ABSTRACT
Emergency physicians are highly trained to deliver acute unscheduled care. The emergency physician core skillset gained during emergency medicine residency can be applied to many other roles that benefit patients and extend and diversify emergency physician careers. In 2022, the American College of Emergency Physicians (ACEP) convened the New Practice Models Task Force to describe new care models and emergency physician opportunities outside the 4 walls of the emergency department. The Task Force consisted of 21 emergency physicians with broad experience and 2 ACEP staff. Fifty-nine emergency physician roles were identified (21 established clinical roles, 16 emerging clinical roles, 9 established nonclinical roles, and 13 emerging nonclinical roles). A strength-weakness-opportunity-threat (SWOT) analysis was performed for each role. Using the analysis, the Task Force made recommendations for guiding ACEP internal actions, advocacy, education, and research opportunities. Emphasis was placed on urgent care, rural medicine, telehealth/virtual care, mobile integrated health care, home-based services, emergency psychiatry, pain medicine, addiction medicine, and palliative care as roles with high or rising demand that draw on the emergency physician skillset. Advocacy recommendations focused on removing state and federal regulatory and legislative barriers to the expansion of new and emerging roles. Educational recommendations focused on aggregating available resources, developing a centralized resource for career guidance, and new educational content for emerging roles. The Task Force also recommended promoting research on potential advantages (eg, improved outcomes, lower cost) of emergency physicians in certain roles and new care models (eg, emergency physician remote supervision in rural settings).
Subject(s)
Emergency Medicine , Physicians , Telemedicine , Humans , United States , Emergency Medicine/education , Emergency Service, Hospital , Palliative CareABSTRACT
STUDY OBJECTIVE: We examine the effect of the Medicaid expansion in 2014 under in the Patient Protection and Affordable Care Act on emergency department (ED) utilization and ED admission rates (fraction of ED visits that lead to hospital admission) during the first 3 postexpansion years (2014 to 2016). METHODS: We compared ED utilization and ED admission rates in 151 EDs in 14 expansion states with those in 376 EDs in 14 nonexpansion states, using difference-in-differences methods with data from 3 national emergency medicine groups from 2013 to 2016. RESULTS: In expansion states, the volume of Medicaid-paid ED visits increased 49% (95% confidence interval 34% to 65%), and the volume of uninsured visits decreased 44% (95% confidence interval -52% to -34%) relative to that of nonexpansion states. Both effects on payer mix leveled off during 2015. There was no significant relative change in overall ED utilization or overall ED admission rates in expansion versus nonexpansion states during the study. However, relative ED admission rates for uninsured patients declined 8% (95% confidence interval -18% to -2%) in expansion states. CONCLUSION: Large changes in payer mix in expansion versus nonexpansion states were observed but leveled off during 2015, with more Medicaid-paid visits and fewer uninsured visits in expansion states. Despite these large changes, during this 3-year period, there was no evidence that expansion affected either overall ED visit volume or ED admission rates. The relative decline in ED admission rates in expansion states among the uninsured may reflect a selection effect in which, among newly Medicaid-eligible persons, sicker persons were more likely to enroll than healthier ones.
Subject(s)
Emergency Service, Hospital/statistics & numerical data , Medicaid/statistics & numerical data , Patient Acceptance of Health Care/statistics & numerical data , Patient Admission/statistics & numerical data , Humans , Medicaid/legislation & jurisprudence , Patient Protection and Affordable Care Act , United StatesABSTRACT
STUDY OBJECTIVE: We seek to examine differences in the provision of high-acuity professional services between rural and urban physicians receiving reimbursement for emergency care evaluation and management services from Medicare fee-for-service Part B. METHODS: Using the 2017 Medicare Public Use Files, we performed a cross-sectional analysis and defined the primary outcome, the proportion of high-acuity charts (PHAC), at the physician level as the proportion of services provided as 99285 and 99291 emergency care evaluation and management service codes relative to all such codes. After accounting for unique clinician-level characteristics, we categorized individual physicians by PHAC quintiles and conducted ordered logistic regression analyses reporting adjusted marginal probabilities to examine associations with rurality. RESULTS: A total of 34,256 physicians providing emergency care had a median PHAC of 66.8% (interquartile range 55.6% to 75.7%), with 89.2% practicing in an urban setting. Urban and rural physicians had respective median PHACs of 67.6% (interquartile range 57.1% to 76.2%) and 57.9% (interquartile range 42.7% to 69.4%). Urban and rural physicians had respective adjusted marginal probabilities of 15.2% and 11.8% of being in the highest PHAC quintile, and respective adjusted marginal probabilities of 14.3% and 18.2% of being in the lowest PHAC quintile. CONCLUSION: In comparison with rural physicians, urban physicians providing emergency care received reimbursements for a greater PHAC when caring for Medicare fee-for-service beneficiaries. Policymakers must consider these differences in the design and implementation of new emergency care payment policies.
Subject(s)
Emergency Medicine/statistics & numerical data , Patient Acuity , Practice Patterns, Physicians'/statistics & numerical data , Cross-Sectional Studies , Humans , Medicare , Rural Population , United States , Urban PopulationABSTRACT
PURPOSE: To characterize performance among ED sites participating in the Emergency Quality Network (E-QUAL) Avoidable Imaging Initiative for clinical targets on the American College of Emergency Physicians Choosing Wisely list. METHODS: This was an observational study of quality improvement (QI) data collected from hospital-based ED sites in 2017-2018. Participating EDs reported imaging utilization rates (UR) and common QI practices for three Choosing Wisely targets: Atraumatic Low Back Pain, Syncope, or Minor Head Injury. RESULTS: 305 ED sites participated in the initiative. Among all ED sites, the mean imaging UR for Atraumatic Low Back Pain was 34.7% (IQR 26.3%-42.6%) for XR, 19.1% (IQR 11.4%-24.9%) for CT, and 0.09% (IQR 0%-0.9%) for MRI. The mean CT UR for Syncope was 50.0% (IQR 38.0%-61.4%). The mean CT UR for Minor Head Injury was 72.6% (IQR 65.6%-81.7%). ED sites with sustained participation showed significant decreases in CT UR in 2017 compared to 2018 for Syncope (56.4% vs 48.0%; 95% CI: -12.7%, -4.1%) and Minor Head Injury (76.3% vs 72.1%; 95% CI: -7.3%, -1.1%). There was no significant change in imaging UR for Atraumatic Back Pain for XR (36.0% vs 33.3%; 95% CI: -5.9%, -0;5%), CT (20.1% vs 17.7%; 95% CI: -5.1%, -0.4%) or MRI (0.8% vs 0.7%, 95% CI: -0.4%, -0.3%). CONCLUSIONS: Early data from the E-QUAL Avoidable Imaging Initiative suggests QI interventions could potentially improve imaging stewardship and reduce low-value care. Further efforts to translate the Choosing Wisely recommendations into practice should promote data-driven benchmarking and learning collaboratives to achieve sustained practice improvement.
Subject(s)
Benchmarking , Diagnostic Imaging/statistics & numerical data , Emergency Service, Hospital/statistics & numerical data , Quality Improvement/organization & administration , Unnecessary Procedures/statistics & numerical data , Choice Behavior , Craniocerebral Trauma/diagnostic imaging , Databases, Factual , Humans , Low Back Pain/diagnostic imaging , Practice Patterns, Physicians'/statistics & numerical data , Syncope/diagnostic imaging , United States , Unnecessary Procedures/economicsSubject(s)
Emergency Medicine/economics , Hospitalization/economics , Medicare , Value-Based Health Insurance/economics , Emergency Medicine/organization & administration , Fee Schedules , Health Services Research , Humans , Insurance, Health, Reimbursement , Medicare/economics , Prospective Payment System , Reimbursement, Incentive , United StatesABSTRACT
The Affordable Care Act (ACA) will have far-reaching effects on the way health care is designed and delivered. Several elements of the ACA will directly affect both demand for ED care and expectations for its role in providing coordinated care. Hospitals will need to employ strategies to reduce ED crowding as the ACA expands insurance coverage. Discussions between EDs and primary care physicians about their respective roles providing acute unscheduled care would promote the goals of the ACA.
Subject(s)
Crowding , Emergency Service, Hospital/organization & administration , Emergency Service, Hospital/statistics & numerical data , Patient Protection and Affordable Care Act/legislation & jurisprudence , Primary Health Care/organization & administration , Health Services Needs and Demand , Humans , Medicaid/legislation & jurisprudence , Systems Integration , United StatesABSTRACT
STUDY OBJECTIVE: We study the effect of an emergency department (ED) electronic health record implementation on the operational metrics of a diverse group of community EDs. METHODS: We performed a retrospective before/after analysis of 23 EDs from a single management group that experienced ED electronic health record implementation (with the majority of electronic health records optimized specifically for ED use). We obtained electronic data for 4 length of stay measures (arrival to provider, admitted, discharged, and overall length of stay) and 4 measures of operational characteristics (left before treatment complete, significant returns, overall patient satisfaction, and provider efficiency). We compared the 6-month "baseline" period immediately before implementation with a "steady-state" period commencing 6 months after implementation for all 8 metrics. RESULTS: For the length of stay measures, there were no differences in the arrival-to-provider interval (difference of -0.02 hours; 95% confidence interval [CI] of difference -0.12 to 0.08), admitted length of stay (difference of 0.10 hours; 95% CI of difference -0.17 to 0.37), discharged length of stay (difference of 0.07 hours; 95% CI of difference -0.07 to 0.22), and overall length of stay (difference of 0.11 hours; 95% CI of difference -0.04 to 0.27). For operational characteristics, there were no differences in the percentage who left before treatment was complete (difference of 0.24%; 95% CI of difference -0.47% to 0.95%), significant returns (difference of -0.04%; 95% CI of difference -0.48% to 0.39%), overall percentile patient satisfaction (difference of -0.02%; 95% CI of difference -2.35% to 2.30%), and provider efficiency (difference of -0.05 patients/hour; 95% CI of difference -0.11 to 0.02). CONCLUSION: There is no meaningful difference in 8 measures of operational performance for community EDs experiencing optimized ED electronic health record implementation between a baseline and steady-state period.
Subject(s)
Electronic Health Records , Emergency Service, Hospital/standards , Efficiency, Organizational/statistics & numerical data , Electronic Health Records/organization & administration , Emergency Service, Hospital/organization & administration , Emergency Service, Hospital/statistics & numerical data , Hospitals, Community/organization & administration , Hospitals, Community/standards , Hospitals, Community/statistics & numerical data , Humans , Length of Stay/statistics & numerical data , Patient Satisfaction/statistics & numerical data , Quality Indicators, Health Care/statistics & numerical data , Retrospective Studies , United StatesABSTRACT
Optimizing resource use, eliminating waste, aligning provider incentives, reducing overall costs, and coordinating the delivery of quality care while improving outcomes have been major themes of health care reform initiatives. Recent legislation contains several provisions designed to move away from the current fee-for-service payment mechanism toward a model that reimburses providers for caring for a population of patients over time while shifting more financial risk to providers. In this article, we review current approaches to episode of care development and reimbursement. We describe the challenges of incorporating emergency medicine into the episode of care approach and the uncertain influence this delivery model will have on emergency medicine care, including quality outcomes. We discuss the limitations of the episode of care payment model for emergency services and advocate retention of the current fee-for-service payment model, as well as identify research gaps that, if addressed, could be used to inform future policy decisions of emergency medicine health policy leaders. We then describe a meaningful role for emergency medicine in an episode of care setting.
Subject(s)
Emergency Medicine , Episode of Care , Emergency Medicine/economics , Emergency Medicine/legislation & jurisprudence , Emergency Medicine/organization & administration , Fee-for-Service Plans/legislation & jurisprudence , Fee-for-Service Plans/organization & administration , Health Care Reform/legislation & jurisprudence , Health Care Reform/organization & administration , Humans , Models, Economic , Patient Protection and Affordable Care Act , Reimbursement Mechanisms/legislation & jurisprudence , Reimbursement Mechanisms/organization & administration , United StatesABSTRACT
BACKGROUND: The specialty of emergency medicine (EM) continues to experience a significant workforce shortage in the face of increasing demand for emergency care. SUMMARY: In July 2009, representatives of the leading EM organizations met in Dallas for the Future of Emergency Medicine Summit. Attendees at the Future of Emergency Medicine Summit agreed on the following: 1) Emergency medical care is an essential community service that should be available to all; 2) An insufficient emergency physician workforce also represents a potential threat to patient safety; 3) Accreditation Council for Graduate Medical Education/American Osteopathic Association (AOA)-accredited EM residency training and American Board of Medical Specialties/AOA EM board certification is the recognized standard for physician providers currently entering a career in emergency care; 4) Physician supply shortages in all fields contribute to-and will continue to contribute to-a situation in which providers with other levels of training may be a necessary part of the workforce for the foreseeable future; 5) A maldistribution of EM residency-trained physicians persists, with few pursuing practice in small hospital or rural settings; 6) Assuring that the public receives high quality emergency care while continuing to produce highly skilled EM specialists through EM training programs is the challenge for EM's future; 7) It is important that all providers of emergency care receive continuing postgraduate education.
Subject(s)
Emergency Medicine/education , Emergency Service, Hospital/trends , Emergency Medicine/standards , Forecasting , Humans , Internship and Residency/standards , Nurse Practitioners/education , Physician Assistants/education , WorkforceABSTRACT
Physician shortages are being projected for most medical specialties. The specialty of emergency medicine continues to experience a significant workforce shortage in the face of increasing demand for emergency care. The limited supply of emergency physicians, emergency nurses, and other resources is creating an urgent, untenable patient care problem. In July 2009, representatives of the leading emergency medicine organizations met in Dallas, TX, for the Future of Emergency Medicine Summit. This consensus document, agreed to and cowritten by all participating organizations, describes the substantive issues discussed and provides a foundation for the future of the specialty.
Subject(s)
Emergency Medicine , Emergency Nursing , Emergency Service, Hospital/trends , Health Services Needs and Demand/trends , Emergency Medicine/education , Emergency Medicine/trends , Emergency Nursing/education , Emergency Nursing/trends , Emergency Service, Hospital/organization & administration , Forecasting , Humans , Nurse Practitioners/supply & distribution , Nurses/supply & distribution , Physician Assistants/supply & distribution , Physicians/supply & distribution , Quality of Health Care/standards , United States , WorkforceABSTRACT
BACKGROUND: A shared language and vocabulary are essential for managing emergency department (ED) operations. This Fourth Emergency Department Benchmarking Alliance (EDBA) Summit brought together experts in the field to review, update, and add to key definitions and metrics of ED operations. OBJECTIVE: Summit objectives were to review and revise existing definitions, define and characterize new practices related to ED operations, and introduce financial and regulatory definitions affecting ED reimbursement. METHODS: Forty-six ED operations, data management, and benchmarking experts were invited to participate in the EDBA summit. Before arrival, experts were provided with documents from the three prior summits and assigned to update the terminology. Materials and publications related to standards of ED operations were considered and discussed. Each group submitted a revised set of definitions prior to the summit. Significantly revised, topical, or controversial recommendations were discussed among all summit participants. The goal of the in-person discussion was to reach consensus on definitions. Work group leaders made changes to reflect the discussion, which was revised with public and stakeholder feedback. RESULTS: The entire EDBA dictionary was updated and expanded. This article focuses on an update and discussion of definitions related to specific topics that changed since the last summit, specifically ED intake, boarding, diversion, and observation care. In addition, an extensive new glossary of financial and regulatory terminology germane to the practice of emergency medicine is included. CONCLUSIONS: A complete and precise set of operational definitions, time intervals, and utilization measures is necessary for timely and effective ED care. A common language of financial and regulatory definitions that affect ED operations is included for the first time. This article and its companion dictionary should serve as a resource to ED leadership, researchers, informatics and health policy leaders, and regulatory bodies.
Subject(s)
Benchmarking/methods , Emergency Service, Hospital/standards , Consensus Development Conferences as Topic , Humans , LeadershipABSTRACT
In 2014 twenty-eight states and the District of Columbia had expanded Medicaid eligibility while federal and state-based Marketplaces in every state made subsidized private health insurance available to qualified individuals. As a result, about seventeen million previously uninsured Americans gained health insurance in 2014. Many policy makers had predicted that Medicaid expansion would lead to greatly increased use of hospital emergency departments (EDs). We examined the effect of insurance expansion on ED use in 478 hospitals in 36 states during the first year of expansion (2014). In difference-in-differences analyses, Medicaid expansion increased Medicaid-paid ED visits in those states by 27.1 percent, decreased uninsured visits by 31.4 percent, and decreased privately insured visits by 6.7 percent during the first year of expansion compared to nonexpansion states. Overall, however, total ED visits grew by less than 3 percent in 2014 compared to 2012-13, with no significant difference between expansion and nonexpansion states. Thus, the expansion of Medicaid coverage strongly affected payer mix but did not significantly affect overall ED use, even though more people gained insurance coverage in expansion states than in nonexpansion states. This suggests that expanding Medicaid did not significantly increase or decrease overall ED visit volume.
Subject(s)
Emergency Service, Hospital/statistics & numerical data , Insurance, Health, Reimbursement/trends , Medicaid/economics , Patient Protection and Affordable Care Act/economics , Databases, Factual , Emergency Service, Hospital/economics , Female , Health Care Reform/economics , Humans , Insurance Coverage/economics , Insurance Coverage/statistics & numerical data , Insurance, Health, Reimbursement/economics , Male , Medicaid/statistics & numerical data , Patient Protection and Affordable Care Act/organization & administration , Regression Analysis , Retrospective Studies , United StatesSubject(s)
Emergency Medicine , Emergency Nursing , Emergency Service, Hospital/trends , Health Services Needs and Demand/trends , Emergency Medicine/education , Emergency Medicine/trends , Emergency Nursing/education , Emergency Nursing/trends , Emergency Service, Hospital/organization & administration , Forecasting , Humans , Nurse Practitioners/supply & distribution , Nurses/supply & distribution , Physician Assistants/supply & distribution , Physicians/supply & distribution , Quality of Health Care/standards , United States , WorkforceABSTRACT
The acute care system reflects the best and worst in American medicine. The system, which includes urgent care and retail clinics, emergency departments, hospitals, and doctors' offices, delivers 24/7 care for life-threatening conditions and is a key part of the safety net for the under- and uninsured. At the same time, it is fragmented, disconnected, and costly. We describe strategies to contain acute care costs. Reducing demands for acute care may be achieved through public health measures and educational initiatives; in contrast, delivery system reform has shown mixed results. Changing providers' behavior will require the development of care pathways, assessments of goals of care, and practice feedback. Creating alternatives to hospitalization and enhancing the interoperability of electronic health records will be key levers in cost containment. Finally, we contend that fee-for-service with modified payments based on quality and resource measures is the only feasible acute care payment model; others might be so disruptive that they could threaten the system's effectiveness and the safety net.
Subject(s)
Emergency Service, Hospital/economics , Quality of Health Care/economics , Reimbursement, Incentive , Cost Control/methods , Emergency Service, Hospital/statistics & numerical data , Humans , United StatesABSTRACT
Emergency department (ED) crowding continues to be a major public health problem in the United States and around the world. In June 2011, the Academic Emergency Medicine consensus conference focused on exploring interventions to alleviate ED crowding and to generate a series of research agendas on the topic. As part of the conference, a panel of leaders in the emergency care community shared their perspectives on emergency care, crowding, and some of the fundamental issues facing emergency care today. The panel participants included Drs. Bruce Siegel, Sandra Schneider, Peter Viccellio, and Randy Pilgrim. The panel was moderated by Dr. Jesse Pines. Dr. Siegel's comments focused on his work on Urgent Matters, which conducted two multihospital collaboratives related to improving ED crowding and disseminating results. Dr. Schneider focused on the future of ED crowding measures, the importance of improving our understanding of ED boarding and its implications, and the need for the specialty of emergency medicine (EM) to move beyond the discussion of unnecessary visits. Dr. Viccellio's comments focused on several areas, including the need for a clear message about unnecessary ED visits by the emergency care community and potential solutions to improve ED crowding. Finally, Dr. Pilgrim focused on the effect of effective leadership and management in crowding interventions and provided several examples of how these considerations directly affected the success or failure of well-constructed ED crowding interventions. This article describes each panelist's comments in detail.
Subject(s)
Crowding , Emergency Service, Hospital/organization & administration , Health Plan Implementation , Quality Assurance, Health Care , Emergency Medicine/organization & administration , Female , Humans , Male , Needs Assessment , Organizational Innovation , Patient Care Team/organization & administration , Time Management , United States , WorkflowABSTRACT
With a persistent trend of increasing emergency department (ED) volumes every year, services are intensifying. Thus, improving the timeliness of delivering emergency care should be a primary focus, both from an operational and from a research perspective. Much has been published on factors associated with delays in emergency care, and the next phase in this area of research will focus on exploring interventions to improve the timeliness of care. On June 1, 2011, Academic Emergency Medicine held a consensus conference titled "Interventions to Assure Quality in the Emergency Department." This article summarizes the findings of the breakout session that investigated interventions to improve the timeliness of emergency care. This article will explore the background on the concept of timeliness of emergency care, the current state of interventions that have been implemented to improve timeliness, and specific questions as a framework for a future research agenda.
Subject(s)
Emergency Medicine/organization & administration , Emergency Service, Hospital/organization & administration , Quality Improvement/organization & administration , Time Management , Triage , Crowding , Diffusion of Innovation , Female , Humans , Male , Patient Care Team/organization & administration , Quality Assurance, Health Care , United States , WorkflowABSTRACT
The ideal emergency care system delivers the right care to the right patient at the right time and yields appropriate patient outcomes at a sustainable overall cost. Transforming the current system of emergency care into the Institute of Medicine's vision of a coordinated, regionalized, and accountable emergency care system requires careful consideration of administrative challenges and barriers. Left unaddressed, certain processes, systems, and structures may prevent integration efforts or threaten long-term viability.
Subject(s)
Catchment Area, Health , Emergency Medical Services/organization & administration , Health Services Accessibility/organization & administration , Catchment Area, Health/economics , Electronic Health Records , Emergency Medical Services/legislation & jurisprudence , Health Care Reform/legislation & jurisprudence , Health Services Accessibility/legislation & jurisprudence , Humans , Interdisciplinary Communication , United StatesABSTRACT
In 2006, the Institute of Medicine (IOM) advanced the concept of "coordinated, regionalized, and accountable emergency care systems" to address significant problems with the delivery of emergency medical care in the United States. Achieving this vision requires the thoughtful implementation of well-aligned, system-level structures and processes that enhance access to emergency care and improve patient outcomes at a sustainable cost. Currently, the delivery of emergency medical care is supported by numerous administrative systems, including economic; reimbursement; legal and regulatory structures; licensure, credentialing, and accreditation processes; medicolegal systems; and quality reporting mechanisms. In addition, many regionalized systems may not optimize patient outcomes because of current administrative barriers that make it difficult for providers to deliver the best care. However, certain administrative barriers may also threaten the sustainability of integration efforts or prevent them altogether. This article identifies significant administrative challenges to integrating networks of emergency care in four specific areas: reimbursement, medical-legal, quality reporting mechanisms, and regulatory aspects. The authors propose a research agenda for indentifying optimal approaches that support consistent access to quality emergency care with improved outcomes for patients, at a sustainable cost. Researching administrative challenges will involve careful examination of the numerous natural experiments in the recent past and will be crucial to understand the impact as we embark on a new era of health reform.