Retrospective denial of emergency department payments is inappropriate

Abstract

Third-party payers typically use patients' discharge diagnoses to determine "appropriate" Emergency Department (ED) usage. This analysis compared the resource intensity involved in ED evaluation for "inappropriate" and all other ED visits. In this retrospective database review, 11 discharge diagnoses (DX11) (chronic nasopharyngitis; chronic sinusitis; chronic pharyngitis; rhinitis; constipation; head cold; hemorrhoids; toothache; flu; headache; and tension headache) were identified by a third party payor as being "inappropriate" for ED evaluation. The chief complaints of all patients seen in 1994 and 1995 with one of the DX11 were identified along with their E & M billing level, ED length of stay (LOS), and the frequency of consultation. In this urban, university trauma center, 1994 and 1995 visits totaled 120,402. Eighty-two different chief complaints were associated with a final diagnosis of DX11; 79% of all ED patients presented with one of the chief complaints (AllCC). Four percent of patients with DX11 were admitted, and the AllCC group had comparable resource utilization to the entire ED population. Patients' presenting complaints are incapable of predicting diagnosis or disposition. Retrospective denial of payment by discharge diagnosis is inappropriate.