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
  • Career
    • Practice Management
      • Reimbursement & Coding
      • Legal
      • Operations
    • Awards
    • Certification
    • Early Career
    • Education
    • Leadership
    • Profiles
    • Retirement
    • Work-Life Balance
  • Compensation Reports
  • Columns
    • ACEP4U
    • Airway
    • Benchmarking
    • By the Numbers
    • EM Cases
    • End of the Rainbow
    • Equity Equation
    • FACEPs in the Crowd
    • Forensic Facts
    • From the College
    • 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
    • mTBI Resource Center
    • ACEP.org
    • ACEP Knowledge Quiz
    • CME Now
    • Annual Scientific Assembly
      • ACEP14
      • ACEP15
      • ACEP16
      • ACEP17
      • ACEP18
      • ACEP19
    • Annals of Emergency Medicine
    • JACEP Open
    • Emergency Medicine Foundation
  • Issue Archives
  • Archives
    • Brief19
    • Coding Wizard
    • Images in EM
    • Care Team
    • Quality & Safety
  • About
    • Our Mission
    • Medical Editor in Chief
    • Editorial Advisory Board
    • Awards
    • Authors
    • Article Submission
    • Contact Us
    • Advertise
    • Subscribe
    • Privacy Policy
    • Copyright Information

OPINION: A Pragmatic Fix for Emergency Medicine’s Payment Crisis

By Andrea Austin, MD, MHPE, FACEP | on April 30, 2026 | 1 Comment
Features Opinion
Share:  Print-Friendly Version

Imagine you’re planning to open a business. Your community desperately needs what you provide — so much so that lives will literally hang in the balance based on whether you can keep your doors open. You apply for a loan and begin building your financial forecast.

You Might Also Like
Explore This Issue
ACEP Now: April 2026 (Digital)

As you research market conditions, you discover three sobering facts:

  • You will not be paid by roughly 20 percent of your customers.
  • About 50 percent of your customers will pay through a government program that reimburses at a rate far below fair market value.
  • Only 30 percent of your customers will pay rates that approximate the true cost of your services, and even those payers have reduced reimbursement by a range of 10.9 percent to 47.7 percent over the past five years.

No bank would approve that loan.

Yet this is the business model of emergency medicine.

This is not hyperbole. It is the reality outlined in the 2025 RAND report, Strategies for Sustaining Emergency Care in the United States.1 Even though emergency medicine has always operated under this strain, the system is now approaching a breaking point. I began to feel it acutely in 2023, when inflation surged and a Medscape analysis of 2018–2023 data showed that emergency physicians’ real wage growth, adjusted for inflation, fell by 12.1 percent.2

We are now at a moment when we can no longer afford to ignore the elephant in the room: EMTALA is an unfunded mandate. Every day, emergency physicians expend physical and cognitive energy — often while facing violence, moral injury, and communicable disease — to care for patients who cannot pay. Ten years into practice and one pandemic later, it struck me that no other profession is routinely required by federal law to provide complex professional services for free.

Out of curiosity, I asked ChatGPT whether any analogous situation exists.* It could not identify a true parallel. The closest examples were public defenders, jury duty, and the military draft.  Even then, it noted:

  • Compensation: EMTALA does not guarantee compensation, whereas public defenders, jurors, and draftees receive at least some payment.
  • Nature of Work: EMTALA obligates private actors to provide potentially extensive, resource-intensive services creating a direct economic burden unlike those other examples.

Let that sink in. We are federally mandated to work. We are unpaid for roughly 20 percent of that work. For at least half of what remains we are paid far below market value. In effect, we are required to provide professional labor without fair compensation.

Pages: 1 2 3 4 | Single Page

Topics: EMTALAMedicaidMedicareOpinionPhysician CompensationPhysician PaymentPhysician ReimbursementRAND Reportstudent loansTaxes

Related

  • Physicians Brace for Medicaid’s Next Coverage Changes

    September 9, 2026 - 0 Comment
  • When Cost Keeps Patients Away

    July 6, 2026 - 0 Comment
  • July 2026 News from the College

    June 30, 2026 - 1 Comment

Current Issue

ACEP NOW: October 2026 (Digital)

Read More

One Response to “OPINION: A Pragmatic Fix for Emergency Medicine’s Payment Crisis”

  1. May 3, 2026

    Clayton Whiting Reply

    Phenomenal performance telling the realities in real dollars of the crisis in EM Reibursement! Thank you for the effort! As a frontline PIT Doc dedicated to my patients and community the last 23 years, I can’t comprehend the under compensated dollar amount of care I have provided while the payors and hospital systems report billions in profits! We must reorganize and rise up for the critical services we provide as a specialty!

Leave a Reply Cancel Reply

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


*
*





Wiley
  • Home
  • About Us
  • Contact Us
  • Privacy
  • Terms of Use
  • Advertise
  • Cookie Preferences
Copyright © 2026 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