.

This forum made possible through the generous support of SDN members, donors, and sponsors. Thank you.
Status
Not open for further replies.
Sort by date Sort by votes
mrbreakfast said:
Can't comment on private practice ophtho, but if you want strictly 9-5 and anything else is a dealbreaker, I see ophtho residents at the hospital at 3 am all the time.

The true bottom line is that it's less what you do than where you work. If you're OK with working in rural MS (nothing wrong with MS, but I get recruitment stuff from there all the time) expect to make three-four times what you'd make in a major East Coast city. OK with working in a smaller town in the Midwest? I know family medicine docs out there who make $250/hour+ out there. There are nocturnist gigs where you'll spent 70% of your shift asleep and still make bank. Etc.

Any field has the potential to make you quite wealthy. But many medical students have never had a real job before. You might be surprised how far $60,000 a year as a resident goes, let alone several times that as an attending. But it's not worth it if you dread going to work every day.
Click to expand...
Are there any residencies that are actually 9-5 tho?
 
Upvote 0 Downvote
OP, if you want to explore optho, you basically need to start now. My school only had about 1-2 weeks coverage of some basic material and then no other exposure to it ever again. Check out the optho forum here and reach out to that person at your school who just matched it and see what they did. This is like any other surgical subspecialty in that if you wait until M2 or especially M3, you’re already behind.
 
Upvote 0 Downvote
Upvote 0 Downvote
M&L said:
honestly, if you are so focused on the whole 9-5 thing, why did you even get to medical school? I mean, not trying to hurt your feelings, but seriously. Have you done any shadowing at all before medical school?
Click to expand...
There are plenty of specialties that are roughly 9-5 as an attending. Not sure why you’re making it seem like wanting decent hours is unreasonable.
 
Upvote 0 Downvote
premedtx123 said:
Please no judgment here please. Current M1 considering what specialty to pursue in the future. I know lots of specialties pay you well but the hours are long. I value work-life balance so the total compensation is not as important as hourly rate to me.

so my question is, which specialty in your opinion has the highest hourly rate? I am not interested in skin so no dermatology please.

TIA for your input!
Click to expand...
This isnt really the question you should be asking... You should be asking that question after you narrowed it down to things you would actually do... There is some specialties I would not do for ANY amount of money..
 
Upvote 0 Downvote
for the love of me I can’t get why people say you have to love a field. Tolerate it yes, but love it??? I really don’t believe all these top applicants love skin and eyes that much for fields like derm and optho being such hot fields. The reality I think is l, tons of people are picking these top specialty based on money/lifestyle and are either lying or fooled themselves to saying they loved the field and just grew to like it. Also I know there are people who genuinely like these fields but it doesn’t correlate to how popular it is.
 
Upvote 0 Downvote
Matthew9Thirtyfive said:
The r^2 is like .6 or something. It’s decent but not great.
Click to expand...
Not to mention population statistics like that have essentially zero indication how any one individual is going to do. I mean all someone has to do is look at the ranges at any one of those MCAT bins to see how variable it is… a high MCAT in no way is indicative of a high Step score.

OP I suggest putting your head down and start grinding if you think you might want ophtho. You’ll need stellar academics, research, and people in the field going to bat for you.

You can’t change your med school, so just get to work. Don’t just pick a specialty based on salary data. Yeah money should absolutely factor in, but there are a lot of specialties you can make good money while living a good life. Even in my specialty (general surgery), which gets crapped on all the time for a terrible life, there are definitely gigs out there where you make 400k+ being done at 3-4 PM.
 
Upvote 0 Downvote
Chelsea FC said:
for the love of me I can’t get why people say you have to love a field. Tolerate it yes, but love it??? I really don’t believe all these top applicants love skin and eyes that much for fields like derm and optho being such hot fields. The reality I think is l, tons of people are picking these top specialty based on money/lifestyle and are either lying or fooled themselves to saying they loved the field and just grew to like it. Also I know there are people who genuinely like these fields but it doesn’t correlate to how popular it is.
Click to expand...
Agree. And it’s not like people in law or finance are “passionate” about what they do. No one gives them crap for being 100% financially motivated. No matter what OP goes into, at least he/she will actually do something that benefits humanity.
 
Upvote 0 Downvote
premedtx123 said:
well I was thinking 9-5 as an attending... never in a second did I think I could find a 9-5 residency

How about the subspecialties in surgery? Do all of them have terrible hours
Click to expand...
Oh well that’s different. You can be 9-5 in most non surgical specialties if you’re willing to take a pay cut. It’s called “mommy track.”
 
Upvote 0 Downvote
Matthew9Thirtyfive said:
The r^2 is like .6 or something. It’s decent but not great.
Click to expand...

DOVinciRobot said:
Not to mention population statistics like that have essentially zero indication how any one individual is going to do. I mean all someone has to do is look at the ranges at any one of those MCAT bins to see how variable it is… a high MCAT in no way is indicative of a high Step score.
Click to expand...

This is what I meant when I said forget your MCAT being a predictor of your Step score. And to reiterate, a 75th percentile MCAT is so high partially because of all those <500 scores. A 75th percentile Step is among medical students whose average MCAT across the country's MD schools is a 512 (mid upper 80s percentile). The two tests are totally different ballgames.

For the record, I had that 512 MCAT score and ended up with a >80th percentile Step 1 and beat out students who had 515+ MCATs (>90th percentile) and didn't break 70th percentile (<240)
 
Upvote 0 Downvote
It's hard to compare MCAT and Step scores because an enormous percentage of MCAT test-takers do not actually apply to medical school. The average applicant to medical school scored in the top 1/3rd of takers for their year.

The "average" MCAT score for MD students is around 512. That might be 80th percentile for all takers, but it's right in the middle for medical students.
 
Upvote 0 Downvote
premedtx123 said:
Please no judgment here please. Current M1 considering what specialty to pursue in the future. I know lots of specialties pay you well but the hours are long. I value work-life balance so the total compensation is not as important as hourly rate to me.

so my question is, which specialty in your opinion has the highest hourly rate? I am not interested in skin so no dermatology please.

TIA for your input!
Click to expand...

You and every other med student OP, 16 weeks of vacation too. Let me know if you find that specialty, I might switch.
 
Upvote 0 Downvote
Ho0v-man said:
Agree. And it’s not like people in law or finance are “passionate” about what they do. No one gives them crap for being 100% financially motivated. No matter what OP goes into, at least he/she will actually do something that benefits humanity.
Click to expand...
I don’t really disagree with your broader point about not judging people for being financially motivated, but I don’t think it’s correct to imply that people in law are not passionate about it. My experience with lawyers has been that most of them are passionate about it. I’m currently in a fellowship that is like 99% legal in comparison to “clinical” in the traditional sense. I am also very passionate about what I do. It’s just not passionate in the ways that most doctors recognize.

Passion for people in legal and legally-adjacent professions manifests as a zealous belief in fairness and a devotion to advocacy and forging justice out of the implementation of the legal process. While most doctors recognize a devotion to patients as “passion,” my experience is that, with the law, it is often more about the process than the individual parties or outcomes (although those are components, too).

I think similar criticisms could be leveled at your comments about people in finance, but I just don’t have enough professional experience with those people to say.
 
Upvote 0 Downvote
Ho0v-man said:
Agree. And it’s not like people in law or finance are “passionate” about what they do. No one gives them crap for being 100% financially motivated. No matter what OP goes into, at least he/she will actually do something that benefits humanity.
Click to expand...
Not to get too off topic. My dad and step mom are immigration defense attorneys who are extremely passionate about their jobs. That’s a gross generalization that just isn’t accurate.
 
Upvote 0 Downvote
sloop said:
I don’t really disagree with your broader point about not judging people for being financially motivated, but I don’t think it’s correct to imply that people in law are not passionate about it. My experience with lawyers has been that most of them are passionate about it. I’m currently in a fellowship that is like 99% legal in comparison to “clinical” in the traditional sense. I am also very passionate about what I do. It’s just not passionate in the ways that most doctors recognize.

Passion for people in legal and legally-adjacent professions manifests as a zealous belief in fairness and a devotion to advocacy and forging justice out of the implementation of the legal process. While most doctors recognize a devotion to patients as “passion,” my experience is that, with the law, it is often more about the process than the individual parties or outcomes (although those are components, too).

I think similar criticisms could be leveled at your comments about people in finance, but I just don’t have enough professional experience with those people to say.
Click to expand...
Matthew9Thirtyfive said:
Not to get too off topic. My dad and step mom are immigration defense attorneys who are extremely passionate about their jobs. That’s a gross generalization that just isn’t accurate.
Click to expand...
Fair enough. Let me know how y’all feel when you’re involved in a frivolous lawsuit👍
 
Upvote 0 Downvote
Matthew9Thirtyfive said:
Not to get too off topic. My dad and step mom are immigration defense attorneys who are extremely passionate about their jobs. That’s a gross generalization that just isn’t accurate.
Click to expand...
I imaging there are certain areas of law that attract the passionate.

I don't imagine the guy that did my house closing is one of them. I know that my uncle who does minor criminal defense and divorces isn't. I'm 99% sure the ambulance chasing shyster who has 200 billboards in town isn't passionate about anything except money.
 
Upvote 0 Downvote
Ho0v-man said:
Fair enough. Let me know how y’all feel when you’re involved in a frivolous lawsuit👍
Click to expand...
So because there are physicians who exploit patients for money, no physician is passionate about medicine? That is basically the equivalent of what you’re saying and makes as little sense.
 
Upvote 0 Downvote
VA Hopeful Dr said:
I imaging there are certain areas of law that attract the passionate.

I don't imagine the guy that did my house closing is one of them. I know that my uncle who does minor criminal defense and divorces isn't. I'm 99% sure the ambulance chasing shyster who has 200 billboards in town isn't passionate about anything except money.
Click to expand...
There are physicians who are in it for the money. The guy who does lipo and Botox is super passionate about that? So that means no physicians are passionate? Painting an entire profession as driven entirely by money is ridiculous.
 
Upvote 0 Downvote
Matthew9Thirtyfive said:
So because there are physicians who exploit patients for money, no physician is passionate about medicine? That is basically the equivalent of what you’re saying and makes as little sense.
Click to expand...
There’s people passionate about their job in any field. There’s also people just trying to maximize their earnings however unscrupulous it may be. Obviously it’s not an all or none.

Sorry about your hurt feelings. But you really can’t be naive enough to believe that there’s anywhere close to an equal distribution of the two groups in these two different professions.

The people who go into medicine just for the money still have provide good care or they won’t survive residency. The lawyers who are in it just for the money go on to make money however they see fit.

I’m simply pointing out the double standard.
 
Upvote 0 Downvote
Matthew9Thirtyfive said:
There are physicians who are in it for the money. The guy who does lipo and Botox is super passionate about that? So that means no physicians are passionate? Painting an entire profession as driven entirely by money is ridiculous.
Click to expand...
I think the point people are trying to make is medicine is a job and just like any job you will have people who are passionate about it and people who find the best in it but really want to just earn a living. Just like law and other high earning jobs. THis is to say that medicine isnt unique where on has to be inlove with their job to be able to do it well
 
Upvote 0 Downvote
Matthew9Thirtyfive said:
There are physicians who are in it for the money. The guy who does lipo and Botox is super passionate about that? So that means no physicians are passionate? Painting an entire profession as driven entirely by money is ridiculous.
Click to expand...
I suspect that a larger proportion of attorneys are motivated by money than physicians. Almost impossible to prove of course.
 
Upvote 0 Downvote
VA Hopeful Dr said:
I suspect that a larger proportion of attorneys are motivated by money than physicians. Almost impossible to prove of course.
Click to expand...
Except a larger proportion of attorneys don’t make nearly as good money as physicians. I don’t disagree with your general sentiment, just pointing out the irony.
 
Upvote 0 Downvote
premedtx123 said:
Please no judgment here please. Current M1 considering what specialty to pursue in the future. I know lots of specialties pay you well but the hours are long. I value work-life balance so the total compensation is not as important as hourly rate to me.

so my question is, which specialty in your opinion has the highest hourly rate? I am not interested in skin so no dermatology please.

TIA for your input!
Click to expand...
If you value work-life balance you should
- find a specialty you truly enjoy so that you’re not drained at the end of your day/week or dreading going back to work after your time off
- find a job in your preferred specialty that gives you the work-life balance. This might mean part time or taking a pay cut.
- learn to live within your means and any doctor job will provide you a comfortable life. You can make 200k or 500k and if you don’t learn to live within your means you’ll always feel behind.

keep in mind there’s no way to predict pay 10 years from now. But, if you have a job you enjoy that allows for working “easy hours” you’ll be able to achieve a good work-life balance.
 
Upvote 0 Downvote
Chelsea FC said:
I think the point people are trying to make is medicine is a job and just like any job you will have people who are passionate about it and people who find the best in it but really want to just earn a living. Just like law and other high earning jobs. THis is to say that medicine isnt unique where on has to be inlove with their job to be able to do it well
Click to expand...
Oh no I agree. I’m just saying we shouldn’t be painting whole professions with broad strokes like that. And it goes for medicine too. By making it seem like anyone who goes into medicine is super passionate, it ostracizes any comments about money being a motivator.
 
Upvote 0 Downvote
ACSurgeon said:
Except a larger proportion of attorneys don’t make nearly as good money as physicians. I don’t disagree with your general sentiment, just pointing out the irony.
Click to expand...
Prior to the oversupply of law school graduates (and extra year of much higher tuition compared to 15 years ago), I wonder if the extra 4 years minimum we spend in school was enough of an equalizer.
 
Upvote 0 Downvote
Ho0v-man said:
Fair enough. Let me know how y’all feel when you’re involved in a frivolous lawsuit👍
Click to expand...

VA Hopeful Dr said:
I imaging there are certain areas of law that attract the passionate.

I don't imagine the guy that did my house closing is one of them. I know that my uncle who does minor criminal defense and divorces isn't. I'm 99% sure the ambulance chasing shyster who has 200 billboards in town isn't passionate about anything except money.
Click to expand...

People in medicine always like to talk about “frivolous lawsuits” in medical malpractice and “ambulance chasers,” but the reality is that the vast majority of medical malpractice lawsuits are not frivolous. Just because a claim does not prevail at trial does not mean that it was frivolous. Generally, if a claim is not at least arguably meritorious, it won’t get off the ground. Malpractice attorneys don’t want to waste their time on a claim that won’t go anywhere and to advise a client to file such a claim potentially exposes them to liability for legal malpractice. In many states, there are various statutory provisions that make it difficult to pursue an unmeritorious malpractice claim. In my state, you can’t get to a trial court without either appealing from malpractice claims or getting an exemption which generally requires a professional report by an expert saying that the standard of care was not met.

The reality is that, if somebody gets hurt because a doctor failed to provide the standard of care, that person deserves the opportunity to be compensated. If that error happens to be in my area of expertise, I’m more than willing to provide testimony for a plaintiff if I think the case is meritorious. You can make any sort of comment that you want, but I think that’s just part of accountability for the profession.
 
Upvote 0 Downvote
sloop said:
People in medicine always like to talk about “frivolous lawsuits” in medical malpractice and “ambulance chasers,” but the reality is that the vast majority of medical malpractice lawsuits are not frivolous. Just because a claim does not prevail at trial does not mean that it was frivolous. Generally, if a claim is not at least arguably meritorious, it won’t get off the ground. Malpractice attorneys don’t want to waste their time on a claim that won’t go anywhere and to advise a client to file such a claim potentially exposes them to liability for legal malpractice. In many states, there are various statutory provisions that make it difficult to pursue an unmeritorious malpractice claim. In my state, you can’t get to a trial court without either appealing from malpractice claims or getting an exemption which generally requires a professional report by an expert saying that the standard of care was not met.

The reality is that, if somebody gets hurt because a doctor failed to provide the standard of care, that person deserves the opportunity to be compensated. If that error happens to be in my area of expertise, I’m more than willing to provide testimony for a plaintiff if I think the case is meritorious. You can make any sort of comment that you want, but I think that’s just part of accountability for the profession.
Click to expand...
Dude, attorneys can and do find plenty of expert witnesses that say and will you didnt meet standard of care. I agree, something really bad has to happen (death, brain death, nerve injury, paralysis, fall out of bed, etc etc.. fail to diagnose. ) to make it worthwhile for an attorney to waste time with a suit. The potential payout has to be worth it. At the same time, this is why non-physicians are able and do practice "at the top of their license"; because nobody really cares if the right medicine is practiced, until something bad happens.. The only ones who see it are practicing physicians. I walk around with my jaw on the ground on most days. Im aghast at what is happening.
 
Upvote 0 Downvote
Aheadbyacentury said:
Dude, attorneys can and do find plenty of expert witnesses that say and will you didnt meet standard of care. I agree, something really bad has to happen (death, brain death, nerve injury, paralysis, fall out of bed, etc etc.. fail to diagnose. ) to make it worthwhile for an attorney to waste time with a suit. The potential payout has to be worth it. At the same time, this is why non-physicians are able and do practice "at the top of their license"; because nobody really cares if the right medicine is practiced, until something bad happens.. The only ones who see it are practicing physicians. I walk around with my jaw on the ground on most days. Im aghast at what is happening.
Click to expand...
I’m not sure that you can get an expert to testify for any claim you want. The expert’s reputation is on the line and nobody wants to get raked over the coals on the witness stand for some stupid case. That is not a pleasant experience and it harms your ability to get future expert witness work. It’s not like you have to be on the winning side of the case, but if you frequently appear like you’re trying to fabricate a cause of action, that is not good for your career. And, again, these witnesses are expensive. The potential damages need to be considerable to justify their services.

But even if I grant you that most medical malpractice cases could get an expert to say the standard of care was violated, the mere fact that that is true pretty much means that the case is not frivolous. Again non-frivolous does not mean that it is the more meritorious position. It just means that there is a reasonable claim. Different doctors can disagree about what constitutes the standard of care, but if a doctor tells you that the standard of care was violated in your case, I think that serves as a reasonable basis for a lawsuit. I’m not exactly sure how else you’re defining a frivolous lawsuit.
 
Upvote 0 Downvote
sloop said:
I’m not sure that you can get an expert to testify for any claim you want. The expert’s reputation is on the line and nobody wants to get raked over the coals on the witness stand for some stupid case. That is not a pleasant experience and it harms your ability to get future expert witness work. It’s not like you have to be on the winning side of the case, but if you frequently appear like you’re trying to fabricate a cause of action, that is not good for your career. And, again, these witnesses are expensive. The potential damages need to be considerable to justify their services.

But even if I grant you that most medical malpractice cases could get an expert to say the standard of care was violated, the mere fact that that is true pretty much means that the case is not frivolous. Again non-frivolous does not mean that it is the more meritorious position. It just means that there is a reasonable claim. Different doctors can disagree about what constitutes the standard of care, but if a doctor tells you that the standard of care was violated in your case, I think that serves as a reasonable basis for a lawsuit. I’m not exactly sure how else you’re defining a frivolous lawsuit.
Click to expand...
There are physicians who are putting their licenses on the line for a few hundred bucks “supervising” PAs hundreds of miles away. You don’t think there are doctors who will tell someone they didn’t meet standard of care for the same or more?
 
Upvote 0 Downvote
sloop said:
The expert’s reputation is on the line
Click to expand...
LOL!! As if that matters. It is their opinion that you did not meet standard of care. S/He is entitled to his/her opinion and the jury is entitled to their opinion.
A malpractice case relies on expert witnesses. We can put an end to medical malpractice by making it unethical to testify or participate in legal proceedings with regards to med mal.
 
Upvote 0 Downvote
M&L said:
I mean, not trying to make fun of the pandemic, but the way we are going...... This might be one of the highest paying IM specialties in a few years.
Click to expand...
Except the insurance companies can claim it is a workers comp case and make you bill the workers comp insurance instead, in which case you may not be paid for a long time. I have a colleague who had to return the reimbursements for this very reason!
 
Upvote 0 Downvote
Matthew9Thirtyfive said:
There are physicians who are putting their licenses on the line for a few hundred bucks “supervising” PAs hundreds of miles away. You don’t think there are doctors who will tell someone they didn’t meet standard of care for the same or more?
Click to expand...

I won’t say this doesn’t happen but I don’t think it’s very common. Being crucified on the stand is very uncomfortable and, if you’re doing this kind of work, you should be getting paid a retainer up front. If your opinion is unfavorable for the retaining attorney, you still get paid. Also, most decent attorneys want you to be honest in your opinion. The ones who don’t are usually shooting themselves in the foot. Here’s why:

If a case is factually unfavorable for a successful malpractice claim (I.e. it is going to be hard to argue that there was a violation of standard of care), the attorney doesn’t want to learn about this at trial when you are getting destroyed by the opposing expert. They want to know at the beginning so that they can effectively advise their client and possibly push for a settlement. If they go to trial and lose, depending on their contract, it is very possible that the attorney doesn’t get paid.
Aheadbyacentury said:
LOL!! As if that matters. It is their opinion that you did not meet standard of care. S/He is entitled to his/her opinion and the jury is entitled to their opinion.
Click to expand...

I agree with this.

Aheadbyacentury said:
A malpractice case relies on expert witnesses. We can put an end to medical malpractice by making it unethical to testify or participate in legal proceedings with regards to med mal.
Click to expand...

I don’t agree with this. Why is the elimination of malpractice cases the goal? How is that fair? So the person who was injured by a medical mistake and can never work again isn’t entitled to be compensated for that injury? I refuse to take part in your conspiracy of silence.
 
Upvote 0 Downvote
sloop said:
I’m not sure that you can get an expert to testify for any claim you want. The expert’s reputation is on the line and nobody wants to get raked over the coals on the witness stand for some stupid case. That is not a pleasant experience and it harms your ability to get future expert witness work. It’s not like you have to be on the winning side of the case, but if you frequently appear like you’re trying to fabricate a cause of action, that is not good for your career. And, again, these witnesses are expensive. The potential damages need to be considerable to justify their services.

But even if I grant you that most medical malpractice cases could get an expert to say the standard of care was violated, the mere fact that that is true pretty much means that the case is not frivolous. Again non-frivolous does not mean that it is the more meritorious position. It just means that there is a reasonable claim. Different doctors can disagree about what constitutes the standard of care, but if a doctor tells you that the standard of care was violated in your case, I think that serves as a reasonable basis for a lawsuit. I’m not exactly sure how else you’re defining a frivolous lawsuit.
Click to expand...

How about an ER PA testifying against an orthopedic surgeon as an “expert”? Sounds pretty desperate and frivolous to me. Issue at hand was sufficient DVT prophylaxis. And yes, it was sufficient and standard of care. Some times people have a bad outcome. The lawsuit got thrown out btw, but was a monumental stress for the physician.

The goal here wasn’t to win, but to strong arm the physician and his employer to settle. This varies greatly from state to state. All you really need is the ability to bring the law suit. The cost of defending leads to a settlement. Look up NY, NJ, PA, and IL. Happens all the time.
 
Upvote 0 Downvote
DarkHorizon said:
How about an ER PA testifying against an orthopedic surgeon as an “expert”? Sounds pretty desperate and frivolous to me. Issue at hand was sufficient DVT prophylaxis. And yes, it was sufficient and standard of care. Some times people have a bad outcome. The lawsuit got thrown out btw, but was a monumental stress for the physician.

The goal here wasn’t to win, but to strong arm the physician and his employer to settle. This varies greatly from state to state. All you really need is the ability to bring the law suit. The cost of defending leads to a settlement. Look up NY, NJ, PA, and IL. Happens all the time.
Click to expand...
PA cant be used as an expert against a physician.
I think most people go to trial thus discouraging lawsuits. The legal bills to bring a case to trial is very high and Im not sure many lawyers would do that unless it was a pretty good case.
 
Upvote 0 Downvote
Aheadbyacentury said:
PA cant be used as an expert against a physician.
I think most people go to trial thus discouraging lawsuits. The legal bills to bring a case to trial is very high and Im not sure many lawyers would do that unless it was a pretty good case.
Click to expand...
I will get back to you about that after I find more details.

What state are you in? What actually happens vastly differs from say Wisconsin, to Illinois, to Indiana. Ultimately, your ability to file a lawsuit is all that matters. Some states make it very hard, not so hard in others. A 10k settlement is hell of a lot cheaper than going to trial.
 
Upvote 0 Downvote
DarkHorizon said:
I will get back to you about that after I find more details.

What state are you in? What actually happens vastly differs from say Wisconsin, to Illinois, to Indiana. Ultimately, your ability to file a lawsuit is all that matters. Some states make it very hard, not so hard in others. A 10k settlement is hell of a lot cheaper than going to trial.
Click to expand...
Yes but settling just encourages lawyers to file lawsuits..
 
Upvote 0 Downvote
OP - I think your questions display a fundamental misunderstanding of how physicians are paid. Your conceptual approach is good - trying to maximize money for time - but the many compensation structures and practice styles render this moot. If you have any friends or family who are in practice, see if you can get them to talk real numbers with you.

My general sense is that you can lump nearly all the surgical fields together in terms of earning and lifestyle potential. The people making the big bucks are usually partners in a successful private group. In my field (ent) I know quite a few docs making $700k-$1.5m as pure generalists. Most of that comes from ancillary services, imaging, surgery center ownership, etc.

Like in all other fields, your income is limited largely by your own business acumen and entrepreneurship and existing access to capital. Location is also a big factor as breaking into a saturated market is going to be much tougher. Those jobs also come with more risk - just look at the pandemic and you can imagine most of those partners were probably not drawing a salary for a long time.

On the salaried side there’s also an exceptional amount of variability. I routinely delete offers for employee positions in remote locations claiming to pay $600-900k. Pay in more desirable markets tends to be more on the $300-400k side (lower for super hot spots). Starting partner tracks for those lucrative private groups can dip below $200k for a few years which serves as your buy in to shares of the other services.

Academics tends to be a bit lower pay in exchange for cooler cases, resident coverage, opportunities for research, prestige, etc. Salaries tend to start around $300 and go to $500+. There are of course notable exceptions such as UCLA where a number of their docs are among the highest paid employees in the state at $1.2-$1.7m. Definitely worth a look since California makes all such data public record. (And when you figure out how the handful of ENTs on that list are doing it, please DM me the answer!)

So that’s yet another reason we tend to advise people chase what they like doing more than the money. There’s potential for incredible income in most specialities, but you’re wise to start exploring early.
 
Upvote 0 Downvote
I would say ortho spine. Median salary in 2019 MGMA was $840k, in reality it is likely higher. For derm to match that hourly rate, they would need to be working 30 hrs/week ($455k) vs 55hrs/week in ortho spine, 4 weeks of vacation for both.

The only fields that compete with ortho spine are CT surgery, neurosurgery, retina, and Mohs. The first two have worse hours for similar pay, and the later two are extremely small fields. So I guess you could say retina or Mohs as well.

Radiology hours aren’t much better than ortho spine and the median salaries are at least 25% less. Or in other words, rads isn’t working 25% less hours than ortho spine when both are working median jobs.

Ortho spine also has the possibility of outpatient surgery which nrsg and CT surgery don’t.

Final caveat is that neurosurgery can also do spine, but from what I have heard, it’s likely you will still get roped into taking neurosurgery call which sucks and is still brain stuff. Ortho spine can have to take general ortho call too but ortho practices are usually bigger and can spread the pain around more.
 
Upvote 0 Downvote
premedtx123 said:
It might be a stupid question but wouldn't radiology expose you to radiation thus increases the cancer risk?

Oncology is another specialty I am interested in and I am glad someone mentioned it get paid well... What's your opinion on medical vs surgical oncology? If I pursue the medical oncology route, do I need to do an IM residency and then fellowship, or is there a way to match into an oncology residency directly?
Click to expand...
Radiation...only radiation exposure would be doing fluoroscopic procedures, which are not so common nowadays. Interventional cardiology, on the other hand, can get some really serious exposure.

Not sure about your reluctance to consider Derm. Even residency has favorable hours. And a Mohs surgeon can pull down some serious money.
 
Upvote 0 Downvote
premedtx123 said:
It might be a stupid question but wouldn't radiology expose you to radiation thus increases the cancer risk?

Oncology is another specialty I am interested in and I am glad someone mentioned it get paid well... What's your opinion on medical vs surgical oncology? If I pursue the medical oncology route, do I need to do an IM residency and then fellowship, or is there a way to match into an oncology residency directly?
Click to expand...
Radiation...only radiation exposure would be doing fluoroscopic procedures, which are not so common nowadays. Interventional cardiology, on the other hand, can get some really serious exposure.

Not sure about your reluctance to consider Derm. Even residency has favorable hours. And a Mohs surgeon can pull down some serious money.
premedtx123 said:
If optho doesn't make a lot of money why is it so difficult to match into then? A 244 step 1 is just a few points shy from the average of matched neurosurgeons.
Click to expand...
Lifestyle, I suppose,
 
Upvote 0 Downvote
Status
Not open for further replies.
Top