Negatives of EM as a Specialty

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

docB

Chronically painful
Moderator Emeritus
Lifetime Donor
20+ Year Member
Joined
Nov 27, 2002
Messages
7,890
Reaction score
752
There are frequent questions about the pros and cons of EM. I thought I'd start off a con thread since I have one in mind. If someone wants to throw out a pro thread go for it.

One con of EM is that the hindsight second guessing that goes on with every patient (which is why the ED has the nickname “the fishbowl") does not take into account the rest of the ED at the time the case was running. We all know that one of the hardest things to learn as an EP and to teach residents is not how to manage individual cases but to run a whole ED. Running a busy ED single coverage when the critical patients start to stack up is one of the most difficult things in medicine.

I had a case the other day where a chest pain, tearing through to the back, with lots of ST depression but no elevation and hypotension came in. Got his BP back up with fluids and then was able to get him some nitro and morphine to help the pain. His 30 min repeat EKG now showed ST elevation so I called cardiology. Cardiology came in and although they were pretty nice about it said they would have liked to have been called based on the first EKG. So here's where it's tricky being the EP:
-The cardiologist is saying he wanted to be called on a concerning EKG that did not meet emergent lytic/lab criteria yet this same guy has screamed bloody murder in the past when called early on "questionable" EKGs.
-Between the time this patient rolled in and when the second EKG was done I had an intubation, a code and 9 other patients present by ambulance. I was single coverage.
-On top of all that the patient had symptoms concerning for aortic dissection. I was able to get him scanned and back before the cardiologist arrived but I had not started heparin or integrillin because of my concern about the aorta.

So did this guy have a delay in getting consulted and to the lab? Maybe. Was it justified based on the initial EKG and the concern for dissection? Maybe. But the fact that the rest of the ED was in chaos counts for nothing. No questions or criticisms or lawsuits leveled against EPs ever take into account what was going on in the rest of the ED. Yet we all know that the volume and acuity faced at any given time are tremendously important. That's a negative we face in EM.

Members don't see this ad.
 
And the second guessers can't/won't take into account how the patient looked on arrival. Sure the mysterious belly/chest painer we want to admit for further work up looks fine now, but you should have seen the tachycardia/BP/PE before we resuscitated and medicated them.

-And in your example, it seems that even if nothing had been going on in the ED, you might have hesitated to call because of the lack of criteria/attitude of other service and need for a scan....it is annoying
 
There are frequent questions about the pros and cons of EM. I thought I'd start off a con thread since I have one in mind. If someone wants to throw out a pro thread go for it.

One con of EM is that the hindsight second guessing that goes on with every patient (which is why the ED has the nickname “the fishbowl") does not take into account the rest of the ED at the time the case was running. We all know that one of the hardest things to learn as an EP and to teach residents is not how to manage individual cases but to run a whole ED. Running a busy ED single coverage when the critical patients start to stack up is one of the most difficult things in medicine.

I had a case the other day where a chest pain, tearing through to the back, with lots of ST depression but no elevation and hypotension came in. Got his BP back up with fluids and then was able to get him some nitro and morphine to help the pain. His 30 min repeat EKG now showed ST elevation so I called cardiology. Cardiology came in and although they were pretty nice about it said they would have liked to have been called based on the first EKG. So here's where it's tricky being the EP:
-The cardiologist is saying he wanted to be called on a concerning EKG that did not meet emergent lytic/lab criteria yet this same guy has screamed bloody murder in the past when called early on "questionable" EKGs.
-Between the time this patient rolled in and when the second EKG was done I had an intubation, a code and 9 other patients present by ambulance. I was single coverage.
-On top of all that the patient had symptoms concerning for aortic dissection. I was able to get him scanned and back before the cardiologist arrived but I had not started heparin or integrillin because of my concern about the aorta.

So did this guy have a delay in getting consulted and to the lab? Maybe. Was it justified based on the initial EKG and the concern for dissection? Maybe. But the fact that the rest of the ED was in chaos counts for nothing. No questions or criticisms or lawsuits leveled against EPs ever take into account what was going on in the rest of the ED. Yet we all know that the volume and acuity faced at any given time are tremendously important. That's a negative we face in EM.

Good point. DocB you already bring a new fresh perspective on things.

I had a horrible case, one day before my 30th birthday. Women in her 40s came in complaining of a cough and transient chest pain iwth the cough. An EKG was done (by protocol) and I ordered a CXR. EKG was a little funny looking. Maybe a little Wellens going on, maybe some ST depression in ONE lead inferior. Nurse asks me about it, and I said "when she gets back from XR I'll go talk to her." In the meantime, a stroke comes in, which leaves me busy for about 35 minutes. I come back into the room to talk to her about her odd EKG (of which sh ehad no previous) and she's dead. She wasn't on a monitor so no one knew. Coded her for about an hour, got her back, to cath lab with 100% triple vessel disease.

One could sya that i hsould have jumped on her iwth the EKG findings, but I was busy with the stroke.... if something were to happen (which I don't because I don't think anything would have mattered nor do I think anyone would have done anything differently) one coudl easily quesiton why nothing was done for 35 minutes.

Q
 
Members don't see this ad :)
Just having worked as an ED tech with sympathetic observations of EP's it blows my mind to hear so much criticism of them. When I saw them do so many critical things at once I couldn't help but to think my head would explode trying to do all that. If I get into medical school I have all but ruled out EM just based on the insanity of multi-tasking critical patients. I do not understand how a medical student could rotate through a busy E.D. and then turn around and disrespect their colleagues down the road.

Here's is one hopeful future colleague with an enormous respect for your field if not fearful aversion to your responsibilities as the front line for everything that comes at our system.

You guys need some kind of video game or simulation that these other hotshots who second guess you can try to see if they can hang. It would be too dangerous for them to try on patients.
 
DocB, sounds like you are getting hit after hit after hit. I hope it stops soon for you!

Have you guys ever argued for double coverage? Certainly sounds like you have the acuity for it. Unfortunately, no matter how good you are at multi tasking the care of critically ill patients, the lawyers won't give a damn. Its easy to say get double coverage, but unfortunately, you only have what you have for resources.
 
Good point. DocB you already bring a new fresh perspective on things.

I had a horrible case, one day before my 30th birthday. Women in her 40s came in complaining of a cough and transient chest pain iwth the cough. An EKG was done (by protocol) and I ordered a CXR. EKG was a little funny looking. Maybe a little Wellens going on, maybe some ST depression in ONE lead inferior. Nurse asks me about it, and I said "when she gets back from XR I'll go talk to her." In the meantime, a stroke comes in, which leaves me busy for about 35 minutes. I come back into the room to talk to her about her odd EKG (of which sh ehad no previous) and she's dead. She wasn't on a monitor so no one knew. Coded her for about an hour, got her back, to cath lab with 100% triple vessel disease.

One could sya that i hsould have jumped on her iwth the EKG findings, but I was busy with the stroke.... if something were to happen (which I don't because I don't think anything would have mattered nor do I think anyone would have done anything differently) one coudl easily quesiton why nothing was done for 35 minutes.

Q

These are the scenarios that are putting a hole in my gut.
Beyond the consultants' superb use of the retrospectometer (that frankly has no solution), the real injury here occurs when you have to sit in a wooden-paneled room with attorneys who review the chart and reveal in the nurse's note:
"Dr. Quinn informed of 'abnormal EKG'. No action taken."

This could just as easily read "Dr. Quinn informed of 'abnormal EKG'...my responsibility is met and I am off the hook."

This is where the much lauded team approach to EM care breaks down. The Emergency Nurses Association (ENA) routinely surveys members. Consistently one of the most desired attributes of a "good work environment" is increased nursing autonomy. When the Dilbert-speak missives of the ENA and other organizations are broken down this essentially means nurses want to practice medicine rather than nurse.
By nursing I mean consistent monitoring and bedside care of the patient. In Hayduke's dream world this would mean the nurse's note would read..."EKG performed per protocol. Computer reads 'abnormal EKG'. Physician informed. Dr. Quinn to see patient. Charge nurse informed of need for bed change. Pt. moved to monitored bed. ST elevation alarms set."

Our care is only as good as our team. Our team is only as good as their understanding and willingness to perform their respective jobs.
 
Back to topic-
I had a case the other day where a chest pain, tearing through to the back, with lots of ST depression but no elevation and hypotension came in. Got his BP back up with fluids and then was able to get him some nitro and morphine to help the pain. His 30 min repeat EKG now showed ST elevation so I called cardiology. Cardiology came in and although they were pretty nice about it said they would have liked to have been called based on the first EKG. So here's where it's tricky being the EP:
-The cardiologist is saying he wanted to be called on a concerning EKG that did not meet emergent lytic/lab criteria yet this same guy has screamed bloody murder in the past when called early on "questionable" EKGs.
-Between the time this patient rolled in and when the second EKG was done I had an intubation, a code and 9 other patients present by ambulance. I was single coverage.
-On top of all that the patient had symptoms concerning for aortic dissection. I was able to get him scanned and back before the cardiologist arrived but I had not started heparin or integrillin because of my concern about the aorta.

So did this guy have a delay in getting consulted and to the lab? Maybe. Was it justified based on the initial EKG and the concern for dissection? Maybe. But the fact that the rest of the ED was in chaos counts for nothing. No questions or criticisms or lawsuits leveled against EPs ever take into account what was going on in the rest of the ED. Yet we all know that the volume and acuity faced at any given time are tremendously important. That's a negative we face in EM.

I know the horse is dead and buried, but FoughtFyr could be fairly eloquent on topics like this.
A few months ago he posted a response in an EM hate thread that detailed the role of the EP in relation to that of other specialties. The crux of his statements, as I read them, came down to the difference in a specialty who's purpose is ruling out life threats compared to the rest of medicine/surgery that spends time getting to a diagnosis and applying contemporary treatment.
Our role in general is not understood. This Cardiologist's grousing about a 'late call' demonstrates his lack of appreciation for the extensive workup you had already performed on a guy's ambiguous presentation. You basically worked this patient until his diagnosis had to be in the Cards domain. Your patient serendipitously declared himself.

The acuity level of the department at any given time is so far outside the view of most consultants that even mentioning it gets a glassy eyed stare.

How do you deal with this?
Hey! That's what I come here to find out!
 
Maybe a solution is to make an 'ER acuity score' that goes with the vital signs on all triage sheets:

If the ER is 25% total number of beds score is 1
if the ER is 50% total number of beds score is 2
if the ER is 75% total number of beds score is 3
if the ER is 100% total number of beds score is 4
if the ER is 125% or higher the score is 5

that way if someone is looking at a chart 4 years later they see a score of 3 it gives them SOME idea, definitely not the whole truth because you may be 50% full with all critical care folks...but still better than nothing right?
 
I'm a medicine R3 so I'm occasionally the retrospectoscope guy. It is true that we often don't appreciate the constant pull for the ER doc's attention but I've worked down there enough to know that it gets rough for you guys. I think the only way to deal with this is by developing a good reputation. I know which ER docs at our hospital are really good so when they give crummy sign-out or do something that seems a little off, I give them the benefit of the doubt and say "Dang, Jim must be getting worked cause he would usually pick up on X,Y, or Z." I also know which guys do a sh***y w/u every time so they probably get a harder time from consultants cause they haven't earned the benefit of the doubt.
 
I'm a medicine R3 so I'm occasionally the retrospectoscope guy. It is true that we often don't appreciate the constant pull for the ER doc's attention but I've worked down there enough to know that it gets rough for you guys. I think the only way to deal with this is by developing a good reputation. I know which ER docs at our hospital are really good so when they give crummy sign-out or do something that seems a little off, I give them the benefit of the doubt and say "Dang, Jim must be getting worked cause he would usually pick up on X,Y, or Z." I also know which guys do a sh***y w/u every time so they probably get a harder time from consultants cause they haven't earned the benefit of the doubt.
This is a good point. We all have these reputations with those who admit the patients we see in the ED. We may also not like to admit it but I have found that these reputations are valid more often than not. I don't think it's necessarily a bad thing to work to make sure we have good relations with our consultants while not allowing the ED to get bogged down with workups that should be done in house.
 
This is a good point. We all have these reputations with those who admit the patients we see in the ED. We may also not like to admit it but I have found that these reputations are valid more often than not. I don't think it's necessarily a bad thing to work to make sure we have good relations with our consultants while not allowing the ED to get bogged down with workups that should be done in house.
Also keep in mind that 1 bad admission or missed major diagnosis can ruin 10 zebra pickups. It's the rotten apple spoils the whole bunch theory of ED admissions.
 
That's a good point as well. The reputation system isn't always fair.
That same system holds true for analysts in the intelligence world. As the saying goes, "All it takes is one 'aw sh1t' to erase ten 'atta boys!'"

I am glad to see this thread. It's nice to know the downsides of a field before you get committed to it. Please keep 'em coming. :thumbup:
 
Members don't see this ad :)
The other thing that sucks is the whole first impression thing when you get out of training (which may not be specific to EM but is more pronounced). Making a "rookie" mistake may not be looked at forgivingly by your consultants. In the end, we are all human and will make mistakes, some large, and some small. EM is difficult because we truly have to please everyone all the time. Consultants must stay happy or they will degrade your reputation. Patients must be happy or they will degrade your press-gainey scores. Nurses must be happy or they will degrade all of the above and complain to administration about you. This is truly a rough job that we have.
 
For another con, see the post about frequent flyers, they can really try your nerves and one time out of 100 they will actually be sick and it can be easy to write off. See also post about drug-seekers - another heralded bunch. Finally we should add the homeless-does he really have chest pain or just want a sandwich-scenario. Honorable mention - ED overcrowding and toxic sock syndrome
 
You do not build anything. That is to say, you do not build a practice. You do not build your reputation as the specialist in a certain area for a certain region. You do not build a base of patients who come to rely on you when they are in a bind.

As evidence: Is there any difference in an ED attending 3 years out vs. 10 years out? You may have more experience, but do you feel as though you have advanced in your career?

Caveat: Playing Hillary's advocate; wouldn't trade EM for any other specialty.
 
As evidence: Is there any difference in an ED attending 3 years out vs. 10 years out? You may have more experience, but do you feel as though you have advanced in your career?
I do. There are lots of things you can do that represent moving forward in one way or another and that help you in your clinical practice. Administration, hospital comittees, education, civic involvement. I get your point but my day to day practice is so much easier now than it was several years ago due to the contacts I have from these activities that I do feel like I've advanced.
 
I do. There are lots of things you can do that represent moving forward in one way or another and that help you in your clinical practice. Administration, hospital comittees, education, civic involvement. I get your point but my day to day practice is so much easier now than it was several years ago due to the contacts I have from these activities that I do feel like I've advanced.

Theres also research and fellowship oppurtunities to become more of "an expert / specialist" if that is what you are looking for.
 
As evidence: Is there any difference in an ED attending 3 years out vs. 10 years out? You may have more experience, but do you feel as though you have advanced in your career?
I was a tech for 3 years in a fairly major academic center, and from the sidelines it was easy to put faculty into various diverse boxes based on how they chose to advance their practices. One guy was scary-good with anything cardio, and routinely and good-naturedly argued with the Cards prof at weekly conferences. Another was the Tox God for like four states. One was of course the EMS guru for the county. Another was the tech nerd, who made sure we had working secure wireless and every US machine recorded a digital video of every scan. Yet another was the US guru, one was the Monarch of the Hyperbaric Chamber, etc. etc.

All these people were getting articles and textbook chapters published in their chosen areas. And they were not just respected elders or rising stars, but backed up the reputation with a higher level of expertise and skill, which seemed pretty universally recognized.

Granted, at a non-academic center the line between "respected authority" and "likes to putter with a specific technology" is maybe not so appealingly blurry. But EM starts out as a wide enough discipline that it seems like anybody can become "the best in the hospital" at some obscure or super-specific thing.
 
Jack's idea is a good one. Volume alone wouldn't be good, but combined with ICU admits/ tele admits might work.
 
I like the concept, but as long as we are billing for our services I dont think anyone outside of those of us working in the ED will care.
 
Here’s another negative of EM: responding to in house emergencies.

Many, I’d even venture to say most, EPs are obligated to respond to in house codes and acute decompensations. In my position we respond to all the codes and do all the in house airways. I am well aware that ACEP, AAEM and pretty much every authority in the universe is against this being standard practice but this is reality. It can really split you between the ED and the house.
 
Theres also research and fellowship oppurtunities to become more of "an expert / specialist" if that is what you are looking for.

Can some one please elaborate on some of the available EM fellowships? Any links/lists...etc would be appreciated!

Wisc
 
Can some one please elaborate on some of the available EM fellowships? Any links/lists...etc would be appreciated!

Wisc

Points to keep in mind while reading:

1. As of three years ago (If I remember) fellowships have become specific for residencies i.e. IM fellowships (which are the majority) take only IM graduates. It used to be that fellowships must fill 75% of their spots with IM grads, now its 100%.
2. Some fellowships are accredited by the ABMS and/or the American Board of... and lead to Board Certification; some fellowships are not accredited, do not lead to Board Certification, but are for those that want advanced training in something for reasons of: career advancement, personal interest, necessity due to patient population

FREIDA lists the following accredited fellowships as specific for EM:
-Medical Toxicology
-Pediatric EM
-Sports Med
-Undersea/Hyperbaric Med

The following are NON-accredited fellowships, off the top of my head:
-Prehospital Med/EMS
-Wilderness and Travel Med
-International EM
-Cardiovascular EM
-Research/Academic EM
-Emergency Radiology/Ultrasonography (RDMS Certified)

There are accredited fellowships for Internists which sometimes/used to accept EPs. However, EPs can not earn board certification (also, note Rule#1 above):
-Infectious Disease
-Critical Care (some programs used to accept EPs. Now with the change in ruling, it seems that some EM programs are partnering with Pulmonology/Critical Care departments to create separate spots for EPs, while not taking spots away from Internists. This fellowship can lead to the European Diploma in Intensive Care, which is recognized in the US.
 
FREIDA lists the following accredited fellowships as specific for EM:
-Medical Toxicology
-Pediatric EM
-Sports Med
-Undersea/Hyperbaric Med

Many of these are not specific to emergency medicine.

Medical toxicology and pediatric EM are open to both emergency medicine and pediatrics.

Sports medicine is open to family practice.
 
Maybe a solution is to make an 'ER acuity score' that goes with the vital signs on all triage sheets:

If the ER is 25% total number of beds score is 1
if the ER is 50% total number of beds score is 2
if the ER is 75% total number of beds score is 3
if the ER is 100% total number of beds score is 4
if the ER is 125% or higher the score is 5

that way if someone is looking at a chart 4 years later they see a score of 3 it gives them SOME idea, definitely not the whole truth because you may be 50% full with all critical care folks...but still better than nothing right?
I meant to resond to this post but then got distracted and forgot about it. This is a great idea and I have often had the same thought my self. Volume and acuity are absolutely factors that effect our performance and should be taken into account when piloting the retrospectoscope. Here's why it will absolutely never happen: Once you make the legal leap from the fault for errors resting on the physician alone to being a part of the whole environment in the ED you involve the hospital and the physician group. The argument would be made by the plaintiff that if you were so busy that you made an error then the hospital or your group are partially to blame for not staffing appropriately. Plaintiffs love to sue hospitals and groups even more than they love suing doctors because they have higher liability caps or none at all on their insurance policies.

So, I agree wholeheartedly with you and think it's a great idea. It'll never happen.
 
Do you guys ever document on a chart "CT delayed due to number of trauma patients in ED" or something similar?

I don't document it. I will often explain this to patients who are wondering what is taking so long, and this factor is a very real one. However, I don't think it would help in court - if a medical patient comes in who needs a CT more urgently than a trauma patient does (CVA within the tPA window, for example) it is my responsibility to bump them ahead of the others. It seems likely that the plaintiff's attourney would produce an expert witnes to say, "This patient clearly should have been moved to the front of the line for CT."
 
I don't document it. I will often explain this to patients who are wondering what is taking so long, and this factor is a very real one. However, I don't think it would help in court - if a medical patient comes in who needs a CT more urgently than a trauma patient does (CVA within the tPA window, for example) it is my responsibility to bump them ahead of the others. It seems likely that the plaintiff's attourney would produce an expert witnes to say, "This patient clearly should have been moved to the front of the line for CT."
I'm speaking of things that are out of your control (e.g., our institution policy states trauma patients are CT'd first, and the trauma surgeon is in charge of full traumas, not the ED attending).
 
Southerndoc, speaking as a community attending, I do document exactly what you asked. If the department is busy, I will sometimes write on the chart something to the effect of "high volume of patients in the ED; acute patient at CT; patient awaiting CT scanner with rads aware of imminent necessity of scan". Will it help if I have a bad outcome? Who knows? But it certainly can't hurt that I documented that I was aware that an emergent study was indicated, but I was being held back due to other circumstances.
 
It appears that this is an institution-dependant factor. If you are unable to move a patient to the front of the line, then documenting why the scan was delayed might help. However, I'm just trying to play the Devil's advocate & point out that an attourney could find a way to turn this against you. However, I suppose this is going to be true in many, many other situations as well...
 
*snip*

The shift work is the biggest reason I’m leaving the specialty.

If you don't mind my asking, what are your future plans? Retraining in a different field? Working in a clinic setting? Getting out of medicine all together?
 
If you don't mind my asking, what are your future plans? Retraining in a different field? Working in a clinic setting? Getting out of medicine all together?

Sorry to bring this back up, but I was curious as to the answer of this question as well. Birdstrike never responded so I wasn't sure if it was because he/she chose not too or because it went unnoticed.
 
(I've posted this before, but I thought it would be more appropriate to place it here on the sticky. So, if you've already read this, I apologize.)


Warning: just one man's opinion.

Pros:

There is no call and no business/practice to run. No staff to hire and fire.

The adrenaline rush can be cool at times.

When you are off, you are off (sort of, see "cons").

It's the highest paid specialty for the shortest residency (3yrs).

You are a "real doctor". Despite the many consultants who will try to make you think they are superior, you are the only one who can see ANYTHING. The only one with the courage. You are the only one with the courage to walk in that room and take on any patient, any challenge. You're not a neurosurgeon who says, "I only do spines, not brains". Or the plastic surgeon who says, "I do eyelids, but not tear ducts." You do brains, spines, car accidents, heart attacks, adults, kids, normal people, crazy people, surgical patients, non-surgical patients, everything. You at least see the patient, do what you can, a do what's right. This is probably the coolest thing about the specialty. I think most of the ER bashing you see and hear from other specialties is that deep down it kills them to know they gave this up. It covers up a huge insecurity that a lot of "specialists" have. Deep down they know that when the s—t hits the fan, and the secretary at their office collapses and goes into cardiac arrest and they're shaking in their boots, they're going to call 911-that's you. If someone collapses on an airplane at 37,000 feet and they call for a doctor you'll know what to do. You're everyone's hero even if they don't say it. You won't have to say, "Yes I'm a doctor, but I only do rectums". Also, there is nothing cooler than bringing a young person through a life-threatening situation and saving a life.

It's the most secure profession on the planet. Recession, depression, peace, war, people will always get sick. And if not, they'll still go to the ER, trust me. People love the ER. More visits yearly than Disneyworld. You'd think they're giving away free stuff (oh, wait, they are).


Cons-

When you're off, you're not really off. On a huge number of days "off", you may have worked the night before until 2, or 3, or 5 in the morning on the day you are "off". The shift work thing is fine, when you're 28 single, or even just married without kids. Who cares, you just sleep all day. You work Friday, Saturday and Sunday…who cares? You're off Monday, Tuesday and Wednesday. When you have a family, the "lifestyle specialty" does a complete 180 on you. If you work 2 pm – midnight Monday through Friday one week, you don't see your kids, at all (if they're in school). Or you work a stretch of 4 or 5 or 6 night shifts….no big deal right, you've got 4 days off? Well, the first 2-3 days, you're a post-nights zombie who wants to sleep all day and be up all night. Your first 2-3 days "off" you're miserable trying to recover from your nights. Then guess what, back to day shift. Jobs where you don't work any nights are rare. If you have one, never let it go. It still doesn't get you out of the 3pm-11pm shifts, or 6pm – 4am shifts, etc. Those aren't "nights". In my medical school ER rotation, they let us off easy and didn't make us do any overnights. I think if I had been forced to work a tougher schedule that month, I may have chose differently. Probably not, though. The shift work is the biggest reason I'm leaving the specialty. I think if I could work in the ED 7-3pm or even 8am-6pm, Monday through Friday, I probably wouldn't be leaving the specialty. There's just very little way around it at most jobs. It's a necessary evil of the specialty and just kills you as time goes on. It has eaten away at me like a cancer. Shift work sleep disorder is actually a diagnosable disease now, and I think most, if not all ER doctors have some degree of it (yet we pretend it's no big deal and soldier on). Rotating shift work has actually been shown to take years off your life, much equivalent to the effect of a pack per day smoking, due to the stresses. I can't wait until I can live a normal life again.

You are either an employee or a "de-facto" employee of a group or hospital. You may be a "partner" but really you are highly paid hourly help. You or your group can be thrown out any day, sometimes with no notice. It happens all the time. It hasn't happened at my group, yet, but guys have left my group and gotten thrown out, or been thrown out and come to work at my group. They bring in cheaper help. Yes, it's that simple. See, you don't bring any "business" into the hospital. In fact, the hospital is doing you a favor by giving you patients to see, that you can bill. If you leave, your patients will not follow you and take business (money) from the hospital. Yes, it's all about money. All "for-profit" hospitals care about is profits. All "not-for-profit" hospitals care about is profits (they just don't call it "profit", its called "re-investment"). The "profits" are put back into the system (and not necessarily in your pocket). When you don't bring any money into the system, what you say doesn't matter. If your department wants an ultrasound machine, it may not be in the budget. If the hospital wants some new computer system that saves money but makes your job miserable, tough. If there are ten things about the hospital that you could easily fix to make your job easier, they may not care, if the fix is not in the budget.

The adrenaline rush gets old. 4 critical traumas at 5 in the morning when a minivan full of kids rolls over may not always be fun when it's just you and a few nurses. Putting a chest tube in when you're a resident: cool. Telling a 10 year olds' parents that their son is dead, when they didn't even know he was in the ER: brutal. This never gets any easier. Not for me anyways. Not if you're even partly human. Dermatologists don't have to do this. Radiologists don't have to do this.

Working a small set-number of shifts per month is getting harder and harder to do. In the future, it may be impossible. Let me explain: there is a huge shortage of ER doctors. In fact, roughly 40% of ER hours are covered by non-board certified (non-ER) doctors. Could you imagine if 40% of neurosurgeon jobs were covered by non-neurosurgeons? Hospitals and the government are getting more and more intolerant of 12hr, 6hr, or even 1 hr waits in hospital EDs. In fact, at my hospital, if the ER wait is more than 45 min the hospital CEOs boss's, boss's, boss, who is in another state watching a computer screen following all of his ED wait times, calls immediately in a panic and raises h--l due to the increased wait times. Of course this is always when you're most stressed and working way over red-line. They never send in an extra nurse, tech or unit secretary. The assumption is that you're all a bunch of inefficient screwballs. It's infuriating. The point is this: they may want you to work 14, 15, 18 or 24 shifts a month because there aren't enough ER doctors, PAs or nurse practitioners to achieve these numbers. The old policy of "see the sick ones and the not-so-sick can wait, is becoming extinct. Patients are money, and they want you to see them fast, and 24 hours a day, at night, on weekends and holidays, too. They want you to see everybody within 5 minutes, even if there are critical patients to attend to. Its impossible, but they don't care. Not all hospitals are as aggressive about this as the one I'm at, but they will be. When they see the $ signs, they'll all be doing it. They've got live ER wait times posted on a billboard now on the highway, directing people in!

Despite the hero factor, you won't get paid like one, or be appreciated like one. Yes, you'll do very well, but like a soldier, police officer, school teacher, you'll always get way less than you deserve. 2/3 of the bills your group sends to patients won't get paid. That's your money down the drain. People who can't afford their own house payment will save up for years for breast implants, or drop cash on beer, drugs or cigarettes, but when it comes down to paying you a couple hundred bucks for literally saving their life, they won't hesitate to rip that bill up and throw it in the garbage, because you're a "rich greedy doctor" and you "make too much". Yes, a 2nd string football player on the worst football team in the NFL, makes thousands for making a catch in a losing football game. You save a life and 2/3 of the time you make nothing. Yes, nothing. You can, however, get sued for millions of dollars by patients who you're required by law to see, yet who are required to pay you nothing.

You're treated with unfathomable contempt and disrespect at times. One day, I had the most hair-raising, sphincter-clenching airway case I've ever had. I had a 500lb asthmatic who came in on Bipap who needed to be intubated (put on life support). I go in to intubate her and she's got a tongue the size of a football, her sat drops to 50% (dying) and I can't get the tube. My two partners and I take turns struggling to get this lady intubated using multiple techniques before she dies, which is going to be very soon, minutes, seconds. She's young and she's going to die, right now. No one can get any airway in and she's not breathing, at all. I call ENT and anesthesia (which I'd never done before, in years of practice) and plan on cric-ing this ladies' neck (cutting a hole in her neck and putting a tube in), which is going to be an abominable nightmare since she's 500lbs with no neck at all. Luckily, thank god, my partner tries again and blindly, luckily, gets the airway before we need to cric her and before any consultant arrives. It's the worst case of almost any kind I've had in years, but thank god, we saved this ladies life. None of this so far is what bothers me. Here's the kicker: I walk out of the room and this old man in the room next door starts swearing at me, pointing his finger in my face nearly spitting centimeters from my nose saying he's been on the phone with his lawyer and he's going to sue me because his (adult) daughter who's totally stable and barely sick enough to be in the hospital had been in the ER 4 hours and wasn't upstairs to a room yet. I said to the guy, "I was next door, working to save that ladies life. We saved her life." He had watched the whole thing, he said "I don't care, we're going to sue you!! We're going to sue you! You hear me, sue the pants off you!" This is not the first time this has happened. I've coded children who've died after working to save them for what seems like forever and immediately after returning to my other patients who've now been waiting for hours, I've been sworn at and verbally berated because someone who came in for a stubbed toe had to wait while I worked on a dying child. It's truly unbelievable. You can let this roll of your back the first 50 times, but at some point enough is enough.




I'm not saying the specialty is all bad. There's lots of great things about it, but make no mistake about it, it's not for p-----s. It takes a special person to do this. It takes an even more special person to do it for 25 years.
ol
 
Last edited:
(1) Relatively high malpractice risk compared to many other fields.

(2) Most jobs out there are structured in a way that the ER physician is an independent contractor with no employer contribution for health, disability, or retirement. This structure also requires that the physician pay the portion of the social security contribution that would be ordinarily paid by the employer.

(3) "You never treat a Rockafeller in the ER." I suppose you might after he wrecks his Lexus, but a much larger percentage of our patients are noncompliant sociopathic cockroaches than in a regular clinic setting.
 
As evidence: Is there any difference in an ED attending 3 years out vs. 10 years out? You may have more experience, but do you feel as though you have advanced in your career?

Assuming that he has played his cards correctly, an ED attending 10 years out can afford to retire, while the ED attending 3 years out cannot.
 
Assuming that he has played his cards correctly, an ED attending 10 years out can afford to retire, while the ED attending 3 years out cannot.

Those gotta be some wicked cards... maybe pocket Aces? Considering that the average ED salary is $250k, and nearly half goes to Uncle Sam, how do you suppose an ED attending can retire after just 10 years?
 
I think the goal of early retirement must be viewed as an unrealistic expectation.

This lie of "retirement" was born in the early progressive era when social security was set up. Social security was a big pyramid scheme that made the government money hand over fist as the average american died before or shortly after they collected much from the program. It is now a failed pyramid scheme that must pay out more than it can generate.

This has also happened to the pension funds of public employees, governement workers, and union members that are currently unsustainable when coupled with the spiralling cost of our immense social programs.

Both social security and union pensions were workable in the financial prosperity of the 80's and 90's when the baby boomers were in their peak productivity and their retirement accounts were making 7% annual profits. With the terrible combination of the retirement of baby-boomers, a permanently weakened American economy and a government that refuses to allow us to use our own natural resources, the financial outlook of this country is dismal at best.

You might say "I know I won't get social security, so I won't be affected by this." I'm not sure that is absolutely true.

1. You might save and save, socking away retirement only to have the stockmarket crash on you and see your nest-egg lose have its value in a matter of months.

2. This unsustainable spending on pensions, welfare, unemployment, medicare, medicaid, low income housing, etc. can only be continued by the government printing more money. With every day of refusal to balance the budget (best evidenced by the recent travesty of democratic congressman dodging the bullet of acountability by hiding in surrounding states http://www.examiner.com/conservativ...wisconsin-democrats-could-hide-for-days-weeks) more and more of our spending is WASTED on interest on the debt, with a compounding, spiraling debt which will make us even more unable to take care of the elderly and poor.

This WILL eventually lead to inflation. Have you heard of the Weimar Republic? I'm not confident that something like that couldn't happen here.

http://www.pbs.org/wgbh/commandingheights/shared/minitext/ess_germanhyperinflation.html

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Inflation_in_the_Weimar_Republic

I'm not sure money is something that can be counted on to be there in 20 years. Society will always pay you for a service or good that is in demand (like the ability to work in the ER). It might not pay you so much for your devalued stocks, real estate, or even for a bank account whose content is now worthless because of inflation. Moral of the story, our generation may face working until the day we die. I'm not sure that is a bad thing. Work is healthy for the soul.
 
Last edited by a moderator:
Absolutely not. Maybe if you live in an airstream trailer for 10 years eating ramen noodles, never have a wife or kids or pay any taxes. Ask your EM attendings who are 10 or more years out how close they are to retiring. I wish you were right, though. I really do.

I think it is reasonable to put $100,000/ year away and end up worth $1,000,000 in 10 years. Then transitioning to something less stressful, like being a professor would be a possibility, or even simply pulling 3 shifts/month (pseudoretirement). When I whine to my wife about unrealistic employer and patient expectations, she reminds me of the $370,000 of debt we have. I hang my head, go back to work and slog through the patients. What gets me through it is dreaming of the day when I'm financially able to tell my boss/CEO/group to stick their unreasonable demands up their butts, walk out of the hospital and go on a 3 month long vacation.
 
Last edited by a moderator:
40? If you want to retire after 30 years, you must see about another 100,000 patients.
 
Yeah, I am on a drug, its called "Charlie Sheen" *waves fingers*. #Tigerblood.


But seriously, what needs to happen in America (by and large) is the death of the notion that you "go and see the ER doc and you get all fixed".

- I'm a PGY-2, and I'm already burnt-out on the 'gimme-gimme-entitlement-crowd'.

- I am not responsible for your poor health/life decisions. I am only responsible for my own life/health decisions. I can help you with yours, but ultimately.... there's this thing called free-well and self-determinism. I'm not legally bound for either....

#philosophyblog.
 
- and here is the kicker.

- Everyone in the department, in the HOSPITAL knows "Christina Diabetica". She's 26, and has had as many ICU/SICU admits. She's just not willing to admit that she needs to be vigilant about her blood glucose, and it shows. Whenever she feels '****ty', which is every two weeks... she comes into the ED, gets a central line, gets her potassium/glucose/acidosis corrected, and goes home.

- We (residents) all know Christina. We all salivate over getting the central line/intubation. But she's singlehandedly bankrupting the system. Again. and Again. and Again.

- Anyone want to let her die next time ?

#braveryandhonestyblog.

#socialresponsibilityblog.

#dontwanttobeadickblog.
 
Top