Dual applying. Is it frowned up on?

[turboE36]

Hi there,

I'm a MSIII interested in anesthesiology as a career. I'm still in the process of absolutely positively deciding what I want to do, but so far I've narrowed it down to ENT and anesthesiology. As far as what appeals to me, I really like the idea of being in the OR, being involved with my hands, and doing short to medium length procedures (both at bedside and in the OR), but I'm a bit hesitant about long procedures (i.e 8 hour+ free flaps in ENT). I love patient interaction, but I hate the idea of charting for hours and making phone calls all day (which is why I'm not going for IM...does anesthesia have long rounds and charting???). I do love both fields and I can see myself being happy in either, but I'm having a really hard time deciding between the two. Would it really be that bad to apply to both and see what happens? It's extremely frightening to me to have to decide what I have to do for the rest of my life based on 3-4 weeks on a rotation (which is obviously very limited due to being at one institution, with one group of faculty and residents).

My stats:
Step I: 235
Top 50 school, not AOA, mix of HP, H, P grades
Lots of ENT, surgery research

---

Members don't see this ad.

 

[BLADEMDA]

My ENT surgeons NEVER do a procedure longer than 2.5 hours; most procedures are one hour or less. Private Practice is very different than Academia.

 

[kazuma]

I think it is discouraged at most programs. They may get the impression that you're not 100% dedicated. Usually its not too difficult to sniff out someone that's riding the fence when you sift through their eras app.

For example: someone with mediocre board scores, published research in an unrelated field like derm and derm related related extracurriculars/clubs is likely someone who has enough insight to realize they're highly unlikely to match into derm and is applying to your 3rd tier gas program as a backup plan.

I saw it several times throughout the interview season. Granted sometimes people change thier minds and decide to do anesthesiology late.

From a logistical stand point it's also difficult to schedule Sub-I electives in two specialties during the prime time season. Especially if youre looking to stay in a small geographic area or the same town. The world of medicine is smaller than you might think.

 

[Orin]

Agree with Kazuma. But with that said, ENT's a competitive enough specialty that if you aren't a solid candidate, applying to anesthesia as a backup is reasonable.

Based solely on your Step 1 score/US Medical school and the 2014 charting outcomes data, you have about a 65% chance to match into otolaryngology.
http://www.nrmp.org/wp-content/uploads/2014/09/Charting-Outcomes-2014-Final.pdf
Page 193 has a nice probability curve of matching vs Step 1 score for ENT.

As a reminder, this data'll be two cycles old by the time you apply. It's only getting more competitive, so I don't expect your odds will be higher by the time you apply.

If you decide to do ENT, cover your bases and schedule an elective in anesthesia near the end of your 4th year as a backup plan. Best case scenario you'll have matched into ENT and you can get some experience with airways and anesthetic mgmt. Worst case, you don't match and can use that time to gain exposure/letters for a possible anesthesia application. You can use the SOAP to get into a surgical/medicine program for a year and re-apply to whatever you decide upon.

 

[Mman]

My ENT surgeons NEVER do a procedure longer than 2.5 hours; most procedures are one hour or less. Private Practice is very different than Academia.

Depends what they do. We will sometimes get the 6-8 hour complicated hemi-face-ectomy (or so it seems), radical neck dissection, trach, and free flap. Most procedures are quick, but there isn't much getting around a complicated dissection and free flap taking some time.

 

[turboE36]

I think it is discouraged at most programs. They may get the impression that you're not 100% dedicated. Usually its not too difficult to sniff out someone that's riding the fence when you sift through their eras app.

For example: someone with mediocre board scores, published research in an unrelated field like derm and derm related related extracurriculars/clubs is likely someone who has enough insight to realize they're highly unlikely to match into derm and is applying to your 3rd tier gas program as a backup plan.

Hmm, this is quite a difficult predicament. Is there a lot of interdeparmental communication between ENT and Anesthesiology? I was planning to apply to different schools for each, but since ENT is so competitive I'll have to apply broadly and there might be some overlap.

As far as sniffing out people who might be doing gas as a backup, would it hurt me to be forthright and say I'm uncertain about which one I want to go into? I'd rather not lie...

 

[venacontracta]

Is there any way you can get more exposure to these fields and try to decide which you actually want to do? More rotations at your school? Away rotations? Less formal exposure (shadowing)? Anything?

Dual applying sounds like a true headache. If you were set on ENT but thought you'd also be happy in anesthesia, navigating through the mess of dual applying to have a backup could be worth it given your step score. But if your dilemma is that you truly don't know which field you'd rather go into, a good first step might be to do whatever you can to answer that question.

 

[turboE36]

Is there any way you can get more exposure to these fields and try to decide which you actually want to do? More rotations at your school? Away rotations? Less formal exposure (shadowing)? Anything?

Dual applying sounds like a true headache. If you were set on ENT but thought you'd also be happy in anesthesia, navigating through the mess of dual applying to have a backup could be worth it given your step score. But if your dilemma is that you truly don't know which field you'd rather go into, a good first step might be to do whatever you can to answer that question.

There's things I like and dislike about both. Some of them are probably less than worthy of discussion and may be due to my own lack of education or misconceptions, so I apologize in advance if I offend anyone.

Anesthesia:
Pros:
Procedure based
Get to spend your energy on one patient at a time
Requires quick decisions with immediately observable results
Light rounding
Ability to choose between academics and private
Great lifestyle/Excellent compensation (although it might be declining?)
Relatively easier to match into

Cons:
No patient follow up
Surgery envy/looking over the drape
CRNAs

=====

ENT:
Pros:
Love the anatomy, the bread and butter
Fascinating pathology/difficult complex diseases
Research
Seems more "exciting"
Surgery and clinic
Good lifestyle
Academic vs private
Patient continuity
Job security
Probably the same compensation as anesthesia; not sure


Cons:
Very sick patients
Long hours
Residency is demanding
Extremely competitive
No control over geographic preference for matching

 

[nimbus]

There's things I like and dislike about both. Some of them are probably less than worthy of discussion and may be due to my own lack of education or misconceptions, so I apologize in advance if I offend anyone.

Anesthesia:
Pros:
Procedure based
Get to spend your energy on one patient at a time
Requires quick decisions with immediately observable results
Light rounding
Ability to choose between academics and private
Great lifestyle/Excellent compensation (although it might be declining?)
Relatively easier to match into

Cons:
No patient follow up
Surgery envy/looking over the drape
CRNAs

=====

ENT:
Pros:
Love the anatomy, the bread and butter
Fascinating pathology/difficult complex diseases
Research
Seems more "exciting"
Surgery and clinic
Good lifestyle
Academic vs private
Patient continuity
Job security
Probably the same compensation as anesthesia; not sure


Cons:
Very sick patients
Long hours
Residency is demanding
Extremely competitive
No control over geographic preference for matching

In my community/practice setting, ENT lifestyle is MUCH better than anesthesia. And we see MUCH sicker patients than our ENTs ever see. They do mostly healthy outpatients. Anesthesia tends be be more "exciting" too. I've never been excited about an ent case.

 

[Nivens]

Anesthesia tends be be more "exciting" too. I've never been excited about an ent case.

Agreed.

I had this conversation with one of the MS3s at my med school the other day. He was giving me that "man, I really wish I liked anesthesia" speech (not nearly as PC as everyone thinks it is) when he found out what I'd applied for, and then mentioned how there just wasn't enough excitement in anesthesia for him, which was why he'd chosen to do general surgery. There are many valid reasons to choose surgery over anesthesiology (and vice versa), but lack of "excitement"? Ever been second assist in a whipple? Also, my impression is while "exciting" things like crashing patients and massive traumas are "fun" as a med student, and maybe even as a resident, when you're an attending and it's your license and your responsibility these experiences become less and less desireable and more and more the stuff of nightmares.

 

[turboE36]

Agreed.

I had this conversation with one of the MS3s at my med school the other day. He was giving me that "man, I really wish I liked anesthesia" speech (not nearly as PC as everyone thinks it is) when he found out what I'd applied for, and then mentioned how there just wasn't enough excitement in anesthesia for him, which was why he'd chosen to do general surgery. There are many valid reasons to choose surgery over anesthesiology (and vice versa), but lack of "excitement"? Ever been second assist in a whipple? Also, my impression is while "exciting" things like crashing patients and massive traumas are "fun" as a med student, and maybe even as a resident, when you're an attending and it's your license and your responsibility these experiences become less and less desirable and more and more the stuff of nightmares.

The analogy I was given about anesthesia is that it's sort of like being a pilot. No one claps or applaudes when he/she lands a plane. It's just expected to be done with a certain element of perfection.

I guess what I'm afraid of is doing something so frequently that it becomes routine and mindless. But then again, maybe this applies to any profession? Does the novelty of doing something "exciting" wear off quickly? I don't know...I feel pretty naive as a medical student. This is what frightens me the most about applying for residency....

 

[deleted171991]

What medical students don't realize is that all the excitement doesn't mean crap if it doesn't translate into motivation for continuing individual study.

If one can enjoy reading about a specialty for hours, without getting bored, there is a chance one might like the practice of it, too (and the manual skills will come, too, and are not really that important except for surgeons). And the opposite: if you don't enjoy reading now, imagine how much you'll read at the end of an exhausting day (for the next 30+ years). Not reading (enough) is the recipe for mediocrity (or failure).

So ask yourselves: which specialties do you really enjoy reading about? That's your short list, from where you'll choose the best one to practice (based on all the pros and cons).

 

[IlDestriero]

Hmm, this is quite a difficult predicament. Is there a lot of interdeparmental communication between ENT and Anesthesiology? I was planning to apply to different schools for each, but since ENT is so competitive I'll have to apply broadly and there might be some overlap.

As far as sniffing out people who might be doing gas as a backup, would it hurt me to be forthright and say I'm uncertain about which one I want to go into? I'd rather not lie...

If 20+ people are applying to your program for every residency slot, do you think we would waste an interview on someone not sure they want to do anesthesia? And if you did get an interview and you said that you weren't sure, do you think you're going to get ranked above the 10 per slot that get interviews?
No chance. 500 other applicants want that slot and they claim to be committed to a career in anesthesia.

ENT doesn't seem very exciting to me, and there certainly isn't any surgeon envy. Go enjoy the afternoon clinic chief, I'll be on the back 9.
There is plenty of excitement in anesthesia if you're at a big full service hospital and or a L1 trauma center. Plenty.

 

[G-Man82]

There's things I like and dislike about both. Some of them are probably less than worthy of discussion and may be due to my own lack of education or misconceptions, so I apologize in advance if I offend anyone.

Anesthesia:
Pros:
Procedure based
Get to spend your energy on one patient at a time
Requires quick decisions with immediately observable results
Light rounding
Ability to choose between academics and private
Great lifestyle/Excellent compensation (although it might be declining?)
Relatively easier to match into

Cons:
No patient follow up
Surgery envy/looking over the drape
CRNAs

=====

ENT:
Pros:
Love the anatomy, the bread and butter
Fascinating pathology/difficult complex diseases
Research
Seems more "exciting"
Surgery and clinic
Good lifestyle
Academic vs private
Patient continuity
Job security
Probably the same compensation as anesthesia; not sure


Cons:
Very sick patients
Long hours
Residency is demanding
Extremely competitive
No control over geographic preference for matching

So, Anesthesiology is a pretty misunderstood specialty by medical students especially. This goes even for those programs that "require" a 2 week block in Anesthesiology as part of the required surgery rotation. Thinking back to when I was a 3rd year student on Medicine (prior to entering the OR for gyn or surgery), I ran into a few Anesthesiogy residents rotating through our MICU. I caught myself wondering," wtf are they doing here?" I had ZERO concept as to what an Anesthesiogist does. And now look. I'm THAT guy now in the MICU, where med residents see my ID and ask if I'm the prelim medicine intern. Imagine their surprise when I say that I'm a critical care fellow. One pgy-3 even told me that she had a lot of anesthesia interns on her service before ... But now she realizes the difference between them and me. Not sure how I should take that; chose to take it as a compliment.

Anyway, regarding your pros:
1. Procedure: yeah, we do lines, awake intubations, nerve blocks etc. But we don't do surgery. Our procedures are not that type. I see it as a technical skill set that we obtain through residency. A lot of ppl can do it; CRNAs can do it. The difference is in choosing on WHOM to do the procedure. That takes understanding of medical pathophysiology. I'm talking GENERAL medical knowledge here. And lots of it. Our drugs and techniques are poisons and should be given that regard.

2. One patient at a time - I wish. That's starting to seem less and less likely these days, though MD-only practices do exist.

3. Quick decisions/ instant gratification: true for the most part. An 18 hour long ENT free flap on the other hand? Zzzzzzz. Very boring. And NOT fun for those poor ENT residents either.

4. Rounding: a huge plus. Not done outside ICU practice. I did a peds CT Elective as a CA-3. We did table rounds for the next day's patients discussing studies, goals, hemodynamics etc. but I think that's an exception.

5. Academics/private: true. not sure of the benefit here though. The debate on PP and AMCs has already been done. Academics may be the place to be these days.

6. Lifestyle/compensation. Still good, though general consensus on this site is that we've passed the hey day of anesthesiology practice. That's its own debate though.

I definitely do not ever want to even consider being a surgeon of any specialty. I'd rather quit medicine. But that's my opinion. I hated the OR as a surgery student, but did a complete 180 when I did an Anesthesiology elective.

Not gonna comment much on ENT other than to say it's a surgical specialty, so my opinion stands. Most specialists lack or lose a lot of their general medical knowledge; that was something that I wanted to hold on to.

I'm pgy-5. Med school feels a long time ago, but I was clueless regarding Anesthesia. I'm still certain I don't know much about practice because I haven't yet been an Attending. But these are my opinions based on my perceptions as a medical student to what I see now and have experienced during residency. Take it for what you will. You will NEVER be bored in this job unless you choose to become a professional propofol pusher. But those jobs probably won't exist anymore either.

 

[Carbocation1]

So, Anesthesiology is a pretty misunderstood specialty by medical students especially. This goes even for those programs that "require" a 2 week block in Anesthesiology as part of the required surgery rotation. Thinking back to when I was a 3rd year student on Medicine (prior to entering the OR for gyn or surgery), I ran into a few Anesthesiogy residents rotating through our MICU. I caught myself wondering," wtf are they doing here?" I had ZERO concept as to what an Anesthesiogist does. And now look. I'm THAT guy now in the MICU, where med residents see my ID and ask if I'm the prelim medicine intern. Imagine their surprise when I say that I'm a critical care fellow. One pgy-3 even told me that she had a lot of anesthesia interns on her service before ... But now she realizes the difference between them and me. Not sure how I should take that; chose to take it as a compliment.

Anyway, regarding your pros:
1. Procedure: yeah, we do lines, awake intubations, nerve blocks etc. But we don't do surgery. Our procedures are not that type. I see it as a technical skill set that we obtain through residency. A lot of ppl can do it; CRNAs can do it. The difference is in choosing on WHOM to do the procedure. That takes understanding of medical pathophysiology. I'm talking GENERAL medical knowledge here. And lots of it. Our drugs and techniques are poisons and should be given that regard.

2. One patient at a time - I wish. That's starting to seem less and less likely these days, though MD-only practices do exist.

3. Quick decisions/ instant gratification: true for the most part. An 18 hour long ENT free flap on the other hand? Zzzzzzz. Very boring. And NOT fun for those poor ENT residents either.

4. Rounding: a huge plus. Not done outside ICU practice. I did a peds CT Elective as a CA-3. We did table rounds for the next day's patients discussing studies, goals, hemodynamics etc. but I think that's an exception.

5. Academics/private: true. not sure of the benefit here though. The debate on PP and AMCs has already been done. Academics may be the place to be these days.

6. Lifestyle/compensation. Still good, though general consensus on this site is that we've passed the hey day of anesthesiology practice. That's its own debate though.

I definitely do not ever want to even consider being a surgeon of any specialty. I'd rather quit medicine. But that's my opinion. I hated the OR as a surgery student, but did a complete 180 when I did an Anesthesiology elective.

Not gonna comment much on ENT other than to say it's a surgical specialty, so my opinion stands. Most specialists lack or lose a lot of their general medical knowledge; that was something that I wanted to hold on to.

I'm pgy-5. Med school feels a long time ago, but I was clueless regarding Anesthesia. I'm still certain I don't know much about practice because I haven't yet been an Attending. But these are my opinions based on my perceptions as a medical student to what I see now and have experienced during residency. Take it for what you will. You will NEVER be bored in this job unless you choose to become a professional propofol pusher. But those jobs probably won't exist anymore either.

Thanks for this post! Would you say anesthesiologists get to do a lot of diagnosing? From what I've read they usually can pick up stuff that falls through the cracks in pre-op but don't get to much diagnosing in the traditional sense (excluding diagnosis of acute problems in the OR).

 

[G-Man82]

Thanks for this post! Would you say anesthesiologists get to do a lot of diagnosing? From what I've read they usually can pick up stuff that falls through the cracks in pre-op but don't get to much diagnosing in the traditional sense (excluding diagnosis of acute problems in the OR).

We're not diagnosing in the same sense as an Internist who sees and admits a patient for a specific chief complaint. By the time the patient comes to us, a diagnosis usually exists and a procedure is required. That being said, as you mentioned already, yes we do pick things up that may have been missed in patients coming for elective procedures. Often times though for Pts coming through the ED for an emergency surgery, we may have a slightly more diagnostic role, but looking for things that could directly affect our anesthetic plan. For example, I may grab the transthoracic Echo probe and place it on grandma prior to her hip surgery for an acute fracture if I hear a murmur. Or, like I did on OB once as a resident, speak to and examine the pt at 29 weeks who arrives in respiratory distress with severely reduced exercise tolerance and look for signs of heart failure. I'm not primary, but we are still trained to be consultant physicians. While diagnosing won't be your primary objective, opportunities exist and our expertise, and especially our training (intern year!), differentiates us from other physicians, and especially non-physician anesthesia providers.

 

[deleted171991]

Thanks for this post! Would you say anesthesiologists get to do a lot of diagnosing? From what I've read they usually can pick up stuff that falls through the cracks in pre-op but don't get to much diagnosing in the traditional sense (excluding diagnosis of acute problems in the OR).

There is not "a lot" of diagnosing, but occasionally one will hear a new murmur, will see a new bundle branch block or AFib, or obviously chronic hypertension, or obstructive sleep apnea that the patient doesn't know about. Or one will notice something in the labs or imaging, ask the patient about it, just to find out that the patient has never been told she has kidney disease, or an aortic aneurysm etc.

As an anesthesiologist, you have to have good basic diagnostic skills, at least at the level of not missing any significant pre-existing disease for anesthetic purposes (especially cardiovascular, respiratory, brain, acid-base, hydroelectrolytic or blood pathology). Also, one should be able to diagnose and treat a bunch of medical emergencies, should they occur intraop.

 

[turboE36]

Hi all,

Wanted to revisit this topic. I've done a lot of thinking and I want to apply to anesthesia - but as a backup.

Problem: I have three ENT aways scheduled, so no time to do a anesthesia sub i. Can I still match without one? Do my letters HAVE to be from a anesthesiologist? I did particularly well on my medicine rotation and the program director offered to write me a strong letter - would this be a good option?

 

[Twiggidy]

It's extremely frightening to me to have to decide

one of the most important parts of medicine is making decisions and living with the outcome. this is across al fields and especially in anesthesiology. (by the way, you provide 'anesthesia' and practice 'anesthesiology')

Hi all,

Wanted to revisit this topic. I've done a lot of thinking and I want to apply to anesthesia - but as a backup.

Problem: I have three ENT aways scheduled, so no time to do a anesthesia sub i. Can I still match without one? Do my letters HAVE to be from a anesthesiologist? I did particularly well on my medicine rotation and the program director offered to write me a strong letter - would this be a good option?

think of it this way, if you were applying to, as you say, anesthesia, with ENT as a backup, do you think you'd get many ENT interviews with no letters of recommendation from an ENT surgeon? they way it will look to a PD is that he/she couldn't establish a good enough relationships in OUR field to get anyone to vouch for he/she, but seemed to make good friends and have good relationships with the internist. trash....next candidate.

so, one less away rotation and do an anesthesiology sub-i

(by the way, i had nearly the same credentials as you, did a surgery sub-i, no aways, double interviewed Gen Surg and Anesthesiology, no one noticed, and matched at my #1 choice. Interviewing was expensive as hell for a broke as med student)

 

[Doctor4Life1769]

I think its overrated.
You can apply to both, have good letters for both specialties.
Interview wisely, don't waiver on the commitment and have legit reasons
Of course, the end result will be out of your hands and the process will be tiring and expensive, but it can work.

 

[deleted171991]

At the end of the day, what you'll want is to know that you gave each specialty/application your best effort. This way you'll have no significant regrets if you don't match into one of them.

 

[Consigliere]

There's things I like and dislike about both. Some of them are probably less than worthy of discussion and may be due to my own lack of education or misconceptions, so I apologize in advance if I offend anyone.

Anesthesia:
Pros:
Procedure based
Get to spend your energy on one patient at a time
Requires quick decisions with immediately observable results
Light rounding
Ability to choose between academics and private
Great lifestyle/Excellent compensation (although it might be declining?)
Relatively easier to match into

Cons:
No patient follow up
Surgery envy/looking over the drape
CRNAs

=====

ENT:
Pros:
Love the anatomy, the bread and butter
Fascinating pathology/difficult complex diseases
Research
Seems more "exciting"
Surgery and clinic
Good lifestyle
Academic vs private
Patient continuity
Job security
Probably the same compensation as anesthesia; not sure


Cons:
Very sick patients
Long hours
Residency is demanding
Extremely competitive
No control over geographic preference for matching

In regards to the "Pros" bolded item: the lifestyle in anesthesiology is far from "great" as many here will attest to, not just "bitter" people such as myself. Compensation, a motivating factor for many, is far from "excellent."

In regards to the "Cons" bolded item: most anesthesiologists consider this a "pro."

 

[deleted171991]

In regards to the "Cons" bolded item: most anesthesiologists consider this a "pro."

And that's a huge mistake. In the "patient-centered" future, the patient-doctor relationship will matter enormously (for the bean counters, because that's how they were trained, to appreciate especially the employees who bring business). So we should aim for repeat customers by prolonging the doctor-patient relationship as much as we can. That means the surgical patient should be ours from the moment he's admitted to the hospital till he is discharged or transferred to a non-surgical floor.

What do you think, @BuzzPhreed?

 

[Carbocation1]

And that's a huge mistake. In the "patient-centered" future, the patient-doctor relationship will matter enormously (for the bean counters, because that's how they were trained, to appreciate especially the employees who bring business). So we should aim for repeat customers by prolonging the doctor-patient relationship as much as we can. That means the surgical patient should be ours from the moment he's admitted to the hospital till he is discharged or transferred to a non-surgical floor.

What do you think, @BuzzPhreed?

What is the difference between this and PSH, in theory?

 

[turboE36]

one of the most important parts of medicine is making decisions and living with the outcome. this is across al fields and especially in anesthesiology. (by the way, you provide 'anesthesia' and practice 'anesthesiology')



think of it this way, if you were applying to, as you say, anesthesia, with ENT as a backup, do you think you'd get many ENT interviews with no letters of recommendation from an ENT surgeon? they way it will look to a PD is that he/she couldn't establish a good enough relationships in OUR field to get anyone to vouch for he/she, but seemed to make good friends and have good relationships with the internist. trash....next candidate.

so, one less away rotation and do an anesthesiology sub-i

(by the way, i had nearly the same credentials as you, did a surgery sub-i, no aways, double interviewed Gen Surg and Anesthesiology, no one noticed, and matched at my #1 choice. Interviewing was expensive as hell for a broke as med student)

Thanks for the input. I think the best thing to do at this point is to meet with my PD and see what the options are.

As far as research goes...how important is it to have anesthesiology specific projects? I have 4 published papers in well known ENT journals and a dozen or so podium presentations, but nothing strictly anesthesiology related. I am working on a case report of ophthalmic vasospasm following oxymethazoline use during FESS, but would it be a stretch to say this is "anesthesia research"?

 

[Twiggidy]

Thanks for the input. I think the best thing to do at this point is to meet with my PD and see what the options are.

As far as research goes...how important is it to have anesthesiology specific projects? I have 4 published papers in well known ENT journals and a dozen or so podium presentations, but nothing strictly anesthesiology related. I am working on a case report of ophthalmic vasospasm following oxymethazoline use during FESS, but would it be a stretch to say this is "anesthesia research"?

I had ENT research on my CV. For anesthesiology I don't think it mattered a whole lot. I'm sure it was better than nothing and probably got me a few interviews I otherwise would not have gotten. For ENT it'll likely be crucial in an ultra-competitive match.

Most anesthesiology programs will turn flips if they find out you want to do research, and are actually honest about it. The true academic anesthesiologist is a rare breed.

 

[Consigliere]

And that's a huge mistake. In the "patient-centered" future, the patient-doctor relationship will matter enormously (for the bean counters, because that's how they were trained, to appreciate especially the employees who bring business). So we should aim for repeat customers by prolonging the doctor-patient relationship as much as we can. That means the surgical patient should be ours from the moment he's admitted to the hospital till he is discharged or transferred to a non-surgical floor.

What do you think, @BuzzPhreed?

Which is exactly the opposite of why most people went into anesthesiology. Imagine applying for a job and being told "you will never have to sweep floors." Then after a few years, 30% of your job is floor sweeping.

 

[deleted171991]

Unfortunately, your current job is being downsized, so you can either sweep the floors or pick up your pink slip.

 

[FollowTheMoney]

Which is exactly the opposite of why most people went into anesthesiology. Imagine applying for a job and being told "you will never have to sweep floors." Then after a few years, 30% of your job is floor sweeping.

That is hilarious.

 

[turboE36]

Is it a red flag if I don't have any anesthesia letters or sub i on my transcript?

 

[Twiggidy]

Is it a red flag if I don't have any anesthesia letters or sub i on my transcript?

my opinion.....yes.

treat anesthesiology like any other competitive field. you think the derm folks are applying without derm letters? why risk not matching where you want to go?