Civil Monetary Penalties Resulting From Violations of the Emergency Medical Treatment and Labor Act (EMTALA) Involving Psychiatric Emergencies, 2002 to 2018.
Clicks: 411
ID: 31934
2019
Article Quality & Performance Metrics
Overall Quality
Not rated
Combines reader engagement with the AI quality analysis. This
article has not been analysed, so there is no overall score —
reader engagement is measured and shown alongside.
Reader Engagement
Steady Performance
68.3
/100
411 views
297 readers
Trending
AI Quality Assessment
Not analyzed
Readership in this journal
SteadyRanked #2 of 6 articles by views in Academic emergency medicine : official journal of the Society for Academic Emergency Medicine
Most read
Least read
Bar heights use a square-root scale.
Mint this article as an NFT
Not yet mintedCreate a permanent, verifiable on-chain record of this article on the Scimatic Network. The NFT is held in your Journament account, and you can withdraw it to your own wallet at any time.
5
SUSD
one-off · no wallet required
Abstract
The objective was to describe characteristics of civil monetary penalties levied by the Office of the Inspector General (OIG) related to violations of the Emergency Medical Treatment and Labor Act (EMTALA) involving psychiatric emergencies.Descriptions of EMTALA-related civil monetary penalty settlements from 2002 to 2018 were obtained from the OIG. Cases related to psychiatric emergencies were identified by inclusion of key words in settlement descriptions. Characteristics of settlements involving EMTALA violations related to psychiatric emergencies including date, amount, and nature of the allegation were described and compared with settlements not involving psychiatric emergencies.Of 230 civil monetary penalty settlements related to EMTALA during the study period, 44 (19%) were related to psychiatric emergencies. The average settlement for psychiatric-related cases was $85,488, compared with $32,004 for non-psychiatric-related cases (p < 0.001). Five (83%) of the six largest settlements during the study period were related to cases involving psychiatric emergencies. The most commonly cited deficiencies for settlements involving psychiatric patients were failure to provide appropriate medical screening examination (84%) or stabilizing treatment (68%) or arrange appropriate transfer (30%). Failure to provide stabilizing treatment was more common among cases involving psychiatric emergencies (68% vs. 51%, p = 0.041). Among psychiatric-related settlements, 18 (41%) occurred in CMS Region IV (Southeast) and nine (20%) in Region VII (Central).Nearly one in five civil monetary penalty settlements related to EMTALA violations involved psychiatric emergencies. Settlements related to psychiatric emergencies were more costly and more often associated with failure to stabilize than for nonpsychiatric emergencies. Administrators should evaluate and strengthen policies and procedures related to psychiatric screening examinations, stabilizing care of psychiatric patients boarding in EDs, and transfer policies. Recent large, notable settlements related to EMTALA violations suggest that there is considerable room to improve access to and quality of care for patients with psychiatric emergencies.
| Reference Key |
terp2019civilacademic
Use this key to autocite in the manuscript while using
SciMatic Manuscript Manager or Thesis Manager
|
|---|---|
| Authors | Terp, Sophie;Wang, Brandon;Burner, Elizabeth;Connor, Denton;Seabury, Seth A;Menchine, Michael; |
| Journal | Academic emergency medicine : official journal of the Society for Academic Emergency Medicine |
| Year | 2019 |
| DOI |
10.1111/acem.13710
|
| URL | |
| Keywords | Keywords not found |
Citations
No citations found. To add a citation, contact the admin at info@scimatic.org
Comments
No comments yet. Be the first to comment on this article.