88305 TC cut 52%

[AZpath]

It would be better for pathologists and patients if things unfolded as such. Problem is the corporate labs got way too big- they're not going away without a huge fight. If you're a corporate lab MBA where are you gonna look to make up for the sudden big hit to TC revenue?

Boot your least productive pathologist and make the rest pick up slack. What's a few extra hours at the sweat shop compared to unemployment?

---

Members don't see this ad.

 

[2121115]

If one payor arbitrarily sets the reimbursement, and all others follow suit, this is effectively a single payor system. Only difference being insurance companies being allowed to operate in parallel and make money.

Oh, and the other difference being they pay pathologists more than Medicare too.

 

[Gut Shot]

Look at it this way. The global on the 88305 has been cut 33%. 88305 is by far the most common anatomic CPT code. Should private insurers enforce this cut too (which they will most certainly try) It is safe to say that 15-20% of pathology revenue has disappeared overnight. There is no way that is a good thing for anybody. There are just as many mouths to feed but a lot less food now.

If my collection rate goes up to 95% by January 1, 2014 (the day when everyone is supposed to have insurance) I am anticipating this will be at least partially mitigated for my hospital-based practice. Who the hell knows, I might even come out ahead.

 

[medfield12]

If my collection rate goes up to 95% by January 1, 2014 (the day when everyone is supposed to have insurance) I am anticipating this will be at least partially mitigated for my hospital-based practice. Who the hell knows, I might even come out ahead.[/QUOTE
Many employers are converting full time jobs into multiple part time jobs since obamacare does not apply to part time workers. We may end up with more uninsured not less. Google darden restaurants obamacare for instance.

 

[Gut Shot]

Many employers are converting full time jobs into multiple part time jobs since obamacare does not apply to part time workers. We may end up with more uninsured not less. Google darden restaurants obamacare for instance.

Darden is trying to skirt additional costs for itself, but even if successful all of its employees will still be required to purchase insurance through an exchange. If they are part time I have no doubt they will qualify for subsidies.

 

[LADoc00]

I think its safe to say now: We arent all making it out of this alive.

There will be a big shake up in outpatient pathology as a result of this, specifically in derm, gi and gu. Many will fall but out of the ashes, some will rise stronger than ever before.

Just dont be one of the podlab lackeys that falls..

 

[WEBB PINKERTON]

I think its safe to say now: We arent all making it out of this alive.

There will be a big shake up in outpatient pathology as a result of this, specifically in derm, gi and gu. Many will fall but out of the ashes, some will rise stronger than ever before.

Just dont be one of the podlab lackeys that falls..

Only the large operations will rise. They pay only a fraction of what others pay for supplies/equipment due to their scale. It is just a glancing blow for them. Lay off some staff and make the remaning histotechs cut an extra 10 blocks an hour and they will be fine. They probably wont even have to raise their client pricing. The rest of us are ******.

I wonder if BU Pathology will be saying "everyone got a job" everytime a discussion of the job market comes up in the next few years.

 

[lipomas]

I fail to see how this is the end of the world.

This is a big hit for labs, but why is lab corp stock at nearly a 1 year high? Quest also did not fall. It has come down in the past few months but is higher than it was in early to mid october. The cuts were anticipated to be 20-30% and instead were 52%. So shouldn't labcorp or quest drop? It did not. Healthcare stocks in general are essentially unchanged, and labs are a big part of healthcare company revenues. HCA is up. Tenet is up. Lifepoint is up. Vanguard is a bit down but not extreme. I fail to see how, if this is such a disaster, that it would not cause a major fall in any of these stocks.

The TC was clearly overvalued. This is like proton therapy or radiology reimbursements, things that have been cut recently. Cardiology stuff too. This is far from the end of the world.

I am curious however how labs like Bostwick and Caris and Aurora see something like this, given that their business is even more heavily dependent on the 88305. It's not a "glancing blow" for them, it would seem. It is more of a glancing blow for larger hospital-based labs, I would think.

So I understand why people are stressed about this but why so much?

I am also very curious about who that "stakeholder" is that said it should be $18. Very irrational stance.

The major problem I have with this is that a cut of this magnitude should NOT be done so rapidly. If you are going to be as drastic as a 52% cut you need to spread it out over a few years, 10% per year or something. Gradual adjustment would have been better.

 

[2121115]

Here is a link explaining a little bit more about the TC cut, with a helpful chart. Also, it is interesting to note the comments made about industry, particularly "In recent years, there has been open public discussion in the industry about how the 88305 TC can be used as a revenue generator". Basically, labs were making mad profit off of the TC because it was so overvalued.


http://www.cap.org/apps/cap.portal?_nfpb=true&cntvwrPtlt_actionOverride=%2Fportlets%2FcontentViewer%2Fshow&_windowLabel=cntvwrPtlt&cntvwrPtlt{actionForm.contentReference}=statline%2Fspecial_report_cms_specialty_providers.html&_state=maximized&_pageLabel=cntvwr

 

[WEBB PINKERTON]

I fail to see how this is the end of the world.

This is a big hit for labs, but why is lab corp stock at nearly a 1 year high? Quest also did not fall. It has come down in the past few months but is higher than it was in early to mid october. The cuts were anticipated to be 20-30% and instead were 52%. So shouldn't labcorp or quest drop? It did not. Healthcare stocks in general are essentially unchanged, and labs are a big part of healthcare company revenues. HCA is up. Tenet is up. Lifepoint is up. Vanguard is a bit down but not extreme. I fail to see how, if this is such a disaster, that it would not cause a major fall in any of these stocks.

The TC was clearly overvalued. This is like proton therapy or radiology reimbursements, things that have been cut recently. Cardiology stuff too. This is far from the end of the world.

I am curious however how labs like Bostwick and Caris and Aurora see something like this, given that their business is even more heavily dependent on the 88305. It's not a "glancing blow" for them, it would seem. It is more of a glancing blow for larger hospital-based labs, I would think.

So I understand why people are stressed about this but why so much?

I am also very curious about who that "stakeholder" is that said it should be $18. Very irrational stance.

The major problem I have with this is that a cut of this magnitude should NOT be done so rapidly. If you are going to be as drastic as a 52% cut you need to spread it out over a few years, 10% per year or something. Gradual adjustment would have been better.

I hope you are joking about this not being a disaster. ALL of us rely on 88305. And you do realize this is just the beginning? Other high volume pathology codes are up next for 2014. This time next year everyone will be talking about those cuts.

That stakeholder needs to be revealed. I have a feeling it was someone at a national lab that has lost a lot of business to in-office labs. It was a desperate attempt to kill in-office labs off, hoping to be one of the labs "to rise from the ashes." With 88305 cut in half, they will try to recoup the lost revenue with "lab-developed tests" that they try to seduce physicians with.

 

[mario2010]

O.K guys, let me share with you my group's recent experience. We already got a call today from a local derm group with a TC only lab, they are planning to shut it down in next 6 months and they told us that they prefer us over labcorp as we are readily available on phone to discuss cases.

We did some calculations in our group, we will still be able to make good margin since now we will be getting more medicare patients for global billing which pays a bit more than private insurance in our area. Our group collectively feels confident that we will have more business in next 12 months.

 

[yaah]

Interesting point about the lab company and healthcare stocks.

One might be surprised at how many pathologists have been advocating cutting the TC for years. Perhaps 52% is a bit extreme but there are many who think it will help their (i.e. private group) business to have the TC cut.

 

[2121115]

Interesting point about the lab company and healthcare stocks.

One might be surprised at how many pathologists have been advocating cutting the TC for years. Perhaps 52% is a bit extreme but there are many who think it will help their (i.e. private group) business to have the TC cut.

Yep I know several pathologists who have been in favor of cutting the TC for some time. Including some high up in the CAP.

 

[Enkidu]

O.K guys, let me share with you my group's recent experience. We already got a call today from a local derm group with a TC only lab, they are planning to shut it down in next 6 months and they told us that they prefer us over labcorp as we are readily available on phone to discuss cases.

We did some calculations in our group, we will still be able to make good margin since now we will be getting more medicare patients for global billing which pays a bit more than private insurance in our area. Our group collectively feels confident that we will have more business in next 12 months.

Haha - one day after the TC is cut and there is already improvement in the private pathology market. It would be nice to get more posts like this in the other alarmist threads as well, just to keep things from getting too monotonous.

 

[WEBB PINKERTON]

I'd sure love to hear the reasoning of these "high up" pathologists in CAP that were in favor of this cut. It would be nice to hear an alternative view because I havent been able to come up with any positives. Do they think client billing is gonna get killed off? Do they think all the in-office labs will throw in the towel?

 

[pathstudent]

Interesting point about the lab company and healthcare stocks.

One might be surprised at how many pathologists have been advocating cutting the TC for years. Perhaps 52% is a bit extreme but there are many who think it will help their (i.e. private group) business to have the TC cut.

Well those many people are *****s.

What the payment is so nominal that no one else well take the work and that's supposed to be good? That's like saying the food is so bad, no one else well eat it, so now we will get more food for us to eat.

I imagine I know just as many pathologists as you, and I have never met one that advocated cutting anything. I have heard some say pathologists for themselves in this condrum by griping that the tc was too low years ago causing cms to slash pc and tack the amount on tc.

 

[WEBB PINKERTON]

Well those many people are *****s.

What the payment is so nominal that no one else well take the work and that's supposed to be good? That's like saying the food is so bad, no one else well eat it, so now we will get more food for us to eat.

I imagine I know just as many pathologists as you, and I have never met one that advocated cutting anything. I have heard some say pathologists for themselves in this condrum by griping that the tc was too low years ago causing cms to slash pc and tack the amount on tc.

Yea, I guess they want pathology to reimburse so bad that no one will try to take our work. Since the pathologist surplus isn't being addressed, my money says a fair number of in-office labs will survive since they can just slash the pay of the techs/pathologist.

Stock prices tell us nothing. It's not like all the companies rely on biopsies for their revenue. They are diversified. And after the smoke clears, labcorp and quest stand to be the winners in this due to their scale and all the labs that go under.

 

[gbwillner]

Well those many people are *****s.

What the payment is so nominal that no one else well take the work and that's supposed to be good? That's like saying the food is so bad, no one else well eat it, so now we will get more food for us to eat.

I imagine I know just as many pathologists as you, and I have never met one that advocated cutting anything. I have heard some say pathologists for themselves in this condrum by griping that the tc was too low years ago causing cms to slash pc and tack the amount on tc.

Except something HAD to be cut. How much worse would have been if it was the PC? about 1000x, I would think.

This is really a case of eating the bar. We are getting underpaid for 88307 and 88309, but no one complained because we killing it on 88305. Well, now that's gone. Maybe we can regain some margin by reclassifying some of the codes that are non-Bx smaller specimens as 88307's??? Molecular testing will definitely add to our coffers (provided we run the labs) now that there are accepted billing codes.

 

[path24]

Pathology "leaders" want to cut our own pay. Says a lot about our leaders....ya go into pathology it has great leadership and a great future.

The "leaders" also take about an upcoming shortage for decades. I wouldn't believe a word a "leader" said.

Stay away from pathology....we are so pathetic we push to cut our own pay. (aka we are a comodity/joke service...begging for our own work back)

 

[2121115]

Pathology "leaders" want to cut our own pay. Says a lot about our leaders....ya go into pathology it has great leadership and a great future.

The "leaders" also take about an upcoming shortage for decades. I wouldn't believe a word a "leader" said.

Stay away from pathology....we are so pathetic we push to cut our own pay. (aka we are a comodity/joke service...begging for our own work back)

I don't think you understand. Something had to be cut. There was no option to not cut something. This was the least worst option.

 

[path24]

I don't think you understand. Something had to be cut. There was no option to not cut something. This was the least worst option.

Yes, I agree that is the better option if its a must situation. I was thinking along the lines of this being pathology's great idea to get rid of in office labs.

If there wasn't such a massive oversupply of pathologists in office labs wouldn't exist. Pathologists would be able to turn down the work. We could say may lab....my TC and my PC. We don't need the work...we are already way to busy.

We beg and fight for work....so we are willing to give up our TC and even some of our PC. This is what a major oversupply gets you. Stay away people.

 

[sssamsss]

Follow the money in this new transparent world.
Too much profit means commercial opportunists will swoop in and take the good stuff. Take away the extra profit and the moochers must go elsewhere.
Pathologists who wish to do pathology might benefit from the decreased rates because they will be able to do the work without someone being able to profit while paying them to do the work.
On the other hand, large organizations will have lower costs per specimen, with even better quality, increasing the size their slide mills processing the bread and butter routine pathology that constitutes the bulk of most of our workload. So, yes, we b screwed. Once fee for service is gone, maybe we can use our brains rather than just our pattern recognition skills. Wish I knew how I could do thinking work and be paid for it!

 

[2121115]

We have already learned that we will be getting an account back due to an in office lab shutting down. The specimens may just be coming back to the hospital!

 

[Rbrav]

Finally I figured it out, here :
http://www.cms.gov/Medicare/Medicar...ral-Regulation-Notices-Items/CMS-1590-FC.html
if you look at the CY 2013 PFS Addenda [ZIP, 1MB] and search for 88305 you can see that they changed RVUs for "Non-Facility PE RVUs2"
88305 TC from 1.98 to 0.98 and
88305 26 from 0.29 to 0.32

Thanks for finding this. If that's it, though, then 1.98 to 0.98 is a 51% cut, 0.29 to 0.32 is a 10% raise, and overall 2.27 to 1.30 is a 43% cut. Hmm.

 

[Rbrav]

We have already learned that we will be getting an account back due to an in office lab shutting down. The specimens may just be coming back to the hospital!

I agree this is a good thing, but I'm concerned about the pathologist that was working for that in-office lab. If that was his only job, then now he's looking for one. I hope the job market doesn't get even more comical than what it's made out to be here.

 

[Tiki]

I agree this is a good thing, but I'm concerned about the pathologist that was working for that in-office lab. If that was his only job, then now he's looking for one. I hope the job market doesn't get even more comical than what it's made out to be here.

Deleted because things have changed and not for the better..

 

[KeratinPearls]

I'm currently looking for a job and honestly, the market is way better than what I expected from reading SDN. I was terrified I wouldn't find a job after reading this website for the last 8 years, but I already have one offer and interest from two additional private practice groups in the area I desired (northeast).

Maybe this will affect the job market, or maybe it will make it better, but it still won't be as bad as some folks on here would like everyone to believe.

That is what everyone has been saying. There are some seriously cynical/crazy people here. You start believing what ppl are saying. Some ppl also seem to be talking out of their *sses as well.

Thanks for the post.

 

[KeratinPearls]

We have already learned that we will be getting an account back due to an in office lab shutting down. The specimens may just be coming back to the hospital!

Good to hear that. I wonder if large reference labs will pursue these specimens now? Isn't your competition for specimens now large reference labs?

 

[WEBB PINKERTON]

Good to hear that. I wonder if large reference labs will pursue these specimens now? Isn't your competition for specimens now large reference labs?

Of course thats the main competition. If the state still allows client billing, the offices will just look for lowest client pricing. Obviously the sweatshops have a huge advantage with pricing. Just because the in-office lab is closing, doesnt mean the local path lab is gonna see any increase in specimens.

 

[yaah]

I agree this is a good thing, but I'm concerned about the pathologist that was working for that in-office lab. If that was his only job, then now he's looking for one. I hope the job market doesn't get even more comical than what it's made out to be here.

If the in office lab is small enough to be significantly threatened by the TC cut, the pathologist is likely not full time anyway, and the typical arrangement is a contract with a local group, often the one who would have the business anyway.

 

[Ruination]

I'm currently looking for a job and honestly, the market is way better than what I expected from reading SDN. I was terrified I wouldn't find a job after reading this website for the last 8 years, but I already have one offer and interest from two additional private practice groups in the area I desired (northeast).

Maybe this will affect the job market, or maybe it will make it better, but it still won't be as bad as some folks on here would like everyone to believe.

I'm having the same experience as you-- albeit in a different geographical region. 4-5 good private practice opportunities thus far (no decisions yet). Its not as great as some specialties, but not as bad as it has been made out here.

 

[LADoc00]

Per CAP the TC component WILL eventually be driven down to $18 for 88305.

Its really only a matter of time now.

listening to webinar now, apparently a guy named Dr. Tucker sitting on the Pathology seat on the RUC stands between us and total destruction, send him your prayers and thoughts please.

 

[Path2009]

Tucker can't advocate for anything - all he does is vote. Jonathan Myles is the one who advocates, and if you are listening to the webinar, you probably know how effective he is.

 

[LADoc00]

Tucker can't advocate for anything - all he does is vote. Jonathan Myles is the one who advocates, and if you are listening to the webinar, you probably know how effective he is.

Yup, Myles is coming across as the "We should all surrender immediately to Stalin and accept relocation to the camps" type of advocate...we are screwed basically.

 

[Path2009]

From what I hear, he is a good pathologist and a good guy - well respected. But I just don't buy that this was "unavoidable". I mean, a cut - yes - but when you look at all of the cuts across the board, pathology got thumped significantly harder than others. We need an advocate from Chicago - who knows the Chicago way.

 

[LADoc00]

From what I hear, he is a good pathologist and a good guy - well respected. But I just don't buy that this was "unavoidable". I mean, a cut - yes - but when you look at all of the cuts across the board, pathology got thumped significantly harder than others. We need an advocate from Chicago - who knows the Chicago way.

No we need an "advocate" who is an ex-Navy SEAL sniper. This has become an 'Expendables' type of Operation now.

Chuck Norris may not even be enough...

 

[2121115]

Myles is a good guy and does a very good job with the RUC.

It isn't lack of leadership, but lack of leverage, that plagues pathology in these situations. All of the other physician specialty organizations (American College of Surgeons, etc) are able to band together over common interests to advance their agendas (i.e. you scratch my back and I'll scratch yours). Pathology doesn't have as many options, not to mention most of the other specialty society representatives are well aware of how lucrative the TC was and had long thought it was ripe for a cut. It isn't like you can just go in with guns blazing and demand respect and all of the other RUC voters all of the sudden vote to give you more money and keep less for themselves. This is an uphill battle for pathology.

On the bright side, now we have some leverage in that we can play the "you just cut our codes recently" card when re-valuation comes around again. Not that it is much consolation at this point, and not that it will 100% prevent it from happening again.

But this is just the beginning. When bundling of payments hits hard in the near future due to Obamacare, pathologists will be scrambling to become hospital employees as fast as they can so they won't have to duke it out with local surgeons over who gets paid for a biopsy.

My advice to young graduating pathologists - do NOT take out debt to finance your education and do NOT buy an expensive house (or other expensive item) when you become an attending. I also would think twice about committing to private school for your kids. The world you are going to live in isn't the same as the partners in the groups you are joining.

 

[LADoc00]

I will add the last post: Do NOT marry someone who has a mountain of educational debt and very little chance of real earning potential, i.e. most of "educated" America.

 

[Silent Cool]

I will add the last post: Do NOT marry someone who has a mountain of educational debt and very little chance of real earning potential, i.e. most of "educated" America.

lol, so true, man, so true.

 

[2121115]

I will add the last post: Do NOT marry someone who has a mountain of educational debt and very little chance of real earning potential, i.e. most of "educated" America.

True dat.

Full disclosure!

 

[pathstudent]

Best post ever in history of SDN.

Totally agree with everything.

If you thought that as a private practice pathologist/physician, it would be normal to own a McMansion in the suburbs, or in a toney urban enclave, send kids to private school, and take the kids to Europe for a vacation, forget about it, because normal doesn't live here anymore.

Yes all specialties have challenges, but Path is in a particularly weak position as we don't steer patients to hospitals. So we are of no real value to the hospital. We get screwed by the specialists cherry picking our specimens. We get screwed by the governement and insurers (something all doctors put up with) and we got no play with hospital administrators. When subspecialty surgeons get hired by the hospital, they can negotiate good salaries (my ortho friend said the contract he was offered paid him more than he was able to make in private practice as the costs of running his office were so high). We got nothing(met a DC based pathologist who said the new COO/CEO came to her group and said they wanted to employ the pathologists and offered less than half of their lucrative private practice salary. When the said it was too little, they were told to take a hike and another group was brought in).

My advice too is to live well below your means because your means are like to come down.

Myles is a good guy and does a very good job with the RUC.

It isn't lack of leadership, but lack of leverage, that plagues pathology in these situations. All of the other physician specialty organizations (American College of Surgeons, etc) are able to band together over common interests to advance their agendas (i.e. you scratch my back and I'll scratch yours). Pathology doesn't have as many options, not to mention most of the other specialty society representatives are well aware of how lucrative the TC was and had long thought it was ripe for a cut. It isn't like you can just go in with guns blazing and demand respect and all of the other RUC voters all of the sudden vote to give you more money and keep less for themselves. This is an uphill battle for pathology.

On the bright side, now we have some leverage in that we can play the "you just cut our codes recently" card when re-valuation comes around again. Not that it is much consolation at this point, and not that it will 100% prevent it from happening again.

But this is just the beginning. When bundling of payments hits hard in the near future due to Obamacare, pathologists will be scrambling to become hospital employees as fast as they can so they won't have to duke it out with local surgeons over who gets paid for a biopsy.

My advice to young graduating pathologists - do NOT take out debt to finance your education and do NOT buy an expensive house (or other expensive item) when you become an attending. I also would think twice about committing to private school for your kids. The world you are going to live in isn't the same as the partners in the groups you are joining.

 

[Path2009]

I disagree with several points here. We actually hold great value for the hospital, we just fail to articulate our value. We tend to be insular and fail to engage with other physicians.

 

[pathstudent]

I disagree with several points here. We actually hold great value for the hospital, we just fail to articulate our value. We tend to be insular and fail to engage with other physicians.

Of course we are essential, but we don't bring patients to the table. At best we can control costs with limited success. Trust me. Even if you were beloved by the adminsitrators and said to them, we want out of our contract and instead we are going to work at Hospital X. They would say, "we will miss you guys" and then they would find some other group to take your contract within a second. If you were in a big ortho group and said, we are thinking about taking our business to Hospital X and being exclusively employed by them, the administrators would start totally freaking out and attempt to match or better the offer. Each busy orthopedic surgeon is worth 4-5 million to a hospital just in terms of revenue for imaging and hospital stays.

 

[Path2009]

Of course they would. There are plenty of pathologists out there. We train too many of them.

My point is that pathology is a profit center, even if we don't physically bring in the patients, and there is much that we can do to make the hospital run much more smoothly. With a new CEO/COO, I can see how that happened to your friend. But if you participate on important committees and constantly reach out to clinicians and administration, you will not find yourself in this position often. This is something we can control.

The same is true of this CAP and its interaction with the RUC in this scenario. We are a weak organization with little clout and this is not acceptable to me. And we have more control than we give ourselves credit for in this regard. Organizations for other specialties (radiologists, surgeons, etc.) would not take a cut like this lying down. But we do. After all, it was unavoidable.

 

[Substance]

Of course we are essential, but we don't bring patients to the table. At best we can control costs with limited success. Trust me. Even if you were beloved by the adminsitrators and said to them, we want out of our contract and instead we are going to work at Hospital X. They would say, "we will miss you guys" and then they would find some other group to take your contract within a second. If you were in a big ortho group and said, we are thinking about taking our business to Hospital X and being exclusively employed by them, the administrators would start totally freaking out and attempt to match or better the offer. Each busy orthopedic surgeon is worth 4-5 million to a hospital just in terms of revenue for imaging and hospital stays.

I find this interesting because I once saw a report on a physician's pay relative to the income they bring in, and surgeons did not bring in significantly more money than internists and family doctors to account for the differences in income. Is there something I'm not taking into account?

Furthermore, I believe pathology needs to do something about its image, which currently is crap. Your field needs to totally increase the standards of practice in your field as well, cut the residency programs by 75% or something, have an oral component to your final board exam, make USMLE cutoffs at least 240, and only accept IMGs with Nobel Prizes. You'll get respect if you do that. Right now you get none. Not a drop. Radiologists have a similar role to pathologists yet are doing a lot better, and much of it has to do with the caliber of applicant. Plus, do they bring in money to a hospital, even if their role is similar to yours? If so, how do they do it and you guys not? Are they just inherently better?

You guys also need to start seeing patients. All the pathologists I know are so averse to patient contact, and that is just going to murder your field. From the perspective of everyone else, you guys are a lab test. That's what's killing you.

 

[yaah]

I find this interesting because I once saw a report on a physician's pay relative to the income they bring in, and surgeons did not bring in significantly more money than internists and family doctors to account for the differences in income. Is there something I'm not taking into account?

"Bringing in money" is not the important part - it's "bringing in patients." If a surgeon attracts a patient to the hospital they can potentially also get labwork, imaging, therapy, rehab, etc, in addition to the surgery. Like the surgery robot - to my knowledge hospitals lose money on the surgery robot, every surgery is a cost center. But the patient gets a lot of other stuff too, plus their inpatient stay is shorter, so the hospital will take the trade.

I don't know who is saying pathologists are not important to hospitals. There is a lot of strange rhetoric on here. Good pathologists are very important to hospitals, and the good ones typically recognize this. Depending on how the health care law is enforced and modified, pathologists will become even more important to the hospital's bottom line, particularly pathologists who are good at helping to coordinate care and reduce testing. And labs are very important to the hospital. Well run labs with outreach services can do very well for hospitals.

Who says "radiologists are doing a lot better."? Define "better." Radiology's role is rather similar to pathology - people don't typically come to the hospital because of the radiology department, although it can be something the hospital can talk about flatteringly. If the hospital owns the imaging eqipment they will make money, just like if the hospital owns the lab they will make money off of it. I'm not sure you really have much idea about how healthcare works. And what's the deal with the attitude about pathology? At most hospitals I know of, the pathologists and the field in general are greatly respected, just like most of the other fields. I'm not sure where your attitude comes from. It is very easy, of course, to make yourself dispensable and your field seem irrelevant by leaving decisions and control to other specialties or administrators. That does happen in many places.

 

[Enkidu]

You guys also need to start seeing patients. All the pathologists I know are so averse to patient contact, and that is just going to murder your field. From the perspective of everyone else, you guys are a lab test. That's what's killing you.

What would be the point? To discuss the pathology report?

 

[pathstudent]

"Bringing in money" is not the important part - it's "bringing in patients." If a surgeon attracts a patient to the hospital they can potentially also get labwork, imaging, therapy, rehab, etc, in addition to the surgery. Like the surgery robot - to my knowledge hospitals lose money on the surgery robot, every surgery is a cost center. But the patient gets a lot of other stuff too, plus their inpatient stay is shorter, so the hospital will take the trade.

I don't know who is saying pathologists are not important to hospitals. There is a lot of strange rhetoric on here. Good pathologists are very important to hospitals, and the good ones typically recognize this. Depending on how the health care law is enforced and modified, pathologists will become even more important to the hospital's bottom line, particularly pathologists who are good at helping to coordinate care and reduce testing. And labs are very important to the hospital. Well run labs with outreach services can do very well for hospitals.

Who says "radiologists are doing a lot better."? Define "better." Radiology's role is rather similar to pathology - people don't typically come to the hospital because of the radiology department, although it can be something the hospital can talk about flatteringly. If the hospital owns the imaging eqipment they will make money, just like if the hospital owns the lab they will make money off of it. I'm not sure you really have much idea about how healthcare works. And what's the deal with the attitude about pathology? At most hospitals I know of, the pathologists and the field in general are greatly respected, just like most of the other fields. I'm not sure where your attitude comes from. It is very easy, of course, to make yourself dispensable and your field seem irrelevant by leaving decisions and control to other specialties or administrators. That does happen in many places.

Imaging is much more of a money producer than lab work. Plus they do all the crazy interventional stuff. And yes patients do come to the hospital to have radiology (image guided biopsies etc...)

 

[Unty]

"Bringing in money" is not the important part - it's "bringing in patients." If a surgeon attracts a patient to the hospital they can potentially also get labwork, imaging, therapy, rehab, etc, in addition to the surgery. Like the surgery robot - to my knowledge hospitals lose money on the surgery robot, every surgery is a cost center. But the patient gets a lot of other stuff too, plus their inpatient stay is shorter, so the hospital will take the trade.

I don't know who is saying pathologists are not important to hospitals. There is a lot of strange rhetoric on here. Good pathologists are very important to hospitals, and the good ones typically recognize this. Depending on how the health care law is enforced and modified, pathologists will become even more important to the hospital's bottom line, particularly pathologists who are good at helping to coordinate care and reduce testing. And labs are very important to the hospital. Well run labs with outreach services can do very well for hospitals.

Who says "radiologists are doing a lot better."? Define "better." Radiology's role is rather similar to pathology - people don't typically come to the hospital because of the radiology department, although it can be something the hospital can talk about flatteringly. If the hospital owns the imaging eqipment they will make money, just like if the hospital owns the lab they will make money off of it. I'm not sure you really have much idea about how healthcare works. And what's the deal with the attitude about pathology? At most hospitals I know of, the pathologists and the field in general are greatly respected, just like most of the other fields. I'm not sure where your attitude comes from. It is very easy, of course, to make yourself dispensable and your field seem irrelevant by leaving decisions and control to other specialties or administrators. That does happen in many places.

Substance doesnt know what he is talking about. He is just going into different forums slamming their profession. Just like how he slams family medicine. When you can diagnose a hernia sac, we'll talk.

 

[yaah]

Imaging is much more of a money producer than lab work. Plus they do all the crazy interventional stuff. And yes patients do come to the hospital to have radiology (image guided biopsies etc...)

Well yeah but patient's come into the hospital to get labwork done too. That's not the point. They don't typically choose the hospital because of the imaging or the lab, that is my point.