with CRNAs and it continued to expand, despite certain segments not liking it or agreeing with it. I think midlevels have an important role. My personal preference is that if I'm cosigning the charts, I want full control over choosing, hiring and terminating if needed. If I'm responsible, I want a say so.
 
The entire model of medicine today is built around the concept that: 1. You are responsible and 2. You have no say so.
 
The entire model of medicine today is built around the concept that: 1. You are responsible and 2. You have no say so.

Exactly. As we have already established, we don't have a say, and likely will not get one. Either we accept the badness in our specialty and try to find a hospital site that doesn't make us want to contemplate suicide, or leave the profession entirely. Taking back more control of anything is not one of the options.
 
Birdstrike, the other players in EM (hospital admin, CMGs, politicians, lawyers) are not at all concerned about EP wellness, working conditions or job satisfaction. For all of those parties, it's simply about taking advantage of us for financial gain. The attitude I've seen with most CMGs is that if you're not happy with the job, then you can quit and they will just higher someone newly out of residency who doesn't know enough to be dissatisfied yet. I'm not sure how we increase job satisfaction in that environment.
Reserve the Option to Opt Out of EMTALA-Bound, Hospital-Based Practice


You're absolutely right, Veers. Their primary goal is to remain profitable while covering the ED. Only if they can't cover the shifts, then they will make a change. Typically the change is to offer more money, which doesn't necessarily make a place a better place to work. They'll always have either midlevels or FMGs happy to fill these gaps.

So what's the solution? You increased your job satisfaction by divesting yourself from any one group in particular and therefore you have much more control over the things important to you. That can work for some people. What I'm trying to get people to grasp is the concept of an Emergency Physician not being beholden to living within the grips of a vice, that is EMTALA on one side, and de facto employee status that puts you at the mercy of the never-physician hospital businessmen who are happy to treat one like a highly-paid, easily replaceable, hourly worker.

Give me 8 ER doctors all of whom are able to earn a living without being beholden by EMTALA, and outside a hospital-based ER itself, and I'll show you 8 that are likely, much happier than your average 8. When you have a training that says you must work in this one room (or group of rooms) in the hospital, bound by a law that requires you to see every person on Earth that walks through the door, and are monopolized by businessmen that can make unrealistic demands on you, then they've got you by the ----s. If you have the ability to walk away and no longer need them, then you have a much, much greater ability to control your own practice environment and therefore your own wellness. Whether you choose to exercise it or not, is entirely dependent on the circumstances.

I'm telling you, ER doctors need to start seeing themselves as an entity that is not entirely attached with an umbilical cord to the Emergency Department. It's a concept that needs to die. It just makes you too damn vulnerable to these --- -----. It just does. You trust your whole life and career to these people, who take advantage of the vice that is EMTALA, squeezing you with the false crisis of ED overcrowding which they create with billboards directing more patients into your ED that supposedly is in an "unavoidable" crisis?

Why stake your whole life's work and career on the promise, that you'll be able to see a very small minority of your patients that are "emergencies" and give up complete control to these other forces that will crush you between EMTALA and a false crisis they are hell bent on worsening, with you put in charge to fix?

I'm not saying, "Don't be an ER doctor." I'm not saying, "Don't take care of sick people with emergencies." I'm not saying, "Don't work in an ED." What I am saying is, obtain the ability, to be able to earn as large a portion of your living as possible, in an EMTALA exempt environment. Whether is a fellowship such as Sports Med, Pain, HPM, CCM or a free-standing ED that allows you total potential independence, or a fellowship in hyperbarics, tox, admin or doing academics where a significant portion of your income is non-ED, non-EMTALA related work, I think having independence hedges your bets.

That way, if you repeatedly find yourself in a great ED work environment where you just don't get what the whole "burnout thing" is even about, then you stay there. No harm, no foul. On the other hand, if you find yourself repeatedly being in doctor grinder environments where you're expected to constantly save a department in supposed "crisis,' yet the billboard remains on the highway pointing more customers your way, expected to always work more than you can tolerate with circadian shifts you can't tolerate, or being threatened with your job over irrelevant non-medical patient complaints yet with no acknowledgement about the fact you're trying to provide high stress life saving care throughout it all, then you can move on.

Become an Emergency Physician. Have your fun. Work in the ED. But, do a fellowship, or get some some training, somehow, somewhere that allows you to opt out of EMTALA-bound, hospital-based work, as a hedge on your bets, to protect yourself against the toxic controllers of that environment as their influence continues to expand. That's my word to the wise.
 
Last edited:
  • Like
Reactions: 1 user
Unfortunately there is a third (worse) option which involves leaving emtala in place, cutting reimbursements for nonemergent visits, falling pay, and high volumes.

Whatever happens you can count on three certainties:

1. Your pay/benefits/lifestyle as a physician will take a hit before that of the c-suite.
2. Politicians will continue to pander to voters
3. Lawyers will continue to have the right to sue you.
I like your avatar a lot. :D
 
  • Like
Reactions: 1 user
Soon the system will have to make a choice. It can ration the use of EDs by denying visits for such things by stopping reimbursement for these cases, penalizing PMDs whose patients go to the ED for such issues, changing EMTALA or its interpretation or, more likely a mix of all of these.

Humana has started doing this in Florida. For capitated plans (e.g. where the plan pays a certain amount of money each month, per patient enrolled at your practice, whether or not the pt. is seen that month), the insurance company bills the PCP's office if a patient uses the ED or an urgent care center. It also means that if the patient walks in to the PCP's office, they must be seen, even if they walk in 30 seconds before the office closes (because if they are turned away and end up going to the ED, the PCP's office gets billed for the ED visit).

Humana has also started requiring prior authorizations for ED visits.

They're not going to stop paying for ER visits that are non-urgent. It's not going to happen. I'm calling their bluff. They tried that crap out west a couple of years ago and we had some discussions here about it.

Who's "they"?
 
  • Like
Reactions: 1 user
Humana has started doing this in Florida. For capitated plans (e.g. where the plan pays a certain amount of money each month, per patient enrolled at your practice, whether or not the pt. is seen that month), the insurance company bills the PCP's office if a patient uses the ED or an urgent care center. It also means that if the patient walks in to the PCP's office, they must be seen, even if they walk in 30 seconds before the office closes (because if they are turned away and end up going to the ED, the PCP's office gets billed for the ED visit).

Humana has also started requiring prior authorizations for ED visits.



Who's "they"?
I don't know. Ask DocB. He's the one saying it was going to happen and threaten Emergency Medicine. What you describe is not what DocB was talking about. He was talking about not paying ER doctors for ER visits. I know Medicaid in Washington State threatened to do this a few years ago and backed down after the appropriate backlash, fortunately realizing how catastrophic and bad of an idea it was, to choose first to cut costs from the most vulnerable portion of our broken system: it's safety net.

"The state chapter of the American College of Emergency Physicians, backed by Washington State Medical Association and the Washington State Hospital Association, filed a lawsuit in 2011 against the state. Early the next year, then-Gov. Chris Gregoire suspended the plan."

http://seattletimes.com/html/localnews/2023183747_emergencysavingsxml.html
 
Last edited:
Humana has started doing this in Florida. For capitated plans (e.g. where the plan pays a certain amount of money each month, per patient enrolled at your practice, whether or not the pt. is seen that month), the insurance company bills the PCP's office if a patient uses the ED or an urgent care center. It also means that if the patient walks in to the PCP's office, they must be seen, even if they walk in 30 seconds before the office closes (because if they are turned away and end up going to the ED, the PCP's office gets billed for the ED visit).

Humana has also started requiring prior authorizations for ED visits.


Wait, wait, wait... I work in FL. Haven't heard anything like this (yet). Elaborate ?
 
Humana has started doing this in Florida. For capitated plans (e.g. where the plan pays a certain amount of money each month, per patient enrolled at your practice, whether or not the pt. is seen that month), the insurance company bills the PCP's office if a patient uses the ED or an urgent care center. It also means that if the patient walks in to the PCP's office, they must be seen, even if they walk in 30 seconds before the office closes (because if they are turned away and end up going to the ED, the PCP's office gets billed for the ED visit).

Humana has also started requiring prior authorizations for ED visits.

As a side note, I can't tell you how horrible policies like this are. They're essentially then turning the PCP outpatient offices into de facto ER/urgent-cares, by penalizing them for not seeing what could be an unlimited amount of walk-in's, on demand. It's absolutely outrageous, if what you are describing, as I understand it, is happening. I'm assuming you are in FM from your post history, and I can't imagine you like this policy. I can't think of a more backwards concept. Policies like this will be the death knell of themselves and of these insurance plans. I hope every PCP in all of Florida, goes non-par with these plans and tells each and every patient they have that's on these plans how toxic their own insurance companies are to their health.

To insurance companies contemplating policies like these, I say, "Bring it on." Its just a matter of time before your punitive policies send you the way of the HMOs from the 1980's. Narrow networks, patients opting out, and outpatient doctors opting out of your plans with be your death knell.

And prior authorizations for ED visits? Equally absurd. It's a matter of time before that backfires, when the non-authorized visit for "heart burn" turns out to be an MI, the non-authorized visit for "tension headache" turns out to be a ruptured aneurysm, and the non-authorized "peds tummy ache" turns out to be ruptured appendicitis with sepsis and shock.
 
Wait, wait, wait... I work in FL. Haven't heard anything like this (yet). Elaborate ?

Basically, from what I understand, Humana (in particular) has offered some HMO plans that work on "full professional risk" capitation. Essentially, the insurance company has agreed to pay the PCP a set amount, per month, per patient that is on that PCP's patient list. If the patient doesn't come in, great! The PCP's office gets to keep that money.

The issue is what happens if you send the pt. to the ED or to a specialist - like, say, a cardiologist for a stress test. Who is going to pay the ED for the visit? Some insurance plans would pay the ED or the specialist on a fee-for-service basis, but some insurance companies would expect the PCP's office to pay the specialist or the hospital.

This model is really weird for most of us. If you trained fairly recently, you're probably more accustomed to the fee-for-service model, which is a model that also makes more intuitive sense - you perform a service for the patient, you get paid for it. This article from the ACP may help if you're curious: http://www.acponline.org/residents_fellows/career_counseling/understandcapit.htm

As a side note, I can't tell you how horrible policies like this are. They're essentially then turning the PCP outpatient offices into de facto ER/urgent-cares, by penalizing them for not seeing what could be an unlimited amount of walk-in's, on demand. It's absolutely outrageous, if what you are describing, as I understand it, is happening. I'm assuming you are in FM from your post history, and I can't imagine you like this policy. I can't think of a more backwards concept. Policies like this will be the death knell of themselves and of these insurance plans. I hope every PCP in all of Florida, goes non-par with these plans and tells each and every patient they have that's on these plans how toxic their own insurance companies are to their health.

To insurance companies contemplating policies like these, I say, "Bring it on." Its just a matter of time before your punitive policies send you the way of the HMOs from the 1980's. Narrow networks, patients opting out, and outpatient doctors opting out of your plans with be your death knell.

And prior authorizations for ED visits? Equally absurd. It's a matter of time before that backfires, when the non-authorized visit for "heart burn" turns out to be an MI, the non-authorized visit for "tension headache" turns out to be a ruptured aneurysm, and the non-authorized "peds tummy ache" turns out to be ruptured appendicitis with sepsis and shock.

I agree with you. These plans are horrible, and were clearly dreamed up by someone with an MBA - not an MD/DO/ARNP/PA.

The first I had heard that these policies were in effect for some insurance in my area was when one of my co-workers was on call. One of our physicians recently left to join another practice. One night, a home health nurse called my co-worker, because the patient wasn't doing well, but because the patient's PCP was the doctor who had just left, the nurse wasn't sure which practice the patient was affiliated with. The patient had bad COPD, and despite home O2 and nebs, had worsening wheezing, fever, and increased work of breathing. The nurse was calling to "get permission" to take the patient to the ED. She had been told by this patient's PCP to NEVER take the patient to the ED if she could help it at all, and I can only assume that it was for the above reason.
 
Top