objective anesthesiologist salary trends over the last 10 years

This forum made possible through the generous support of SDN members, donors, and sponsors. Thank you.

GaiusOctavius

Full Member
7+ Year Member
Joined
Jun 21, 2014
Messages
118
Reaction score
79
Does anyone have links for mean anesthesiologist salary trends (national or state) for the last 5-10 years. For example in 2014 the average national salary for anesthesiologists was $246,320, in 2013 it was $248,000, in 2012 it was $250,000, in 2011 it was...

I've looked but couldn't find anything. Thank you.

Members don't see this ad.
 
Salary doesn't reflect the whole picture. How many hours worked? How much vacation? Most people will work harder to maintain their income. On average, People are working harder, longer hours and covering more rooms than they were ten years ago. In addition, people also feel less secure than they did ten years ago as well.
 
  • Like
Reactions: 2 users
My salary has increased nearly 30% over the past ten years. I highly doubt that this is the trend though. I don't know.
 
Members don't see this ad :)
There is no doubt that our profession is getting knocked around (as are many others).
Being the sole anesthesia provider in an area carries a lot of weight.
 
It's going down and will continue to do so.
 
Ouch but in actuality we are probably close in pay now.
I was a bit under the MGMA 50%ile 10 yrs ago. You were probably above 50%ile. Just a guess.

Your guess is right on the money. I was around the 90%ile 10 years ago.
 
our partner total comp has increased about 2-3% per year for the last 5-10 years on average. Not quite keeping up with inflation, but in absolute terms still going up.
 
our partner total comp has increased about 2-3% per year for the last 5-10 years on average. Not quite keeping up with inflation, but in absolute terms still going up.

Are the docs in your group working more, less, or about the same as compared to ten years ago?
 
Are the docs in your group working more, less, or about the same as compared to ten years ago?

slightly more, but only in the sense that we have a bit more call responsibility than we used to (covering more things at later hours in the hospital). Average hours per week is probably up < 2 hours per week.
 
Members don't see this ad :)
our partner total comp has increased about 2-3% per year for the last 5-10 years on average. Not quite keeping up with inflation, but in absolute terms still going up.
Hard to believe that you are making 30 percent more than you were 10 years ago
 
Overall Compensation trend is DOWN. Most groups have made up for the decline by working harder (more cases and/or more rooms) and longer days.

A few groups have managed to go up by avoiding CMS patients. If your payer mix is over 50% INSURED (non CMS) then reimbursement should be up year over year even if case load remains the same.

That said, with the ACA/Obamacare, large increase in CMS patients and more people not paying their big copays the overall trend is down nationwide.

Look for a group with over 50% non CMS, insured patients and the golden ticket still leads to the chocolate factory.
 
Became a partner. Higher overall salary in the highest marginal tax bracket. Pease law exemptions phased out nearly all tax breaks except charity and mortgage interest. But it is very possible that last year was the most I will ever make in a single year.
 
  • Like
Reactions: 1 user
We have a lot of guys saying they are at their peak level last year, despite general consensus that outlook is poor and has been poor for years. Would you have said in 2011 that in 2015 you would be at max income?

We never know the future until it is here. I have been saying that I expect a major reduction in salary (~50%) over 5 years for anesthesiologists (specifically me) for the past 4 years, and have been pleasantly surprised by higher numbers yearly.

Workload has increased a lot though. By time unit per year we are up ~10-15% over that period.

Despite my great 2014, I still have same gloomy outlook for the future. Maybe based on the responses here I shouldnt, but I am much happier to be surprised by my pessimistic conservative financial plans being wrong than if I had different expectations.
 
  • Like
Reactions: 1 user
Do MD only groups have a harder time to adjust to these changes. Where a group could increase from 2:1 to 3:1 coverage to help.
 
Do MD only groups have a harder time to adjust to these changes. Where a group could increase from 2:1 to 3:1 coverage to help.


3:1 is fine. Try 4:1 or 5:1 as that is much harder. 2:1 should be reserved for extremely high acuity cases like hearts, lungs, AAA, etc. otherwise you are leaving too much money on the table.

The future is definitely 4:1 or 5:1 for the bean counters except for those of you fortunate enough to have SOLO MD jobs. SOLO MD with no subsidy is the way to go for the best practice and best lifestyle.
 
  • Like
Reactions: 1 user
3:1 is fine. Try 4:1 or 5:1 as that is much harder. 2:1 should be reserved for extremely high acuity cases like hearts, lungs, AAA, etc. otherwise you are leaving too much money on the table.

The future is definitely 4:1 or 5:1 for the bean counters except for those of you fortunate enough to have SOLO MD jobs. SOLO MD with no subsidy is the way to go for the best practice and best lifestyle.

Are there enough CRNAs to support this model?

Currently, about 1600 graduate Anesthesiology residencies every year. Therefore, the number of anesthesiologists, in a decade or so, reach 50k. If we assume that most will end up doing the 4:1 or 5:1 model, we will need 200k+ CRNAs or more than half of anesthesiologists will be jobless.
 
Overall Compensation trend is DOWN. Most groups have made up for the decline by working harder (more cases and/or more rooms) and longer days.

A few groups have managed to go up by avoiding CMS patients. If your payer mix is over 50% INSURED (non CMS) then reimbursement should be up year over year even if case load remains the same.

That said, with the ACA/Obamacare, large increase in CMS patients and more people not paying their big copays the overall trend is down nationwide.

Look for a group with over 50% non CMS, insured patients and the golden ticket still leads to the chocolate factory.
Totally agree. If group has 50% greater commercial insurance. You are golden.

That's why I think it's absolute BS when groups claim efficiency blah blah blah corporate talk. The only numbers that matter is commercial insurance.

If Mednax had 80% Medicare and or Medicaid payer mix they would have zero bargaining power. Zero. Like 0. Because they cannot talk the smack about being efficient.

Saying all that. If the exchanges take over. Right now the number on exchanges (individual market is only 5%). If number on exchanges increases dramatically say 20-30% in next 5 years. Insurers would have more power over companies. Think California. Many providers get screwed with lower reimbursement for commercial insurance compared to their southeast counterparts.
 
  • Like
Reactions: 1 user
Totally agree. If group has 50% greater commercial insurance. You are golden.

That's why I think it's absolute BS when groups claim efficiency blah blah blah corporate talk. The only numbers that matter is commercial insurance.

If Mednax had 80% Medicare and or Medicaid payer mix they would have zero bargaining power. Zero. Like 0. Because they cannot talk the smack about being efficient.

Saying all that. If the exchanges take over. Right now the number on exchanges (individual market is only 5%). If number on exchanges increases dramatically say 20-30% in next 5 years. Insurers would have more power over companies. Think California. Many providers get screwed with lower reimbursement for commercial insurance compared to their southeast counterparts.
Having read that. If you used more commas. It might be better.
I kid. I kid.
 
If you have 50% or more commercial insurance you are also a prime target for hostile takeover.
 
Nobody publishes their numbers for hostile takeover to happen. We all drive pickup trucks and live in simple homes.
 
Nobody publishes their numbers for hostile takeover to happen. We all drive pickup trucks and live in simple homes.

The administration obviously knows your insurance mix. Lots of others can make educated guesses.
 
3:1 is fine. Try 4:1 or 5:1 as that is much harder. 2:1 should be reserved for extremely high acuity cases like hearts, lungs, AAA, etc. otherwise you are leaving too much money on the table.

The future is definitely 4:1 or 5:1 for the bean counters except for those of you fortunate enough to have SOLO MD jobs. SOLO MD with no subsidy is the way to go for the best practice and best lifestyle.
Solo md for the fact of being able to do your cases and not run around like crazy. Financially though I assume this would not compare to 3:1?
 
Top