Which should you gun for if you just want to be happy?
Which should you gun for if you just want to be happy?
Which should you gun for if you just want to be happy?
Derm.
This is the big issue with derm. People don't really have any interest in it and just do it to work 20 hours a week and make a buttload of money. They should've just dropped out of med school as an M2 when they first realized they hated their jobs.
Which should you gun for if you just want to be happy?
Which should you gun for if you just want to be happy?
Whatever field interest you the most and does not feel like a job.
So I am happy when I do not work.. In the company of close people in a nice city (or resort). I need a trophy wife. Understand?
Now some of the replies on here imply that rads make a lot of $$ and can work from home and have lots of vacation. But I have serious doubts that's a possibility. Just read up on auntminnie. Based on some of the posts it seems that it's not realistic to even get a primary care amount of $$ and work from home from a resort. They can hire foreign people for "prereads" instead. So in fact I would actually have to come into the hospital and still get paid like primary care but do more work. And possibly wouldn't even find a job in a desirable area in the u.s. Not to mention 6yrs of grueling residency/fellowship vs 3. And it's still a competitive match. But no, I don't think it's so awesome to see patients. I can tell that doctors and even I (as a medical student) feel really good about ourselves when interacting with patients (with rare exceptions). But a patient is not my friend, not my wife. Just because you have a pleasant interaction doesn't mean that it's anything more than a job. But it certainly helps with job stability.
If I could get derm, I would enjoy it. They do those quick procedures and people have very good reasons to get their precancerous moles removed or even to do a cosmetic procedure. They are useful in a quantifiable way. It's not like some specialties where you just push useless pills. Basically a derm can maintain an outpatient practice even if he has no business skills.
But since derm is too competitive and rads is in decline, I think I should gun for DO ortho. But then what if DO ortho is out of reach? I don't really know what else. I find the subject of PMR or FM sports med interesting. But that's 4-5yrs and at the end you still cannot do any definitive treatment, it's not ortho. Maybe my alternative should just be "hospitalist". It does not require business acumen like outpatient nonsurgical fields. But of course it would suck to prescribe useless meds for people who cannot even clearly say which of their 5 problems bothers them the most. It would really suck if the market for hospitalists too became oversaturated.
I hated general surgery. But ortho is different.
As someone going into ortho, I'd say if you'd be equally happy in rads or ortho, go with rads. Rads (especially IR) does have more income potential, particularly if you're into consulting and innovation. I know some IR docs who pull in $300K per annum passively ON TOP of their base salary, based on steady consulting gigs that have netted marketable products. Ortho on the other hand is beyond its golden age regarding income potential. They work really hard, and very efficiently, but dramatic innovation and expansion into other turf won't happen. Unlike rads/IR, which is having new procedures and efficiencies (=new revenue streams) added each year. Also, CT screening getting a nod from USPSTF this yr is a big plus.
That is not possible in any service profession. I think that people who behave like whatever they are doing does not feel like a job are the type that spend their vacation watching tv or checking their cellphones. I have more respect for those doctors who are honest and tell you how they cannot wait to go on vacation.
As someone who is debating between the two specialties, I just had a few questions:
- do you feel that non-interventional radiology might be one day commonly outsourced to cheaper doctors in foreign countries like India?
- don't procedures usually pay more than non-procedural specialties, eg. orthopedic SURGERY vs. NON-interventional radiology? some doctors have said that ortho will always be one of the highest-paid because it's surgery and it's hard work.
- I hear that radiologists still work longish hours and interventional radiologists work very long hours like a surgeon does?
As someone who is debating between the two specialties, I just had a few questions:
- do you feel that non-interventional radiology might be one day commonly outsourced to cheaper doctors in foreign countries like India?
- don't procedures usually pay more than non-procedural specialties, eg. orthopedic SURGERY vs. NON-interventional radiology? some doctors have said that ortho will always be one of the highest-paid because it's surgery and it's hard work.
- I hear that radiologists still work longish hours and interventional radiologists work very long hours like a surgeon does?
Ortho kills radiology in compensation though in general.
Not really. Medians of 405K (ortho) vs 349k (rads) via medscape 2013. If you corrected for hours & call the medians would be much closer.
Looks about right. A lot of overlapping means btw the two and a higher ceiling in rads.
According to that data, it is true, only because of a single outlier. If you throw out the outlier and then look at the range, ortho is 75-100K more in general. Plus they can do spine and make a cool mill a year. Ceiling is higher for ortho.
That single outlier is a 750 physician survey over 205 organizations, likely including million dollar earners in both fields. That's not a data point you can just put your thumb over and re-draw the curve. Don't kid yourself, rads earning potential is epic as the data clearly demonstrates. This doesn't even include consulting, which from what I've seen anecdotally is more of a cash cow in IR than ortho.
Compared to the Hay group survey of 205 organizations and 28,818 physicians that shows a 100K difference between rads and ortho (in favor of ortho), the Delta group is an outlier. Starting radiology salaries have dropped significantly since 2009. Ortho has increased. Look at the annual medscape reports, see slide titled "Who's up and who's down". Couple that with new Medicare reimbursement reductions for imaging that now pays 50% for any additonal imaging per inpatient stay, you have even lower salaries in the future.
Would never make it into derm. Can ortho do carpal tunnels all day long or theyll never get enough pts for such nice procedures?how about the future o
that's interesting given that 18.5% of us seniors went unmatched in ortho and only 6.8% went unmatched in derm last year.
That is not possible in any service profession. I think that people who behave like whatever they are doing does not feel like a job are the type that spend their vacation watching tv or checking their cellphones. I have more respect for those doctors who are honest and tell you how they cannot wait to go on vacation.
I think you're grossly misinterpreting statistics.
I didn't interpret anything. I just posted data.
I didn't interpret anything. I just posted data.
Next time post sources.
If you go here: http://www.nrmp.org/match-data/main-residency-match-data/
and click the first link, you'll see that last year, 442 US seniors applied for Derm and 316 matched (316/442=71.4%). That's for PGY-2 spots (the vast majority of Derm spots). If you look at PGY-1 spots, 174 people applied for them and 21 matched. But most of those applicants are also applying PGY2 so it muddies those stats.
So, approximately 30% of US Seniors didn't match Derm last year. No clue where you got 6.8%.
By comparison, 636/833 US seniors matched in Ortho, or 76.4%. So, about 24% didn't match vs 30% in Derm. Pretty similar.
Next time post sources.
If you go here: http://www.nrmp.org/match-data/main-residency-match-data/
and click the first link, you'll see that last year, 442 US seniors applied for Derm and 316 matched (316/442=71.4%). That's for PGY-2 spots (the vast majority of Derm spots). If you look at PGY-1 spots, 174 people applied for them and 21 matched. But most of those applicants are also applying PGY2 so it muddies those stats.
So, approximately 30% of US Seniors didn't match Derm last year. No clue where you got 6.8%.
By comparison, 636/833 US seniors matched in Ortho, or 76.4%. So, about 24% didn't match vs 30% in Derm. Pretty similar.
Yeah, inep doesn't know what he's talking about.
Wha? Of course they belong there. If they can score awesome plus want to work two days a week - I can't think of another specialty they'd belong in more.
It would be amusing to find out how many people would be going into derm if all medical specialties made exactly the same amount of money, though. I've heard 25 years ago derm was the equivalent of family medicine or pediatrics.
Thanks for clarifying that for everyone. Pretty clear that when I post data in response to a student's claim that he is automatically unqualified for derm but somehow qualified for ortho that calls this into question and someone posts data and states that derm and ortho are about equal on competitiveness, which you agree with (and I do too), that I don't know what I'm talking about. Because I could see how that could easily be misunderstood.
Or are you just trying to say I made those numbers up? Because I did not. They are in the same document that was tossed back in my face.
Wha? Of course they belong there. If they can score awesome plus want to work two days a week - I can't think of another specialty they'd belong in more.
It would be amusing to find out how many people would be going into derm if all medical specialties made exactly the same amount of money, though. I've heard 25 years ago derm was the equivalent of family medicine or pediatrics.
My source is the exact same one you linked. The data I mentioned is clearly stated there. How exactly could I misinterpret the data when I did not offer any intepretation? How is posting data the same as intepreting it? I will be glad to give you my interpretation of why more people who only ranked ortho failed to match that more people who only ranked derm, but you sounds like you already know my intepretation using telepathy.
What's your agenda? Just another derm guy trying to scare away the 230 students? 230 students do match into derm. You probably think they probably don't belong there. I don't think the people who want to work 1 or 2 days a week belong there. But that's just my opinion.
Thanks for clarifying that for everyone. Pretty clear that when I post data in response to a student's claim that he is automatically unqualified for derm but somehow qualified for ortho that calls this into question and someone posts data and states that derm and ortho are about equal on competitiveness, which you agree with (and I do too), that I don't know what I'm talking about. Because I could see how that could easily be misunderstood.
Or are you just trying to say I made those numbers up? Because I did not. They are in the same document that was tossed back in my face.
You heard wrong according to an older derm I know (he was an average student and says he was very very lucky to get in that many years ago -- He also has money problems keeping his practice afloat -- it's not always peachy like everyone says). Derm has always been coveted if for nothing else it's ability to work 2 days a week (can you really stay at the top of your game doing this -- what the hell are you doing the other 5 days exactly? Watching TV? Sipping cocktails at the country club's pool? I digress...). It's also always been looked down upon by the diehard medicine guys because of the very same reason it's competitive.
Who gives a ****? There's plenty of bright, hardworking medical students with top scores who work themselves to death in neurosurgery, orthopedics, general surgery, urology, ENT, internal medicine, etc. There's also some that go into derm.
There's also many that go into family medicine and pediatrics. Grow up.
According to that data, it is true, only because of a single outlier. If you throw out the outlier and then look at the range, ortho is 75-100K more in general. Plus they can do spine and make a cool mill a year. Ceiling is higher for ortho.
How big is that chip on your shoulder?
Edit: I see where you got your numbers. Page 37's graph gives 6.9 (not 6.8) for Derm vs 18.5 for ortho, in US Seniors who ONLY RANKED those specialties. Those data are misleading and not representative of the actual number of people applying in each field and number of people matching. Anecdotally, most people I know who applied in Derm applied to a backup specialty, while the few who didn't tended to be the really super-stellar applicants.
Regardless, it's pointless to argue against the fact that both specialties are very competitive.
I'm actually working on trying to get things set up so that I only have to work 2 hours a week.
Pretty big considering that a large percentage of derm applicants also stink up the applicant pool secretly applying for rad onc and ent as backups and have no real interest in treating cancer patients and are only there because of the lifestyle.
Yes, I clearly stated that above. Your argument makes zero sense. If what you are implying is true, somebody should drop the ortho guys a hint and tell them they need to apply to a backup because their specialty is too competitive. Apparently derm kids are the only ones smart enough to have figured this out. In reality, this does nothing to prove that people who apply for derm aren't committed to it and don't have an interest in it beyond money and lifestyle, thus explaining the backup choices in other lifestyle fields.
Well then why are you arguing that derm is more competitive?
So you will work the same amount in a year that other doctors work in a week? I am sure you will be highly skilled and patients will seek out your great experience and be able to relate to you on a personal level.
Seesh...