Logo

Log In Sign Up |  An official publication of: American College of Emergency Physicians
Navigation
  • Home
  • Multimedia
    • Podcasts
    • Videos
  • Clinical
    • Airway Managment
    • Case Reports
    • Critical Care
    • Guidelines
    • Imaging & Ultrasound
    • Pain & Palliative Care
    • Pediatrics
    • Resuscitation
    • Trauma & Injury
  • Resource Centers
    • mTBI Resource Center
  • Career
    • Practice Management
      • Benchmarking
      • Reimbursement & Coding
      • Care Team
      • Legal
      • Operations
      • Quality & Safety
    • Awards
    • Certification
    • Compensation
    • Early Career
    • Education
    • Leadership
    • Profiles
    • Retirement
    • Work-Life Balance
  • Columns
    • ACEP4U
    • Airway
    • Benchmarking
    • Brief19
    • By the Numbers
    • Coding Wizard
    • EM Cases
    • End of the Rainbow
    • Equity Equation
    • FACEPs in the Crowd
    • Forensic Facts
    • From the College
    • Images in EM
    • Kids Korner
    • Medicolegal Mind
    • Opinion
      • Break Room
      • New Spin
      • Pro-Con
    • Pearls From EM Literature
    • Policy Rx
    • Practice Changers
    • Problem Solvers
    • Residency Spotlight
    • Resident Voice
    • Skeptics’ Guide to Emergency Medicine
    • Sound Advice
    • Special OPs
    • Toxicology Q&A
    • WorldTravelERs
  • Resources
    • ACEP.org
    • ACEP Knowledge Quiz
    • Issue Archives
    • CME Now
    • Annual Scientific Assembly
      • ACEP14
      • ACEP15
      • ACEP16
      • ACEP17
      • ACEP18
      • ACEP19
    • Annals of Emergency Medicine
    • JACEP Open
    • Emergency Medicine Foundation
  • About
    • Our Mission
    • Medical Editor in Chief
    • Editorial Advisory Board
    • Awards
    • Authors
    • Article Submission
    • Contact Us
    • Advertise
    • Subscribe
    • Privacy Policy
    • Copyright Information

Appropriate Use Criteria: Another Hoop for Emergency Physicians to Jump Through?

By Jay Kaplan, MD, FACEP; and Barbara Tomar, MHA | on August 1, 2017 | 0 Comment
Uncategorized
  • Tweet
  • Click to email a link to a friend (Opens in new window) Email
Print-Friendly Version

Dr. Kaplan, in an attempt to explore the potential pitfalls of implementation, even visited an emergency department which had been touted as a leader in AUC implementation at a national radiology meeting to see what they were doing. What he found was much more problematic than was advertised, especially in terms of ease of use. The emergency physician pioneers at that hospital had discovered many problems with implementation and were willing to share what they had learned, hopefully to help all emergency physicians as this process is regulated forward.

You Might Also Like
  • When Is Ventilation-Perfusion Imaging Appropriate for Suspected Pulmonary Embolism?
  • ACEP Advocates for Fair Payments to Emergency Medicine
  • How CMS’ Value-Based Modifier Program May Affect Emergency Physicians

Given that the revised physician fee schedule language (see sidebar) doesn’t carry the full weight of codified regulatory language, this exemption is more likely to be helpful on appeal if payment is denied. According to clinical informaticist and EMTALA expert Todd B. Taylor, MD, “The EMTALA definition of EMC is a relatively high bar, often only determined retrospectively, and a substantial number of ED patients fail to meet this definition. In other words, by the time you know a patient has an EMC, most tests will have long been ordered. So, from a practical standpoint, emergency physicians may need to comply with this requirement, except perhaps for Level I trauma, cardiac arrest, and other critical situations.”

When Will AUC Be Required?

Start-up was originally scheduled for Jan. 1, 2017. Since the regulation affects physicians, the annual physician fee schedule was the vehicle chosen by CMS for AUC’s implementing rules. The 2017 final rule pushed the start date back a year to Jan. 1, 2018. Given the continuing problems with integrating AUC into hospital electronic health records, many physician groups, including ACEP and the American Medical Association, are advocating additional delays.

If CMS agrees, any change to the startup date would be included in the 2018 physician fee schedule, which will be finalized by Nov. 1, 2017. Barring some sort of intervention by Congress or a hold authorized by the president, every physician will have to comply eventually.

Who Designs Appropriate Use Criteria?

Another provision in the regulation (42 CFR 414.94) describes a “provider-led entity” (PLE) which is “a national professional medical specialty society or other organization that is comprised primarily of providers or practitioners who…predominantly provide direct patient care. Once a PLE is qualified by CMS, the AUC that are developed or endorsed by the entity would be considered to be applicable AUC.”

Once certified, these entities (The American College of Radiology and Brigham and Women’s Physician group are two of 11 currently certified) develop evidenced-based criteria which can then be used for Medicare billing and payment purposes.

Pages: 1 2 3 4 5 | Single Page

Topics: CMSEHRElectronic Medical RecordEMRImaging and UltrasoundMedicaidMedicarePublic Policy

Related

  • Q&A with ACEP President L. Anthony Cirillo

    November 5, 2025 - 0 Comment
  • July 2025 News from the College

    July 2, 2025 - 0 Comment
  • ACEP 2025 Leadership & Advocacy Conference—Showing Up on Behalf of EM!

    June 5, 2025 - 0 Comment

Current Issue

ACEP Now: November 2025

Download PDF

Read More

No Responses to “Appropriate Use Criteria: Another Hoop for Emergency Physicians to Jump Through?”

Leave a Reply Cancel Reply

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


*
*


Current Issue

ACEP Now: November 2025

Download PDF

Read More

Polls

Which topic would you like to see ACEP Now tackle?

View Results

Loading ... Loading ...
  • Polls Archive
Wiley
  • Home
  • About Us
  • Contact Us
  • Privacy
  • Terms of Use
  • Advertise
  • Cookie Preferences
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 2333-2603