2013 Internist Compensation Report

[WiseGuy1]

Advertisement - Members don't see this ad

http://www.medscape.com/features/sl...nal-medicine?src=wnl_edit_specol&uac=153578HG

 

[thierryhenry]

password protected cant see file would love to view it

thanks

 

[gutonc]

password protected cant see file would love to view it

thanks

Just join Medscape (it's free) and you'll get access.

 

[ICmyFuture]

sad that only 19% would do general internal medicine again

 

[thierryhenry]

Just join Medscape (it's free) and you'll get access.

thats ok but thanks for the advice

 

[gutonc]

thats ok but thanks for the advice

Why wouldn't you join Medscape? Serious question.

 

[ICmyFuture]

It has quite a useful phone app. And its free....

 

[C5toC9]

This is available without a password:

http://www.medscape.com/features/slideshow/compensation/2013/public

 

[thierryhenry]

This is available without a password:

http://www.medscape.com/features/slideshow/compensation/2013/public

thank you greatly

 

[WiseGuy1]

sad that only 19% would do general internal medicine again

Does anyone have the data comparing this to other specialties?

 

[swlabr1980]

Does anyone have the data comparing this to other specialties?

You can see reports for other specialties on Medscape.

 

[Silent Cool]

Those who have seen it--how realistic is it?

 

[Silent Cool]

sad that only 19% would do general internal medicine again

Yeah but not surprising.

 

[gutonc]

Those who have seen it--how realistic is it?

Well, the data comes from real people (I filled out the survey earlier this year), so I'd say it's pretty realistic.

How representative is it? I guess that depends. I didn't pay attention to the Gen Med one, but for my subspecialty, in my region, for my practice type, I'd say it's more or less spot on. It might underestimate actually based on my experience (I live in an area with high desirability but only two real academic programs to skew the curve).

Also, keep in mind that the numbers aren't starting salaries, they're averages, for all people in the specialty who returned the survey. In my group there is a 3-4x difference between the newbies (like me) and the senior/founding members of the group. So don't get all pissed off if your offer letter doesn't equal the number listed for your geographic area.

 

[DIce3]

68% of internists were seeing 99 or fewer patients per week. This means that the average internist was seeing less than 20 patients per day with an overall mean income of $185,000. As overhead is relatively fixed, I would say this is a good income for that volume.

 

[Raryn]

68% of internists were seeing 99 or fewer patients per week. This means that the average internist was seeing less than 20 patients per day with an overall mean income of $185,000. As overhead is relatively fixed, I would say this is a good income for that volume.

I think it's including hospitalists.

 

[Bostonredsox]

Hospitalists in general average 18-25 per day, 7 days per week. (Most are 7on/7off) thus the hospitalist avg should be around 130-170 pts per week 2 week block, resulting in 65-85 per week avg. i would say most hospitalists i have met also moonlight atleast 1 generally 2+ days on their off week so the overall avg should be around 100 per week. Dlc3 is correct, the outpt numbers are low thus the average is staying around 99. yet still keeping pay around 185k. Not horrible.

 

[DIce3]

It is strange to me. About 2% of medical students plan to go into general internal medicine yet there is a huge need (unlike many subspecialties) with a good stable income and really no politics compared to many of the subspecialties. I, for one, think it should be more like 1% and that we really need to push internal medicine residents into the very happy and lucrative subspecialties so that we can keep this good thing going (partially kidding, but only partially).

 

[NEMC]

Well, the data comes from real people (I filled out the survey earlier this year), so I'd say it's pretty realistic.

How representative is it? I guess that depends. I didn't pay attention to the Gen Med one, but for my subspecialty, in my region, for my practice type, I'd say it's more or less spot on. It might underestimate actually based on my experience (I live in an area with high desirability but only two real academic programs to skew the curve).


gutonc, when you mean only two real academic program in your area, that is less fewer academic doc out there.. unless there is huge difference(less pay) c/w private practice.. Why you think the survey still underestimate?

 

[path or no path]

It is strange to me. About 2% of medical students plan to go into general internal medicine yet there is a huge need (unlike many subspecialties) with a good stable income and really no politics compared to many of the subspecialties. I, for one, think it should be more like 1% and that we really need to push internal medicine residents into the very happy and lucrative subspecialties so that we can keep this good thing going (partially kidding, but only partially).

with all due respect, I would not consider 180-200 K a good income. It's what CRNAs make and half of what anesthesiologists make. I find puzzling and disheartening that internists settle making a fraction of what their colleagues make.

 

[DIce3]

with all due respect, I would not consider 180-200 K a good income. It's what CRNAs make and half of what anesthesiologists make. I find puzzling and disheartening that internists settle making a fraction of what their colleagues make.

OK

I recommend you choose a better paying specialty.

 

[bronx43]

with all due respect, I would not consider 180-200 K a good income. It's what CRNAs make and half of what anesthesiologists make. I find puzzling and disheartening that internists settle making a fraction of what their colleagues make.

Anesthesia would be a great option if they didn't completely open themselves up to CRNA encroachment. And they have no one else to blame but their older colleagues. That was the ultimate kicker for me when I was deciding... The job market will completely tank on them in the upcoming years as surgical volume won't keep up with their 1000 yearly grads and the hoards of CRNAs coming out.

 

[WiseGuy1]

There is quite a large percentage below 100,000. Are these part time positions? Or are sub-100K jobs relatively common?

 

[infarct]

There is quite a large percentage below 100,000. Are these part time positions? Or are sub-100K jobs relatively common?

likely part time. if you're making <100,000 as a full time physician...you got swindled

 

[DoctwoB]

It's interesting just how much expectations and perception come into play with regard to job/income satisfaction.

If you look at the medscape report, 52% of pediatricians feel that they are fairly compensated, while 39% of orthopods feel that they are fairly compensated.

 

[bronx43]

It's interesting just how much expectations and perception come into play with regard to job/income satisfaction.

If you look at the medscape report, 52% of pediatricians feel that they are fairly compensated, while 39% of orthopods feel that they are fairly compensated.

That's partially because 52% of pediatricians are women and work 30 hours a week, while 39% of orthopods are pulling 90 hour weeks.

 

[DoctwoB]

That's partially because 52% of pediatricians are women and work 30 hours a week, while 39% of orthopods are pulling 90 hour weeks.

No doubt that on average orthopods work longer hours, but even hour for hour I'm sure orthopods make much more.

 

[VentdependenT]

likely part time. if you're making <100,000 as a full time physician...you got swindled

Unless you are a pediatrician

 

[VentdependenT]

To make money you need to do procedures or see assloads of patients. regardless you have to be creative to get your income up to commensurate levels compared to the pure amount of your youth you devoted to becoming a physician.

For instance, pulm has suppliments to income by reading PFT's, CPETS, sleep studies (if grandfathered in otherwise need sleep fellowship). These things are easy to do and not time consuming. Bronchs and ICU procedures can help suppliment as well.

Churnin and burnin through 30-40 pts a day in clinic is not sustainable for me. I couldnt handle it.

 

[Socrates25]

Unless you are a pediatrician

????? Peds dont make as much as IM but nobody makes below 100k unless they are part time

 

[VentdependenT]

How much does an academic pediatrician make? I dunno but its well known that they are undercompensated.

Our ID attendings make 80k. That is NOT part time. It exists.

 

[jdh71]

Maybe it's hard not to focus on the raw numbers, but I think the REAL commentary is that even in the more lucrative specialties, across the physicians surveyed, about half+/- of the people were satisfied with their jobs and about the same would pick medicine again.

Though I ask myself, what the hell else would I do?

 

[goprisko]

Via a private source, FDIC bank examiners make $160,000 / yr. Requires a BS & CPA.
No malpractice problems. 40 hour work week. Paid travel. 20 yr retirement.
No annual competency exam. No CERs. No life and death decision making.

Would seem to me, the solution to pay for MDs is direct primary care, pushing out the insurance companies entirely.

INDY

 

[Socrates25]

Via a private source, FDIC bank examiners make $160,000 / yr. Requires a BS & CPA.
No malpractice problems. 40 hour work week. Paid travel. 20 yr retirement.
No annual competency exam. No CERs. No life and death decision making.

Would seem to me, the solution to pay for MDs is direct primary care, pushing out the insurance companies entirely.

INDY

I highly doubt you can just walk into that job straight out of your BS/CPA degree. I know a couple of people who do that and they couldnt get that position until they had at least 10 years experience in the financial sector.