Responding to Disruptive Patients, 69881-69883 [2010-28711]
Download as PDF
Federal Register / Vol. 75, No. 220 / Tuesday, November 16, 2010 / Rules and Regulations
or commercial vessels; except the draw
shall open anytime for commercial
cargo vessels, including tugs, and tugs
with tows, if two hours advance notice
is given to the Gilmerton Bridge at (757)
545–1512.
From 9:30 a.m. to 3:30 p.m. Monday
through Friday and from 6:30 a.m. to
6:30 p.m. Saturdays, Sundays and
Federal holidays, the draw shall open
on signal hourly on the half hour;
except the draw shall open anytime for
commercial cargo vessels, including
tugs, and tugs with tows, if two hours
advance notice is given to the Gilmerton
Bridge at (757) 545–1512. At all other
times, the draw shall open on signal.
We anticipate a decrease in vehicular
traffic congestion at the bridge, with no
impact to vessels passing under the
bridge in the closed position; however
we foresee slight delays to vessels while
transitioning to the new test opening
schedule.
This test deviation has been
coordinated with the main commercial
waterway user group, specifically, the
Virginia Maritime Association who
represents waterborne commerce in the
Port of Hampton and there is no
expectation of any significant impacts
on navigation. Vessels with a mast
height of less than seven feet can pass
underneath the bridge in the closed
position. There are no alternate
waterway routes.
In accordance with 33 CFR 117.35(e),
the drawbridge must return to its regular
operating schedule immediately at the
end of the designated time period. This
deviation from the operating regulations
is authorized under 33 CFR 117.35.
Dated: November 2, 2010.
Patrick B. Trapp,
Captain, U.S. Coast Guard, Acting
Commander, Fifth Coast Guard District.
[FR Doc. 2010–28737 Filed 11–15–10; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 9110–04–P
DEPARTMENT OF VETERANS
AFFAIRS
38 CFR Part 17
RIN 2900–AN45
Responding to Disruptive Patients
Department of Veterans Affairs.
Final rule.
AGENCY:
jlentini on DSKJ8SOYB1PROD with RULES
ACTION:
This final rule amends the
Department of Veterans Affairs (VA)
regulation that authorizes appropriate
action when a patient engages in
disruptive behavior at a VA medical
facility. This amendment updates VA’s
current regulation to reflect modern
SUMMARY:
VerDate Mar<15>2010
16:46 Nov 15, 2010
Jkt 223001
medical care and ethical practices. The
final rule authorizes VA to modify the
time, place, and/or manner in which VA
provides treatment to a patient, in order
to ensure the safety of others at VA
medical facilities, and to prevent any
interference with the provision of
medical care.
DATES: This final rule is effective
December 16, 2010.
FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:
Roscoe Butler, Acting Director, Business
Policy, Chief Business Office (163),
Veterans Health Administration,
Department of Veterans Affairs, 810
Vermont Avenue, NW., Washington, DC
20420, (202) 461–1586. (This is not a
toll free number.)
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: Under 38
U.S.C. chapters 17 and 18, VA has
authority to provide medical care to
certain veterans and non-veterans. VA is
required, per 38 U.S.C. 1721, to
prescribe rules and regulations to
promote good conduct on the part of VA
patients. VA has implemented this
authority in 38 CFR part 17.
Regarding the rights of patients
receiving VA care, 38 CFR 17.33(a)
prescribes, in part, that patients have ‘‘a
right to be treated with dignity in a
humane environment that affords them
both reasonable protection from harm
and appropriate privacy with regard to
their personal needs.’’ Patients also have
‘‘a right to receive, to the extent of
eligibility therefor under the law,
prompt and appropriate treatment for
any physical or emotional disability.’’
Section 17.33(b) also prescribes rights
with respect to visitations and
communications, clothing, personal
possessions, money, social interaction,
exercise, and worship for VA residents
and inpatients. These rights may be
restricted by the appropriate health care
professional in certain circumstances.
See 38 CFR 17.33(c). The restrictions
authorized by § 17.33(c), however, do
not apply to outpatients and only cover
restrictions on the listed rights. In
certain cases, VA must restrict the
provision of medical care to a patient in
order to prevent harm to other patients
and VA staff and disruptions in VA’s
provision of medical care due to the
patient’s behavior.
VA regulations also prescribe rules of
conduct for patients and other
individuals who have access to VA
facilities. See 38 CFR 1.218. In
particular, § 1.218(a)(5) prohibits
persons on VA property from causing a
wide variety of disturbances, including
creating ‘‘loud or unusual noise,’’
obstructing public areas, and impeding
or disrupting ‘‘the performance of
official duties by Government
PO 00000
Frm 00031
Fmt 4700
Sfmt 4700
69881
employees.’’ The sole enforcement
mechanism provided by paragraph (a)(5)
is ‘‘arrest and removal from the
premises.’’ 38 CFR 1.218(a)(5). VA has
determined that arrest is generally not
an appropriate remedy in a situation
where the Department must balance the
rights and needs of a disruptive patient
against the need to protect other
patients, guests, and staff. Some patients
establish a pattern of disruptive
behavior when interacting with VA
personnel or when they are on VA
property, and we believe that by
understanding these patterns of
behavior, planning for such behavior in
advance, and setting safe conditions for
care delivery, we can intervene in ways
that can prevent subsequent episodes
requiring removal and arrest.
In addition to §§ 1.218 and 17.33, the
behavior of patients is specifically
governed by current 38 CFR 17.106. It
requires, in part, that VA maintain the
good conduct of patients through
‘‘corrective and disciplinary procedure.’’
However, current § 17.106, which VA
promulgated in 1973 and last amended
over 10 years ago, does not adequately
reflect modern practice or VA’s policy
regarding disruptive patients in the
health care setting, which opposes the
use of punishment in the management
of disruptive patients. Instead, it reflects
the view that patients exhibiting
disruptive behavior must be punished.
For example, current § 17.106
emphasizes disciplining patients who
do not engage in ‘‘good conduct,’’ and
includes measures (such as withholding
pass privileges) that do not differentiate
between providing care and ensuring
the safety of others. Moreover, the
current rule could be viewed as
interfering with VA’s legal obligation to
provide medical care to certain veterans
and non-veterans. Accordingly, VA has
determined that amendments to current
regulations are necessary to implement
its policy regarding disruptive patients,
which emphasizes continuation of
treatment.
On June 1, 2010, we proposed to
amend § 17.106 to prescribe the
remedial measures VA will take when a
patient is disruptive and the procedures
for implementing those measures. 75 FR
30,306. We stated that our intent was to
minimize the risk of a particular patient
jeopardizing the health or safety of
others, or disrupting the safe provision
of medical care to another patient, in a
VA medical facility. We received three
comments on the proposed rule. All of
the commenters supported the proposed
rule, and there were no adverse
comments on the content of the
proposed regulation text or on the
rationales for the regulation text that we
E:\FR\FM\16NOR1.SGM
16NOR1
jlentini on DSKJ8SOYB1PROD with RULES
69882
Federal Register / Vol. 75, No. 220 / Tuesday, November 16, 2010 / Rules and Regulations
had provided in the notice of proposed
rulemaking.
The first commenter agreed that the
proposed rule ‘‘indicate[s] a total care
for other patients [sic] safety, as well as
the disruptive patient’s safety.’’ The
commenter agreed that the regulations,
being ‘‘more extensive and unique to the
acts of disruptive behavior,’’ may lead to
improvements for VA facilities. The
commenter suggested that ‘‘speaking
with a disruptive patient * * * could
eliminate the issue from happening
again to someone else.’’ Although the
regulation does not specifically require
direct verbal communication with a
disruptive patient, the regulation
requires VA to provide the patient with
notice of the content of any order
responding to the patient’s behavior,
and clearly contemplates clinical
involvement, including patient-specific
communication. To the extent that the
commenter offers a way for VA to
improve generally the manner in which
we respond to disruptive patients in
order to eliminate future disruptions,
we agree and note that we have
established Disruptive Behavior
Committees (DBCs) specifically for this
purpose. These DBCs will review
instances of disruptive behavior and
make appropriate recommendations.
Thus, we make no changes based on this
comment.
Another commenter agreed that
withholding visitation rights or any
other restriction, as was authorized by
the prior version of § 17.106, may be
unethical. The final rule does not
contemplate such punitive measures,
and furthermore, paragraph (b)(2) of the
final rule requires that any restrictions
on the time, place, or manner of patient
care must be ‘‘narrowly tailored.’’ The
commenter added that ‘‘any action taken
against the patient should be handled
clinically’’ by an appropriate medical
professional. We agree, and note that the
final rule requires that the VA medical
facility Chief of Staff or his or her
designee, which will in all cases be a
clinical professional, authorize all
actions taken in regards to a disruptive
patient. As stated in the proposed rule,
the new regulatory procedure will
emphasize addressing the disruptive
patient’s needs in order to advance VA’s
focus on patient care. Thus, we make no
changes based on this comment.
The third and final commenter,
speaking for The Joint Commission,
supported the regulation and did not
offer any suggestions for improvement.
The Joint Commission approved of the
regulation because it is in accordance
with their own criteria concerning the
rights and responsibilities of patients
and the environment in which care is
VerDate Mar<15>2010
16:46 Nov 15, 2010
Jkt 223001
provided. We appreciate the comment,
and have not made any changes based
on it.
For the foregoing reasons, VA amends
38 CFR 17.106 as proposed in the June
1, 2010, notice of proposed rulemaking
published at 75 FR 30,306.
Effect of Rulemaking
Title 38 of the Code of Federal
Regulations, as revised by this
rulemaking, represents VA’s
implementation of its authority on this
subject. Other than future amendments
to this regulation or governing statutes,
no contrary guidance or procedures on
this subject are authorized. All VA
guidance must be read to conform with
this rulemaking if possible or, if not
possible, such guidance is superseded
by this rulemaking.
Unfunded Mandates
The Unfunded Mandates Reform Act
requires, at 2 U.S.C. 1532, that agencies
prepare an assessment of anticipated
costs and benefits before developing any
rule that may result in the expenditure
by State, local, or tribal governments, in
the aggregate, or by the private sector, of
$100 million or more (adjusted annually
for inflation) in any given year. This
final rule will have no such effect on
State, local, or tribal governments, or on
the private sector.
Paperwork Reduction Act of 1995
This final rule contains no provisions
constituting a collection of information
under the Paperwork Reduction Act of
1995 (44 U.S.C. 3501–3521).
Executive Order 12866
Executive Order 12866 directs
agencies to assess all costs and benefits
of available regulatory alternatives and,
when regulation is necessary, to select
regulatory approaches that maximize
net benefits (including potential
economic, environmental, public health
and safety, and other advantages;
distributive impacts; and equity). The
Executive Order classifies a ‘‘significant
regulatory action,’’ requiring review by
OMB unless OMB waives such review,
as any regulatory action that is likely to
result in a rule that may: (1) Have an
annual effect on the economy of $100
million or more or adversely affect in a
material way the economy, a sector of
the economy, productivity, competition,
jobs, the environment, public health or
safety, or State, local, or tribal
governments or communities; (2) create
a serious inconsistency or otherwise
interfere with an action taken or
planned by another agency; (3)
materially alter the budgetary impact of
entitlements, grants, user fees, or loan
PO 00000
Frm 00032
Fmt 4700
Sfmt 4700
programs or the rights and obligations of
recipients thereof; or (4) raise novel
legal or policy issues arising out of legal
mandates, the President’s priorities, or
the principles set forth in the Executive
Order.
The economic, interagency,
budgetary, legal, and policy
implications of this final rule have been
examined and it has been determined
not to be a significant regulatory action
under the Executive Order.
Regulatory Flexibility Act
The Secretary hereby certifies that
this final rule will not have a significant
economic impact on a substantial
number of small entities as they are
defined in the Regulatory Flexibility
Act, 5 U.S.C. 601- 612. This final rule
will not cause a significant economic
impact on health care providers,
suppliers, or entities since only a small
portion of the business of such entities
concerns VA beneficiaries. Therefore,
pursuant to 5 U.S.C. 605(b), this final
rule is exempt from the initial and final
regulatory flexibility analysis
requirements of sections 603 and 604.
Catalog of Federal Domestic Assistance
The Catalog of Federal Domestic
Assistance numbers and titles for the
programs affected by this document are
64.007, Blind Rehabilitation Centers;
64.008, Veterans Domiciliary Care;
64.009, Veterans Medical Care Benefits;
64.010, Veterans Nursing Home Care;
64.011, Veterans Dental Care; 64.012,
Veterans Prescription Service; 64.013,
Veterans Prosthetic Appliances; 64.014,
64.015, Sharing Specialized Medical
Resources; 64.019, Veterans
Rehabilitation Alcohol and Drug
Dependence; and 64.022, Veterans
Home Based Primary Care.
Signing Authority
The Secretary of Veterans Affairs, or
designee, approved this document and
authorized the undersigned to sign and
submit the document to the Office of the
Federal Register for publication
electronically as an official document of
the Department of Veterans Affairs. John
R. Gingrich, Chief of Staff, approved this
document on November 3, 2010 for
publication.
List of Subjects in 38 CFR Part 17
Administrative practice and
procedure, Alcohol abuse, Alcoholism,
Day care, Dental health, Drug abuse,
Health care, Health facilities, Health
professions, Health records, Homeless,
Medical and Dental schools, Medical
devices, Medical research, Mental
health programs, Nursing homes.
E:\FR\FM\16NOR1.SGM
16NOR1
Federal Register / Vol. 75, No. 220 / Tuesday, November 16, 2010 / Rules and Regulations
Dated: November 9, 2010.
Robert C. McFetridge,
Director of Regulation Policy and
Management, Office of the General Counsel.
For the reasons stated in the preamble,
the Department of Veterans Affairs
amends 38 CFR part 17 as follows:
■
PART 17—MEDICAL
1. Revise the authority citation for part
17 to read as follows:
■
Authority: 38 U.S.C. 501, and as noted in
specific sections.
■
2. Revise § 17.106 to read as follows:
jlentini on DSKJ8SOYB1PROD with RULES
§ 17.106 VA response to disruptive
behavior of patients.
(a) Definition. For the purposes of this
section:
VA medical facility means VA
medical centers, outpatient clinics, and
domiciliaries.
(b) Response to disruptive patients.
The time, place, and/or manner of the
provision of a patient’s medical care
may be restricted by written order of the
Chief of Staff of the VA Medical Center
of jurisdiction or his or her designee if:
(1) The Chief of Staff or designee
determines pursuant to paragraph (c) of
this section that the patient’s behavior at
a VA medical facility has jeopardized or
could jeopardize the health or safety of
other patients, VA staff, or guests at the
facility, or otherwise interfere with the
delivery of safe medical care to another
patient at the facility;
(2) The order is narrowly tailored to
address the patient’s disruptive
behavior and avoid undue interference
with the patient’s care;
(3) The order is signed by the Chief of
Staff or designee, and a copy is entered
into the patient’s permanent medical
record;
(4) The patient receives a copy of the
order and written notice of the
procedure for appealing the order to the
Network Director of jurisdiction as soon
as possible after issuance; and
(5) The order contains an effective
date and any appropriate limits on the
duration of or conditions for continuing
the restrictions. The Chief of Staff or
designee may order restrictions for a
definite period or until the conditions
for removing conditions specified in the
order are satisfied. Unless otherwise
stated, the restrictions imposed by an
order will take effect upon issuance by
the Chief of Staff or designee. Any order
issued by the Chief of Staff or designee
shall include a summary of the
pertinent facts and the bases for the
Chief of Staff’s or designee’s
determination regarding the need for
restrictions.
VerDate Mar<15>2010
16:46 Nov 15, 2010
Jkt 223001
(c) Evaluation of disruptive behavior.
In making determinations under
paragraph (b) of this section, the Chief
of Staff or designee must consider all
pertinent facts, including any prior
counseling of the patient regarding his
or her disruptive behavior or any
pattern of such behavior, and whether
the disruptive behavior is a result of the
patient’s individual fears, preferences,
or perceived needs. A patient’s
disruptive behavior must be assessed in
connection with VA’s duty to provide
good quality care, including care
designed to reduce or otherwise
clinically address the patient’s behavior.
(d) Restrictions. The restrictions on
care imposed under this section may
include but are not limited to:
(1) Specifying the hours in which
nonemergent outpatient care will be
provided;
(2) Arranging for medical and any
other services to be provided in a
particular patient care area (e.g., private
exam room near an exit);
(3) Arranging for medical and any
other services to be provided at a
specific site of care;
(4) Specifying the health care
provider, and related personnel, who
will be involved with the patient’s care;
(5) Requiring police escort; or
(6) Authorizing VA providers to
terminate an encounter immediately if
certain behaviors occur.
(e) Review of restrictions. The patient
may request the Network Director’s
review of any order issued under this
section within 30 days of the effective
date of the order by submitting a written
request to the Chief of Staff. The Chief
of Staff shall forward the order and the
patient’s request to the Network Director
for a final decision. The Network
Director shall issue a final decision on
this matter within 30 days. VA will
enforce the order while it is under
review by the Network Director. The
Chief of Staff will provide the patient
who made the request written notice of
the Network Director’s final decision.
Note to § 17.106: Although VA may restrict
the time, place, and/or manner of care under
this section, VA will continue to offer the full
range of needed medical care to which a
patient is eligible under title 38 of the United
States Code or Code of Federal Regulations.
Patients have the right to accept or refuse
treatments or procedures, and such refusal by
a patient is not a basis for restricting the
provision of care under this section.
(Authority: 38 U.S.C. 501, 901, 1721)
[FR Doc. 2010–28711 Filed 11–15–10; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 8320–01–P
PO 00000
Frm 00033
Fmt 4700
Sfmt 4700
69883
ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION
AGENCY
40 CFR Part 52
[Docket No. EPA–R02–OAR–2010–0872;
FRL–9225–8]
Adequacy Status of the Submitted
2009 PM2.5 Motor Vehicle Emission
Budgets for Transportation Conformity
Purposes for the New York Portions of
New York-Northern New Jersey-Long
Island, NY-NJ-CT PM2.5 Nonattainment
Area; New York
Environmental Protection
Agency (EPA).
ACTION: Finding of adequacy.
AGENCY:
In this document, EPA is
notifying the public that it has found the
motor vehicle emissions budgets for
PM2.5 and NOX in the submitted
attainment demonstration state
implementation plans for the New York
portion of the New York-Northern New
Jersey-Long Island, NY-NJ-CT PM2.5
nonattainment area to be adequate for
transportation conformity purposes. The
transportation conformity rule requires
that the EPA conduct a public process
and make an affirmative decision on the
adequacy of budgets before they can be
used by metropolitan planning
organizations in conformity
determinations. As a result of our
finding, the New York Metropolitan
Transportation Council (excluding
Putnam County) and the Orange County
Transportation Council must use the
new 2009 PM2.5 budgets for future
transportation conformity
determinations.
SUMMARY:
This finding is effective
December 1, 2010.
DATES:
FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:
Melanie Zeman, Air Programs Branch,
Environmental Protection Agency—
Region 2, 290 Broadway, 25th Floor,
New York, New York 10007–1866, (212)
637–4022, zeman.melanie@epa.gov.
The finding and the response to
comments will be available at EPA’s
conformity Web site: https://
www.epa.gov/otaq/stateresources/
transconf/adequacy.htm.
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:
Background
On October 27, 2009, the State of New
York submitted an attainment
demonstration state implementation
plan to EPA for the New York portion
of the New York-Northern New JerseyLong Island, NY-NJ-CT PM2.5
nonattainment area. The purpose of
New York State’s submittal was to
demonstrate the State’s progress toward
E:\FR\FM\16NOR1.SGM
16NOR1
Agencies
[Federal Register Volume 75, Number 220 (Tuesday, November 16, 2010)]
[Rules and Regulations]
[Pages 69881-69883]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Printing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 2010-28711]
=======================================================================
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
DEPARTMENT OF VETERANS AFFAIRS
38 CFR Part 17
RIN 2900-AN45
Responding to Disruptive Patients
AGENCY: Department of Veterans Affairs.
ACTION: Final rule.
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
SUMMARY: This final rule amends the Department of Veterans Affairs (VA)
regulation that authorizes appropriate action when a patient engages in
disruptive behavior at a VA medical facility. This amendment updates
VA's current regulation to reflect modern medical care and ethical
practices. The final rule authorizes VA to modify the time, place, and/
or manner in which VA provides treatment to a patient, in order to
ensure the safety of others at VA medical facilities, and to prevent
any interference with the provision of medical care.
DATES: This final rule is effective December 16, 2010.
FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Roscoe Butler, Acting Director,
Business Policy, Chief Business Office (163), Veterans Health
Administration, Department of Veterans Affairs, 810 Vermont Avenue,
NW., Washington, DC 20420, (202) 461-1586. (This is not a toll free
number.)
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: Under 38 U.S.C. chapters 17 and 18, VA has
authority to provide medical care to certain veterans and non-veterans.
VA is required, per 38 U.S.C. 1721, to prescribe rules and regulations
to promote good conduct on the part of VA patients. VA has implemented
this authority in 38 CFR part 17.
Regarding the rights of patients receiving VA care, 38 CFR 17.33(a)
prescribes, in part, that patients have ``a right to be treated with
dignity in a humane environment that affords them both reasonable
protection from harm and appropriate privacy with regard to their
personal needs.'' Patients also have ``a right to receive, to the
extent of eligibility therefor under the law, prompt and appropriate
treatment for any physical or emotional disability.'' Section 17.33(b)
also prescribes rights with respect to visitations and communications,
clothing, personal possessions, money, social interaction, exercise,
and worship for VA residents and inpatients. These rights may be
restricted by the appropriate health care professional in certain
circumstances. See 38 CFR 17.33(c). The restrictions authorized by
Sec. 17.33(c), however, do not apply to outpatients and only cover
restrictions on the listed rights. In certain cases, VA must restrict
the provision of medical care to a patient in order to prevent harm to
other patients and VA staff and disruptions in VA's provision of
medical care due to the patient's behavior.
VA regulations also prescribe rules of conduct for patients and
other individuals who have access to VA facilities. See 38 CFR 1.218.
In particular, Sec. 1.218(a)(5) prohibits persons on VA property from
causing a wide variety of disturbances, including creating ``loud or
unusual noise,'' obstructing public areas, and impeding or disrupting
``the performance of official duties by Government employees.'' The
sole enforcement mechanism provided by paragraph (a)(5) is ``arrest and
removal from the premises.'' 38 CFR 1.218(a)(5). VA has determined that
arrest is generally not an appropriate remedy in a situation where the
Department must balance the rights and needs of a disruptive patient
against the need to protect other patients, guests, and staff. Some
patients establish a pattern of disruptive behavior when interacting
with VA personnel or when they are on VA property, and we believe that
by understanding these patterns of behavior, planning for such behavior
in advance, and setting safe conditions for care delivery, we can
intervene in ways that can prevent subsequent episodes requiring
removal and arrest.
In addition to Sec. Sec. 1.218 and 17.33, the behavior of patients
is specifically governed by current 38 CFR 17.106. It requires, in
part, that VA maintain the good conduct of patients through
``corrective and disciplinary procedure.'' However, current Sec.
17.106, which VA promulgated in 1973 and last amended over 10 years
ago, does not adequately reflect modern practice or VA's policy
regarding disruptive patients in the health care setting, which opposes
the use of punishment in the management of disruptive patients.
Instead, it reflects the view that patients exhibiting disruptive
behavior must be punished. For example, current Sec. 17.106 emphasizes
disciplining patients who do not engage in ``good conduct,'' and
includes measures (such as withholding pass privileges) that do not
differentiate between providing care and ensuring the safety of others.
Moreover, the current rule could be viewed as interfering with VA's
legal obligation to provide medical care to certain veterans and non-
veterans. Accordingly, VA has determined that amendments to current
regulations are necessary to implement its policy regarding disruptive
patients, which emphasizes continuation of treatment.
On June 1, 2010, we proposed to amend Sec. 17.106 to prescribe the
remedial measures VA will take when a patient is disruptive and the
procedures for implementing those measures. 75 FR 30,306. We stated
that our intent was to minimize the risk of a particular patient
jeopardizing the health or safety of others, or disrupting the safe
provision of medical care to another patient, in a VA medical facility.
We received three comments on the proposed rule. All of the commenters
supported the proposed rule, and there were no adverse comments on the
content of the proposed regulation text or on the rationales for the
regulation text that we
[[Page 69882]]
had provided in the notice of proposed rulemaking.
The first commenter agreed that the proposed rule ``indicate[s] a
total care for other patients [sic] safety, as well as the disruptive
patient's safety.'' The commenter agreed that the regulations, being
``more extensive and unique to the acts of disruptive behavior,'' may
lead to improvements for VA facilities. The commenter suggested that
``speaking with a disruptive patient * * * could eliminate the issue
from happening again to someone else.'' Although the regulation does
not specifically require direct verbal communication with a disruptive
patient, the regulation requires VA to provide the patient with notice
of the content of any order responding to the patient's behavior, and
clearly contemplates clinical involvement, including patient-specific
communication. To the extent that the commenter offers a way for VA to
improve generally the manner in which we respond to disruptive patients
in order to eliminate future disruptions, we agree and note that we
have established Disruptive Behavior Committees (DBCs) specifically for
this purpose. These DBCs will review instances of disruptive behavior
and make appropriate recommendations. Thus, we make no changes based on
this comment.
Another commenter agreed that withholding visitation rights or any
other restriction, as was authorized by the prior version of Sec.
17.106, may be unethical. The final rule does not contemplate such
punitive measures, and furthermore, paragraph (b)(2) of the final rule
requires that any restrictions on the time, place, or manner of patient
care must be ``narrowly tailored.'' The commenter added that ``any
action taken against the patient should be handled clinically'' by an
appropriate medical professional. We agree, and note that the final
rule requires that the VA medical facility Chief of Staff or his or her
designee, which will in all cases be a clinical professional, authorize
all actions taken in regards to a disruptive patient. As stated in the
proposed rule, the new regulatory procedure will emphasize addressing
the disruptive patient's needs in order to advance VA's focus on
patient care. Thus, we make no changes based on this comment.
The third and final commenter, speaking for The Joint Commission,
supported the regulation and did not offer any suggestions for
improvement. The Joint Commission approved of the regulation because it
is in accordance with their own criteria concerning the rights and
responsibilities of patients and the environment in which care is
provided. We appreciate the comment, and have not made any changes
based on it.
For the foregoing reasons, VA amends 38 CFR 17.106 as proposed in
the June 1, 2010, notice of proposed rulemaking published at 75 FR
30,306.
Effect of Rulemaking
Title 38 of the Code of Federal Regulations, as revised by this
rulemaking, represents VA's implementation of its authority on this
subject. Other than future amendments to this regulation or governing
statutes, no contrary guidance or procedures on this subject are
authorized. All VA guidance must be read to conform with this
rulemaking if possible or, if not possible, such guidance is superseded
by this rulemaking.
Unfunded Mandates
The Unfunded Mandates Reform Act requires, at 2 U.S.C. 1532, that
agencies prepare an assessment of anticipated costs and benefits before
developing any rule that may result in the expenditure by State, local,
or tribal governments, in the aggregate, or by the private sector, of
$100 million or more (adjusted annually for inflation) in any given
year. This final rule will have no such effect on State, local, or
tribal governments, or on the private sector.
Paperwork Reduction Act of 1995
This final rule contains no provisions constituting a collection of
information under the Paperwork Reduction Act of 1995 (44 U.S.C. 3501-
3521).
Executive Order 12866
Executive Order 12866 directs agencies to assess all costs and
benefits of available regulatory alternatives and, when regulation is
necessary, to select regulatory approaches that maximize net benefits
(including potential economic, environmental, public health and safety,
and other advantages; distributive impacts; and equity). The Executive
Order classifies a ``significant regulatory action,'' requiring review
by OMB unless OMB waives such review, as any regulatory action that is
likely to result in a rule that may: (1) Have an annual effect on the
economy of $100 million or more or adversely affect in a material way
the economy, a sector of the economy, productivity, competition, jobs,
the environment, public health or safety, or State, local, or tribal
governments or communities; (2) create a serious inconsistency or
otherwise interfere with an action taken or planned by another agency;
(3) materially alter the budgetary impact of entitlements, grants, user
fees, or loan programs or the rights and obligations of recipients
thereof; or (4) raise novel legal or policy issues arising out of legal
mandates, the President's priorities, or the principles set forth in
the Executive Order.
The economic, interagency, budgetary, legal, and policy
implications of this final rule have been examined and it has been
determined not to be a significant regulatory action under the
Executive Order.
Regulatory Flexibility Act
The Secretary hereby certifies that this final rule will not have a
significant economic impact on a substantial number of small entities
as they are defined in the Regulatory Flexibility Act, 5 U.S.C. 601-
612. This final rule will not cause a significant economic impact on
health care providers, suppliers, or entities since only a small
portion of the business of such entities concerns VA beneficiaries.
Therefore, pursuant to 5 U.S.C. 605(b), this final rule is exempt from
the initial and final regulatory flexibility analysis requirements of
sections 603 and 604.
Catalog of Federal Domestic Assistance
The Catalog of Federal Domestic Assistance numbers and titles for
the programs affected by this document are 64.007, Blind Rehabilitation
Centers; 64.008, Veterans Domiciliary Care; 64.009, Veterans Medical
Care Benefits; 64.010, Veterans Nursing Home Care; 64.011, Veterans
Dental Care; 64.012, Veterans Prescription Service; 64.013, Veterans
Prosthetic Appliances; 64.014, 64.015, Sharing Specialized Medical
Resources; 64.019, Veterans Rehabilitation Alcohol and Drug Dependence;
and 64.022, Veterans Home Based Primary Care.
Signing Authority
The Secretary of Veterans Affairs, or designee, approved this
document and authorized the undersigned to sign and submit the document
to the Office of the Federal Register for publication electronically as
an official document of the Department of Veterans Affairs. John R.
Gingrich, Chief of Staff, approved this document on November 3, 2010
for publication.
List of Subjects in 38 CFR Part 17
Administrative practice and procedure, Alcohol abuse, Alcoholism,
Day care, Dental health, Drug abuse, Health care, Health facilities,
Health professions, Health records, Homeless, Medical and Dental
schools, Medical devices, Medical research, Mental health programs,
Nursing homes.
[[Page 69883]]
Dated: November 9, 2010.
Robert C. McFetridge,
Director of Regulation Policy and Management, Office of the General
Counsel.
0
For the reasons stated in the preamble, the Department of Veterans
Affairs amends 38 CFR part 17 as follows:
PART 17--MEDICAL
0
1. Revise the authority citation for part 17 to read as follows:
Authority: 38 U.S.C. 501, and as noted in specific sections.
0
2. Revise Sec. 17.106 to read as follows:
Sec. 17.106 VA response to disruptive behavior of patients.
(a) Definition. For the purposes of this section:
VA medical facility means VA medical centers, outpatient clinics,
and domiciliaries.
(b) Response to disruptive patients. The time, place, and/or manner
of the provision of a patient's medical care may be restricted by
written order of the Chief of Staff of the VA Medical Center of
jurisdiction or his or her designee if:
(1) The Chief of Staff or designee determines pursuant to paragraph
(c) of this section that the patient's behavior at a VA medical
facility has jeopardized or could jeopardize the health or safety of
other patients, VA staff, or guests at the facility, or otherwise
interfere with the delivery of safe medical care to another patient at
the facility;
(2) The order is narrowly tailored to address the patient's
disruptive behavior and avoid undue interference with the patient's
care;
(3) The order is signed by the Chief of Staff or designee, and a
copy is entered into the patient's permanent medical record;
(4) The patient receives a copy of the order and written notice of
the procedure for appealing the order to the Network Director of
jurisdiction as soon as possible after issuance; and
(5) The order contains an effective date and any appropriate limits
on the duration of or conditions for continuing the restrictions. The
Chief of Staff or designee may order restrictions for a definite period
or until the conditions for removing conditions specified in the order
are satisfied. Unless otherwise stated, the restrictions imposed by an
order will take effect upon issuance by the Chief of Staff or designee.
Any order issued by the Chief of Staff or designee shall include a
summary of the pertinent facts and the bases for the Chief of Staff's
or designee's determination regarding the need for restrictions.
(c) Evaluation of disruptive behavior. In making determinations
under paragraph (b) of this section, the Chief of Staff or designee
must consider all pertinent facts, including any prior counseling of
the patient regarding his or her disruptive behavior or any pattern of
such behavior, and whether the disruptive behavior is a result of the
patient's individual fears, preferences, or perceived needs. A
patient's disruptive behavior must be assessed in connection with VA's
duty to provide good quality care, including care designed to reduce or
otherwise clinically address the patient's behavior.
(d) Restrictions. The restrictions on care imposed under this
section may include but are not limited to:
(1) Specifying the hours in which nonemergent outpatient care will
be provided;
(2) Arranging for medical and any other services to be provided in
a particular patient care area (e.g., private exam room near an exit);
(3) Arranging for medical and any other services to be provided at
a specific site of care;
(4) Specifying the health care provider, and related personnel, who
will be involved with the patient's care;
(5) Requiring police escort; or
(6) Authorizing VA providers to terminate an encounter immediately
if certain behaviors occur.
(e) Review of restrictions. The patient may request the Network
Director's review of any order issued under this section within 30 days
of the effective date of the order by submitting a written request to
the Chief of Staff. The Chief of Staff shall forward the order and the
patient's request to the Network Director for a final decision. The
Network Director shall issue a final decision on this matter within 30
days. VA will enforce the order while it is under review by the Network
Director. The Chief of Staff will provide the patient who made the
request written notice of the Network Director's final decision.
Note to Sec. 17.106: Although VA may restrict the time, place,
and/or manner of care under this section, VA will continue to offer
the full range of needed medical care to which a patient is eligible
under title 38 of the United States Code or Code of Federal
Regulations. Patients have the right to accept or refuse treatments
or procedures, and such refusal by a patient is not a basis for
restricting the provision of care under this section.
(Authority: 38 U.S.C. 501, 901, 1721)
[FR Doc. 2010-28711 Filed 11-15-10; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 8320-01-P