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

Federal Government Declares Emergency Physicians Incapable of Performing Medical Screening Exam for Psychiatric Patients in AnMed Lawsuit

By Robert A. Bitterman, MD, JD, FACEP | on October 17, 2017 | 2 Comments
Features
  • Tweet
  • Click to email a link to a friend (Opens in new window) Email
Print-Friendly Version

If the emergency physician is able to determine whether an EMC exists, an on-call physician is not needed to help make that determination. It is only when the emergency physician needs the assistance and expertise of an on-call physician to determine if an EMC exists that the hospital is required to utilize the services of the on-call physician in screening the patient, and this is true regardless of whether the medical condition is a medical problem, surgical problem, pediatric problem, neurosurgical problem, or psychiatric or behavioral health problem.

You Might Also Like
  • ACEP Sues Federal Government Over Health Insurer Billing Practices
  • Is Involuntary Hold for Psychiatric Patients the Only Answer?
  • Washington Chapter ACEP Brings Fight Against Psychiatric Boarding to the Courts
Explore This Issue
ACEP Now: Vol 36 – No 10 – October 2017

In the 36 cases cited by CMS in its statement of deficiencies against AnMed Health, it was not at all difficult for the emergency physician to ascertain whether the patient suffered from an EMC. Many were well-known chronic psychiatric patients with obvious emergency conditions such as acute psychosis, suicidal intent, or behavior that threatened others. Many, just hours before, had encountered the state mental health system and had been sent to the emergency department by a psychiatrist via law enforcement, already on involuntary commitment papers for the emergency department to hold them until a bed became available in the state hospital. Others, through an appropriate history and physical examination, were readily determined to have an EMC without requiring the expertise of an on-call psychiatrist to make that determination. It’s not difficult for an emergency physician to determine that a 50-year-old man who tried to blow his head off with a 45-caliber revolver is actively suicidal.

The logic and the law are the same with respect to stabilizing patients with emergency conditions. If the services of an on-call physician/psychiatrist are not necessary or required to stabilize the individual, then the hospital has no duty under the law to mandate its on-call physicians/psychiatrists to present to the emergency department to provide stabilizing services.

So when is a psychiatric patient stabilized? CMS has specifically defined psychiatric patients to be stable “when they are protected and prevented from injuring or harming themselves or others.”6

Thus, once the hospital emergency department utilizes its usual interventions to “protect and prevent psychiatric patients from injuring or harming themselves or others” (medical clearance, searched, secured, removal of means and opportunity to harm self or others), the patients with psychiatric emergencies have been “stabilized,” as that term is defined by EMTALA, and the on-call physicians need not be involved to stabilize the patient.

Moreover, once stability is achieved, the law ends, and once the patient is stable, any further treatment, such as the care provided while the patient is boarded in the emergency department, psychiatric consultations, or any discharge or transfer, is not governed by EMTALA. As stated by CMS:

Pages: 1 2 3 4 5 6 | Single Page

Topics: AnMed HealthCMSEmergency DepartmentEmergency MedicineEmergency PhysiciansEMTALALawsuitLegallegislationMedical ExamMedicareMedicare & MedicaidMental HealthPatient BoardingPsychiatricPsychology and Behavioral DisorderPublic HealthPublic PolicyregulationScreeningSouth CarolinaViolation

Related

  • Opinion: Physicians Must Reduce Plastic Waste

    December 4, 2025 - 0 Comment
  • Q&A with ACEP President L. Anthony Cirillo

    November 5, 2025 - 0 Comment
  • ABEM’s New Physician Certification Portal Includes Waiver Clause

    October 23, 2025 - 0 Comment

Current Issue

ACEP Now: November 2025

Download PDF

Read More

2 Responses to “Federal Government Declares Emergency Physicians Incapable of Performing Medical Screening Exam for Psychiatric Patients in AnMed Lawsuit”

  1. October 23, 2017

    Charles A. Pilcher MD FACEP Reply

    I look forward to hearing “the rest of the story.” Something is truly amiss here.

    • December 10, 2017

      bob Reply

      Here ya go:

      modernhealthcare.com/article/20170705/NEWS/170709977

      “The patients — most of whom were suicidal and/or homicidal and suffered from serious mental illness — were held in the ED from six to 38 days. In each of these incidents, AnMed had on-call psychiatrists and beds available in its psychiatric unit to evaluate and stabilize the patients. But it but did not provide examination or treatment by a psychiatrist, according to the settlement agreement.”…

      …”AnMed’s policy was that if a patient should be involuntarily committed and did not have financial resources, the attending physician could write an order for the local mental health center to evaluate the patient for commitment to the state mental health system after the patient is medically stable, according to the settlement.”

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 © 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