• Home
  • Practice Focus
    • Facial Plastic/Reconstructive
    • Head and Neck
    • Laryngology
    • Otology/Neurotology
    • Pediatric
    • Rhinology
    • Sleep Medicine
    • How I Do It
    • TRIO Best Practices
  • Business of Medicine
    • Health Policy
    • Legal Matters
    • Practice Management
    • Tech Talk
    • AI
  • Literature Reviews
    • Facial Plastic/Reconstructive
    • Head and Neck
    • Laryngology
    • Otology/Neurotology
    • Pediatric
    • Rhinology
    • Sleep Medicine
  • Career
    • Medical Education
    • Professional Development
    • Resident Focus
  • ENT Perspectives
    • ENT Expressions
    • Everyday Ethics
    • From TRIO
    • The Great Debate
    • Letter From the Editor
    • Rx: Wellness
    • The Voice
    • Viewpoint
  • TRIO Resources
    • Triological Society
    • The Laryngoscope
    • Laryngoscope Investigative Otolaryngology
    • TRIO Combined Sections Meetings
    • COSM
    • Related Otolaryngology Events
  • Search

Situation Critical: Otolaryngologists See Diminishing Returns for Taking Emergency Call

by Gretchen Henkel • June 1, 2006

  • Tweet
  • Click to email a link to a friend (Opens in new window) Email
Print-Friendly Version

“Physicians are angered by providing emergency care to insured patients whose insurance coverages deny payment for mandated care,” said Dr. Harris, who is also chair of the Medical Staff Quality Assurance Committee at a large community hospital in Fullerton, Calif. “Insurance arrangements compelling patients to return to designated providers for follow up, regardless of the quality of care they’ve received, make emergency room call frustrating.

You Might Also Like

  • Pay4Call: Economic, Ethical, and Quality Issues of Payment for Taking Call: Physicians Angry at Lack of Payment
  • The Opt-Outs: Otolaryngologists extol the benefits of third-party independence
  • Otolaryngologists-Head and Neck Surgeons Urged: Be Part of the Solution in Health Care Reform
  • Borrowing 101: Minimize risk when taking out a loan for your practice
Explore This Issue
June 2006

“Once upon a time, it was worth it to you to be on call. That’s the way you built your practice. And there’s still that fantasy around. As a matter of fact, I can remember being kept off call by my competitors. But the whole world turned around over the last 15 years, and nobody even realized it.”

“There’s nothing worse than taking call and looking after a patient at a hospital, and then having them transferred to their Kaiser Permanente doctor who was not on call that night,” said Dr. Davison. “That just annoys the living daylights out of me!”

A study Dr. Davison published in Plastic and Reconstructive Surgery in 2004 highlighted this problem (114(2):453–457). Reviewing a total of 300 patient visits during a 30-month period of ER coverage at three hospitals (an inner-city tertiary care center, an urban university hospital, and a suburban tertiary care center), Dr. Davison found some unexpected results. The inner-city hospital did have the highest percentage of uninsured patients (67%), but it was the suburban tertiary hospital where the lowest rate of reimbursement was seen, despite the percentage of uninsured patients (50%) being lower than that of the inner-city hospital.

Opting Out

The solution for many otolaryngologists–head and neck surgeons is simply to stop taking call. Although he took emergency calls earlier in his career, Dr. Harris has not done so for several years. Echoing the results of Dr. Davison’s study on reimbursement rates, Dr. Harris noted that his reasons had less to do with treating uninsured patients than treating those with insurance coverage. “You have to go through this hassle and people accuse you of ripping them off.”

He recalls one incident almost 15 years ago, when he responded to a 3 AM call to stop an 80 year old patient’s nosebleed. The man, on a fixed income, asked whether Dr. Harris would accept what Medicare allowed for the consultation. Dr. Harris agreed, but secured the patient’s promise that if the amount was low that the patient would appeal the bill. The explanation of benefits allowed a $3 payment on a $150 bill. After an appeal, Dr. Harris eventually was granted a hearing with the Medicare examiner. Taking half a day off, he appeared and contested the low payment. “I won the case,” he said grimly. “I got nine bucks: that’s what happens when you win with these people.”

Pages: 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 | Single Page

Filed Under: Career Development, Departments, Health Policy, Medical Education, Practice Management Tagged With: cost, emergency, EMTALA, healthcare reform, insurance, legal, malpractice, Medicare, policy, reimbursementIssue: June 2006

You Might Also Like:

  • Pay4Call: Economic, Ethical, and Quality Issues of Payment for Taking Call: Physicians Angry at Lack of Payment
  • The Opt-Outs: Otolaryngologists extol the benefits of third-party independence
  • Otolaryngologists-Head and Neck Surgeons Urged: Be Part of the Solution in Health Care Reform
  • Borrowing 101: Minimize risk when taking out a loan for your practice

Leave a Reply Cancel reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *

The Triological SocietyENTtoday is a publication of The Triological Society.

Polls

Would you choose a concierge physician as your PCP?

View Results

Loading ... Loading ...
  • Polls Archive

Top Articles for Residents

  • Applications Open for Resident Members of ENTtoday Edit Board
  • How To Provide Helpful Feedback To Residents
  • Call for Resident Bowl Questions
  • New Standardized Otolaryngology Curriculum Launching July 1 Should Be Valuable Resource For Physicians Around The World
  • Do Training Programs Give Otolaryngology Residents the Necessary Tools to Do Productive Research?
  • Popular this Week
  • Most Popular
  • Most Recent
    • A Journey Through Pay Inequity: A Physician’s Firsthand Account

    • The Dramatic Rise in Tongue Tie and Lip Tie Treatment

    • Otolaryngologists Are Still Debating the Effectiveness of Tongue Tie Treatment

    • Is Middle Ear Pressure Affected by Continuous Positive Airway Pressure Use?

    • Rating Laryngopharyngeal Reflux Severity: How Do Two Common Instruments Compare?

    • The Dramatic Rise in Tongue Tie and Lip Tie Treatment

    • Rating Laryngopharyngeal Reflux Severity: How Do Two Common Instruments Compare?

    • Is Middle Ear Pressure Affected by Continuous Positive Airway Pressure Use?

    • Otolaryngologists Are Still Debating the Effectiveness of Tongue Tie Treatment

    • Complications for When Physicians Change a Maiden Name

    • Excitement Around Gene Therapy for Hearing Restoration
    • “Small” Acts of Kindness
    • How To: Endoscopic Total Maxillectomy Without Facial Skin Incision
    • Science Communities Must Speak Out When Policies Threaten Health and Safety
    • Observation Most Cost-Effective in Addressing AECRS in Absence of Bacterial Infection

Follow Us

  • Contact Us
  • About Us
  • Advertise
  • The Triological Society
  • The Laryngoscope
  • Laryngoscope Investigative Otolaryngology
  • Privacy Policy
  • Terms of Use
  • Cookies

Wiley

Copyright © 2025 by John Wiley & Sons, Inc. All rights reserved, including rights for text and data mining and training of artificial technologies or similar technologies. ISSN 1559-4939