Couldn't agree more with Arcan... Ultimately, we're usually trying to save the consultant a trip down to the ED or a drive in from home. Formal consults are great when they are needed, but if every consultant only felt comfortable with a formal vs an informal consult, then ED throughput times are going to grind to a screeching halt and the ED's are already overloaded as it is. That's taking up precious time in a room that could be spent treating someone else out in the waiting room with a potential emergent problem.
I think we can all agree that there definitely is a medico-legal distinction between the two types of consults. Also, if you read that last article... it gives examples of consultant interactions that prevented the name from being dropped and allowed it to go to court, but did not specify the specific outcome. I still find it difficult to believe that an informal consultant could be found liable and successfully prosecuted in situations like these unless it were a gross exception to the norm. That being said, nobody likes to be named in a lawsuit so I can understand the degree of anxiety.
As JD was saying... I don't know what the specific answer to this problem is ultimately going to be. I don't see informal consults going away, and I don't see specialists being too excited about coming into the ED every time they are called or updated on a pt that is being treated there non-emergently and does not require a formal evaluation. I see the options being the following....
1) Don't document in the ED chart that you spoke with the consultant. - Multiple problems with this... and it's just plain bad medicine. Good documentation always trumps bad documentation and if I spoke with a specialist about the pt, or spoke with the primary, or spoke with the pt's mother or aunt or whomever... I jot it down in the chart. It not only allows me to remember the encounter and accurately document it, but helps any other physician who might be treating the pt as an outpatient later on and wonders what happened in the ED or which specialist/primary I might have spoken to during that encounter.
2) Specialists start denying all informal consults and requiring formal ones. If you're an academic attending, this is an easy thing to say...and have your residents/fellows adhere to it but is completely impractical outside of academia. Also, it will drastically slow down already overloaded EDs. I can see this as something hospital administration would start getting involved in when they start asking why ED throughput is stagnating and why did pt AAA bleed out and code in the waiting room.
3) Specialists start making their own documentation about the encounter. I see this as the easiest solution for everyone if you're paranoid about the consult. If the case is ever brought to court and they are relying on my documentation of the conversation, then you've got your own documentation of the conversation. Also, I still think recorded ED lines is a great solution that might mitigate the necessity of excessive documentation from the consultant in situations like these. If I document that you said "Y" and the recorded conversation clearly shows that you said "X", then that covers you.
Again though... I think everyone needs to back up for a second and look at the big picture. It shouldn't be this complicated for a professional colleague to get your brief opinion on a pt, courteously inform you of your pt's presence in the ED and give you a chance to recommend anything or an entire host of similar situations which arise frequently. We can thank defensive medicine and malpractice lawyers for this thread.
Buzz... If that happened, then just bring it to the attention of the ED faculty, or your own faculty so that it can be escalated. The resident obviously mis-documented or took it out of context, but again... big picture here. How many reducible inguinal hernias do we see in the ED that don't need surgery to evaluate them? Lots. Also, we even have policy guidelines in scheduling certain pt's for outpatient followup that require that I call the specialty and inform them of the pt in the ED so that our own PI dept can successfully make the appt. I have no clue if there is a similar situation at your institution but regardless... just bring it up with your staff, problem solved. I'm sure it doesn't mean that you want to personally come and evaluate every reducible hernia... Hell, I don't even want you to feel required to do this. I get along great with my surgery colleagues and try to save them from as much extra hassle as possible. In my institution, I make these calls for the above reason specified and then document... "Spoke with Dr. X from Surgery who will see the pt in clinic on Wednesday." which allows our PI to schedule the appt with the surgery clinic. I think stating "Dr. X cleared for discharge." is obviously the wrong thing to document.
I feel bad for our optho residents. They actually do have a policy that some of you are suggesting where every call, regardless of it's nature about a pt, requires a formal consult. You can imagine the headaches this causes them and I cringe to call them sometimes. I might have a bad corneal abrasion or an ulceration that needs to be seen in clinic tomorrow but I have to call them to make sure they can be seen. It doesn't necessitate them coming in, but they are forced to regardless by this policy. It's frustrating for the optho residents but also frustrating for us because it keeps the pt in the ED much longer than they need to be and most of those guys are driving in from home so you can imagine how long the pt has to wait to get discharged and how exasperating it is for the optho resident to drive in to see something that did not require emergent evaluation tonight.