Our hospital has noticed that on-call coverage by other local hospitals has gotten thinner since the pandemic. If other hospitals adopt lighter on-call schedules, it means more patients are transferred to our hospital and our on-call physicians have more of a burden. Is it acceptable for these other hospitals to have limited (or zero) on-call requirements for their specialists?
OUR ANSWER FROM HORTYSPRINGER ATTORNEY PHIL ZARONE:
The Emergency Medical Treatment and Labor Act (“EMTALA”) requires every Medicare-participating hospital with an Emergency Department to have an on‑call schedule. Specifically, each hospital is required to have “a list of physicians who are on call for duty after the initial examination to provide further evaluation and/or treatment necessary to stabilize an individual with an emergency medical condition.” 42 C.F.R. §489.20(r)(2).
The Centers for Medicare & Medicaid Services (“CMS”) expects a hospital to provide adequate on-call coverage consistent with the services provided at the hospital and the resources the hospital has available. If a hospital has physicians on the Medical Staff who routinely provide services in their specialty to patients in the community, the hospital is expected to also provide a reasonable amount of on-call coverage in that specialty.
Prior to 2003, CMS informally operated under the “three‑physician rule.” This rule stated that if there were three or more specialists on a hospital’s Medical Staff, CMS expected that hospital to provide on-call coverage 24 hours a day, 365 days a year. In other words, under the three-physician rule, physicians were each expected to provide about 10 days of on-call coverage per month.
In 2003, CMS specifically disavowed the three‑physician rule. In lieu of the three‑physician rule, CMS said it will use an “all relevant factors” test by which CMS will:
- consider all relevant factors, including the number of physicians on staff, other demands on these physicians, the frequency with which the hospital’s patients typically require services of on‑call physicians, and the provisions the hospital has made for situations in which a physician in the specialty is not available or the on‑call physician is unable to respond.
CMS has refused to give any firm guidance on the number of days of coverage a hospital must have per physician under the “all relevant factors” test. Thus, a hospital will only know if its on-call schedule is compliant if, after a complaint and CMS investigation, the hospital is found to be in compliance with EMTALA.
If you have reason to believe that another hospital’s on-call coverage is inadequate or nonexistent, you may want to first gather data to attempt to confirm this is the case. If the data seem to confirm a problem exists, you might want to arrange a meeting with the other hospital to discuss the issues. EMTALA allows for hospitals to work together to develop “community call plans” – this might allow all the involved hospitals to make better use of their resources.
There’s certainly no easy solution to on-call problems. Hopefully, gathering data and communicating will result in better outcomes than any of the alternatives.