Cardiology Job market

[bronx43]

Is cardiology saturated? You'd think with all the old people and fat people there would be an endless demand.

That's what every specialty says. Obviously this isn't true across the board and across all geographic locations. Saturation is local.

---

Members don't see this ad.

 

[nlax30]

Yea I think probably too broad a question with so many variables to say yes or no. All depends on local area/market and which specific field. I only did some cursory searching though it seemed like the general cardio and interventional markets were fairly good and in demand.

 

[bronx43]

Yea I think probably too broad a question with so many variables to say yes or no. All depends on local area/market and which specific field. I only did some cursory searching though it seemed like the general cardio and interventional markets were fairly good and in demand.

How did your cursory searching lead you to this conclusion?

 

[psychMDhopefully]

How did your cursory searching lead you to this conclusion?

Yeah I thought Interventional had a really tight market right now, and I see various posting for cards jobs starting at 350s-380k, the pay gap seem to be narrowing between specialist and hospitalist, 250-270 seems to be reasonable for hospitalist nowadays. Looking at the Doximity job map, I was surprised the average nationwide is around 400k for cards, and there are so few jobs.

 

[nlax30]

How did your cursory searching lead you to this conclusion?

Just ancedotal looking in one state for General/Non-interventional jobs it seemed like most major urban/suburban areas were looking for either a General Cards guy and/or Interventionalist. EP was much more limited in what I found advertised at last. For General Cards positions around here it seemed like 300-350k was a rough average, at least for those that advertised it.

 

[CCM-MD]

Its easy throw around numbers and feel good about it but an important thing thats frequently not advertised/missed is how much one is working in a particular job to earn the stated $. For cardiology it often easily reaches 50-60 hours a week on average, and for that amount of work the 300-350k doesn't sound so good anymore. Those going into cardiology mainly for the money, beware. After accounting for the opportunity cost of the extra years of training the income differential in comparison to other fields may not be that great.

What I got from a couple of my friends who recently signed jobs: tight market in large cities overall and expect to do a good amount of general as an interventional guy as cath volume per cardiologist is lower than it used to be in many areas. Beware of partnership track jobs in which you may never become a partner, as cardiology groups continue to be bought out by health systems.

 

[epicandprivate]

Bump

Applying for gen cardiology this year, struggled with the decision and considered going into pulm/crit for a while. I'm not afraid to work but the one thing that worries me is job market

Can any of the recent graduating fellows comment on the job market experience?

 

[nlax30]

Unfortunately this forum has been pretty dead so you may not get much response. I delayed the real world by 2 years but initially was looking for general cards jobs. For general cardiology, at least in the southeast, there seemed to be a good number of positions advertised, very little on salary though. I was trying to stay in my particular local area (a more suburban market) and was about to sign with my home group I trained with. My co-fellow took a general job in the Northeast big-city area and the market seemed tight from what I heard from him as he applied to numerous places and of course took a salary hit compared to more rural positions.

 

[infarct]

Bump

Applying for gen cardiology this year, struggled with the decision and considered going into pulm/crit for a while. I'm not afraid to work but the one thing that worries me is job market

Can any of the recent graduating fellows comment on the job market experience?

In my fellowship, of the people graduating and pursuing general cardiology, they all had many options. They all got signed in medium to large sized Southeastern cities. I will omit the exact locations to respect their privacy. One for 400+K with a 2-year guarantee. Another for 370K with a 2-year guarantee the last for 400K with one year guarantee with an option for production vs. salary for year two. More senior members of those groups make significantly more. The interventional graduates all signed contracts in the 390-450K range. As a general cardiologist, you need to be well trained in transthoracic echo, stress echocariography, trasnesophageal echo, and Nuclear cardiology. Diagonastic cath and peripheral ultrasound is plus minus for a general guy/gal. Interventionalist should maintain their general skills as they will likely be asked to do these things in practice. Generally, interventionalist must have either peripheral or structural skills to land a competitive job. The gap between salaries (for non-invasive and interventional) has shrunk, but most practices have mechanisms to compensate the interventionalist for STEMI call (i.e taking less or no general call or getting paid slightly more or vacation etc). The market for general in the southeast, gulf and Texas is wide open. Mountain west and West coast are okay but I'm less familiar. DC area has jobs but expects to get paid less (to start) than the numbers quoted above. How much less depends on your negotiation skills and what you bring to the table. North east (philly/ny/nj/boston) same applies. It is tighter for interventional and one has to be more flexible about location. EP is by far the tightest, and I'm not familiar with the details on that market as I don't have friends in the field that I'm close enough to ask. I hope this helps. If you don't like working hard, cardiology is not a good field to consider because pretty much all cardiologists work hard for their money. Hope this helps. The people throwing out arbitrary numbers from websites, but who aren't actually in the field are less reliable sources of information FYI.

 

[bronx43]

If you don't like working hard, cardiology is not a good field to consider because pretty much all cardiologists work hard for their money. Hope this helps. The people throwing out arbitrary numbers from websites, but who aren't actually in the field are less reliable sources of information FYI.

Define working hard. How hard is it to generate 10k+ RVUs? In terms of hours spent and call schedules, etc?

 

[Instatewaiter]

I was geographically limited to a specific city and had no issues. I think this is true especially for General Cardiology or heart failure. For the last few years it has been harder to find solid jobs in EP or interventional but they are out there.

In my experience with my co-fellows non-invasive/general cards jobs have a tighter cluster of pay than something like interventional since there are many more variables (like call frequency, need to start a structural program etc) with interventional.


For General cards or imaging ~350-425 is reasonable. Academics may start in the 2s
For heart failure academic -200-350 depending on program. Private practice/non-academic 350-450
Interventional- 400-700 (all depends on location, call schedule)

 

[Spt30]

I was geographically limited to a specific city and had no issues. I think this is true especially for General Cardiology or heart failure. For the last few years it has been harder to find solid jobs in EP or interventional but they are out there.

In my experience with my co-fellows non-invasive/general cards jobs have a tighter cluster of pay than something like interventional since there are many more variables (like call frequency, need to start a structural program etc) with interventional.


For General cards or imaging ~350-425 is reasonable. Academics may start in the 2s
For heart failure academic -200-350 depending on program. Private practice/non-academic 350-450
Interventional- 400-700 (all depends on location, call schedule)

I'm not a cardiologist but work for a large health care system on the west coast. Starting pay in our system is based on MGMA values (which I personally think is not fair). The established full time guys are usually making 75-90% of MGMA, which I believe is in the 700-800k range for cardiology.

I always tell new residents to not get too caught up with starting salaries but look at the entire package and see what the established docs are making. Obviously that gives you a better picture of long term compensation.

 

[epicandprivate]

It's refreshing to hear that there are still a decent job markey and nice offers for general cardiology. I hope this continues to be the case in 4 years when I'm out. I still think over training of cardiology fellows is a problem. We shouldn't be opening new programs IMO.

 

[bronx43]

I'm not a cardiologist but work for a large health care system on the west coast. Starting pay in our system is based on MGMA values (which I personally think is not fair). The established full time guys are usually making 75-90% of MGMA, which I believe is in the 700-800k range for cardiology.

I always tell new residents to not get too caught up with starting salaries but look at the entire package and see what the established docs are making. Obviously that gives you a better picture of long term compensation.

Established guys in ANY field are usually making bank. This isn't unique to cardiology or GI or plastic surgery, etc. The problem isn't how much those guys make but instead how much new grads will make AND will the money still be there once you're their age.

 

[Spt30]

Established guys in ANY field are usually making bank. This isn't unique to cardiology or GI or plastic surgery, etc. The problem isn't how much those guys make but instead how much new grads will make AND will the money still be there once you're their age.

No one knows what the future will hold. And if anyone says otherwise, they're lying.

I'm still in my 30's but from my experience cardiologist and other procedure based specialties were always paid better than more cognitive fields.

 

[bronx43]

No one knows what the future will hold. And if anyone says otherwise, they're lying.

I'm still in my 30's but from my experience cardiologist and other procedure based specialties were always paid better than more cognitive fields.

Lol, huh? Did I say that the money WON'T be there? I'm posing a question to whether or not the money will be there... so in essence you're just repeating what I said.

And what is the purpose of your second sentence? Are you trying to draw the conclusion that the past predicts the future? If so, then does that not refute the fact that no one knows what the future will hold?

Furthermore, procedures have nothing to do with what specialties get paid. Sure, the procedure heavy specialties in general make more because CMS assigns an artificially high monetary value to these services. However, there are as many non-procedural fields that make a ton. Derm is one of the highest earners yet have minimal procedures. Radiologists don't lift a finger yet bank. Heme onc technically do no procedures yet have very high earning potential.

 

[Spt30]

Lol, huh? Did I say that the money WON'T be there? I'm posing a question to whether or not the money will be there... so in essence you're just repeating what I said.

And what is the purpose of your second sentence? Are you trying to draw the conclusion that the past predicts the future? If so, then does that not refute the fact that no one knows what the future will hold?

Furthermore, procedures have nothing to do with what specialties get paid. Sure, the procedure heavy specialties in general make more because CMS assigns an artificially high monetary value to these services. However, there are as many non-procedural fields that make a ton. Derm is one of the highest earners yet have minimal procedures. Radiologists don't lift a finger yet bank. Heme onc technically do no procedures yet have very high earning potential.

My second sentence has no purpose but to state my (limited) experience.

Derm has minimal procedures? Botox, skin biopsies, etc.

Anyways, future job prospects are important but you also have to do what you love. I always say if you're a competent, personable physician, you will never be unemployed.

 

[bronx43]

My second sentence has no purpose but to state my (limited) experience.

Derm has minimal procedures? Botox, skin biopsies, etc.

Anyways, future job prospects are important but you also have to do what you love. I always say if you're a competent, personable physician, you will never be unemployed.

Everyone can do botox (I know internists who do them), and not all dermatologists do botox. What is "etc?"

I agree that a physician will not be unemployed in this US model, but I don't think anyone really claimed that. A saturated market can hurt you in more ways than making one unemployed.

 

[Spt30]

Everyone can do botox (I know internists who do them), and not all dermatologists do botox. What is "etc?"

I agree that a physician will not be unemployed in this US model, but I don't think anyone really claimed that. A saturated market can hurt you in more ways than making one unemployed.

Common Dermatological Procedures - Health Encyclopedia - University of Rochester Medical Center

Yes anyone can do these procedures, but a dermatologist does tons of these in a typical week. Your original point was that derm does minimal procedures. I disagree. I have multiple dermatology friends who would also disagree that they do minimal procedures.

CMS does have specific $ per wrvu per specialty, but in general procedural based specialties make a lot more money. I don't think that's a point of contention in medicine. For example, An orthopedic surgeon can start off at 600-700k, while a psychiatrist typically starts at 1/3 to 1/2 of that.

And that last part of my comment was just a statement. I wasn't trying to argue about anything. I wasn't saying anyone was claiming that. It was my own opinion.

I'm going to change my kids diaper now.

 

[bronx43]

Common Dermatological Procedures - Health Encyclopedia - University of Rochester Medical Center

Yes anyone can do these procedures, but a dermatologist does tons of these in a typical week. Your original point was that derm does minimal procedures. I disagree. I have multiple dermatology friends who would also disagree that they do minimal procedures.

CMS does have specific $ per wrvu per specialty, but in general procedural based specialties make a lot more money. I don't think that's a point of contention in medicine. For example, An orthopedic surgeon can start off at 600-700k, while a psychiatrist typically starts at 1/3 to 1/2 of that.

And that last part of my comment was just a statement. I wasn't trying to argue about anything. I wasn't saying anyone was claiming that. It was my own opinion.

I'm going to change my kids diaper now.

Those are mostly out of pocket cosmetic procedures. Unless you're doing a high volume cosmetic practice which are hard to build up given the entrenched competition, most dermatologists do not do a ton of those procedures. The average dermatologist generate revenue on office visits. The reason why dermatologists make the kind of money they do has nothing to do with procedural reimbursement but everything to do with the nature of the field. They can easily knock out 50-70 patients daily due to the fact that they can simply walk into a room and walk out in 2 minutes. Most don't even bill any higher than a level 3, yet they can still generate tons of revenue by sheer volume. Therefore, if you have a reasonable payor mix and see 60 patients a day while billing a level 2-3 for all of them, then you look to generate 5-6k a day. Take away 50-60% overhead, and you're left making 500-600k a year.

 

[Successor12]

Those are mostly out of pocket cosmetic procedures. Unless you're doing a high volume cosmetic practice which are hard to build up given the entrenched competition, most dermatologists do not do a ton of those procedures. The average dermatologist generate revenue on office visits. The reason why dermatologists make the kind of money they do has nothing to do with procedural reimbursement but everything to do with the nature of the field. They can easily knock out 50-70 patients daily due to the fact that they can simply walk into a room and walk out in 2 minutes. Most don't even bill any higher than a level 3, yet they can still generate tons of revenue by sheer volume. Therefore, if you have a reasonable payor mix and see 60 patients a day while billing a level 2-3 for all of them, then you look to generate 5-6k a day. Take away 50-60% overhead, and you're left making 500-600k a year.

Can someone in primary care or rheumatology or endo make these numbers just based on the volume of patients they see?

 

[gutonc]

Can someone in primary care or rheumatology or endo make these numbers just based on the volume of patients they see?

Sure. Anybody who can see 60 99213s a day (and justify their billing) can do so. The trick is to be able to build such a practice and then not go insane seeing that many patients.

 

[mxg67]

It's refreshing to hear that there are still a decent job markey and nice offers for general cardiology. I hope this continues to be the case in 4 years when I'm out. I still think over training of cardiology fellows is a problem. We shouldn't be opening new programs IMO.

Agreed. This is certainly something that can be debated, and not just from the job market perspective, but from a quality control perspective as well.

 

[IMDoc607]

---

 

[IMDoc607]

Everyone can do botox (I know internists who do them), and not all dermatologists do botox. What is "etc?"

I agree that a physician will not be unemployed in this US model, but I don't think anyone really claimed that. A saturated market can hurt you in more ways than making one unemployed.

Are you still going on about this? Established guys in any specialty are not making bank. Cardiology is lucrative and will still be lucrative. That being said, you will work for it. Christ this is going on 6 years with you.

 

[bronx43]

Are you still going on about this? Established guys in any specialty are not making bank. Cardiology is lucrative and will still be lucrative. That being said, you will work for it. Christ this is going on 6 years with you.

I didn't say that EVERY established physician in every field is making tons of money. But usually they are making much higher than what is advertised in surveys. But, the point I was trying to make is that just because established guys in a certain situation is making X amount of money, it doesn't mean that's what you will be making. I know a handful of older guys in my field that are making 7 figs, but I understand that the chance of me doing the same is very small as the landscape of the market will likely change drastically by the time I'm into my mid-career. Not only will payment structures change, but a high number of new providers may flood into an area to supplant the referral patterns that used to be dominated by the established guys.

What's your argument really? That you're somehow completely insulated from market forces? That supply and demand doesn't dictate your ability to negotiate or find equally attractive employment in the same number of locations? And are you also going to make the argument that structure of American health care is not going to change? This isn't even about cardiology vs non-cardiology. This is about everything and everyone - from radiologists to anesthesiologists to rheumatologists to allergists to radiation oncologists to the mid-levels.

 

[limatolad]

You can go to Medicare Unmasked: Behind the Numbers to see how much Medicare money is your attending being paid by Medicare. I saw a non-invasive cardiologist who owns his own nuclear medicine facility making up to 1 million dollars/year (40% coming from imaging tests). Having said that, he was listed as being in the 98th percentile of Medicare reimbursement. Non-research oriented interventional cardiologists in academic institutions are receiving reimbursement/year ~ 400K. You also need to know how to submit your claims. In the same institution, there is variability in the amount of money each cardiologist is making a year per patient. Getting reimbursement ~ 400 dollars/patient/year put you in the ~80th percentile.

 

[JACO22]

Any noninterventionalists looking for a position in an urban area in the Pacific Northwest?

 

[PostBacc2016]

-

 

[bronx43]

About to start M1 and thinking about specialities that would fit my business inclination. What is a typical payer mix for cardiology? Can one safely assume that a cardiologist billing 1 million to medicare makes 1 million annually? Maybe assuming 50% total revenue coming from medicare and a 50% profit margin.

If so, seems pretty difficult to pull off. Would mean that only 2% of cardiologists are making more than a million.

Collecting $2 mil annually would be incredibly difficult in any field. At the end of the day, you're a physician and you're limited in terms of volume by hours in a day, how many you can see in a day, and providing good care. Unlike other businesses where you can significantly increase your revenue by scaling up, the practice of medicine is not amenable to such business models.

If you're truly looking to make a lot of money, PRACTICING is a dead end. You have to start your own business and hire employees. I mean, this is the quintessential idea of capitalism - extracting surplus value (hence profit) from capital goods and others' labor.

 

[nlax30]

About to start M1 and thinking about specialities that would fit my business inclination. What is a typical payer mix for cardiology? Can one safely assume that a cardiologist billing 1 million to medicare makes 1 million annually? Maybe assuming 50% total revenue coming from medicare and a 50% profit margin.

If so, seems pretty difficult to pull off. Would mean that only 2% of cardiologists are making more than a million.

Have you thought about getting an MBA?

Honestly at this point I wouldn't focus on "payer mix" and billing specifics to guide a decision as to which field of medicine you may want to go into. All that is going to depend on a lot of factors depending on the local market and practice structure for anyone to give you any sort of straight answer. In GENERAL though.... for cardiology we typically have older patients and a high medicare population. So take that for what it's worth.

No matter what field you go into you'll make a comfortable living as a physician, if you make smart financial decisions. You won't make stupid "I can do whatever I want" money but in some states you could certainly technically be in the top 1% income-wise.

If you truly want to pursue your business interests then look into other type of medical models such as concierge practice/direct primary care and/or ultimately running or starting your own practice group or even some unique health tech company.

 

[bronx43]

Have you thought about getting an MBA?

Lol, save your money on an MBA... it isn't exactly a degree that teaches you how to do anything. Sure, if you're gung ho about trying to break into the finance or management consulting business, then I guess spending $150k on a MBA would be worth it since there's no other real avenue. Nowadays, an MBA wouldn't even get you a fast track into the C suite as a health care administrator.

If you're looking to make the most amount of money, then you gotta do your own business. The downside is risk obviously. Honestly, I think the days of relying on reimbursements in a FFS model to make you rich is approaching extinction. MACRA anyone?

 

[Crazy Diamond]

Collecting $2 mil annually would be incredibly difficult in any field. At the end of the day, you're a physician and you're limited in terms of volume by hours in a day, how many you can see in a day, and providing good care. Unlike other businesses where you can significantly increase your revenue by scaling up, the practice of medicine is not amenable to such business models.

If you're truly looking to make a lot of money, PRACTICING is a dead end. You have to start your own business and hire employees. I mean, this is the quintessential idea of capitalism - extracting surplus value (hence profit) from capital goods and others' labor.

Seriously you want to bill Medicare 2 million and you still an M1? Have seen what happen to Martin Shakerli

 

[arcvmd]

About to start M1 and thinking about specialities that would fit my business inclination. What is a typical payer mix for cardiology? Can one safely assume that a cardiologist billing 1 million to medicare makes 1 million annually? Maybe assuming 50% total revenue coming from medicare and a 50% profit margin.

If so, seems pretty difficult to pull off. Would mean that only 2% of cardiologists are making more than a million.

There is no typical payer mix. That's dictated by the practice climate - whether you work in academics, non-profits, hybrid community program, or private practice. Also depends on your area - Florida has triple the ACA exchange enrollees as Mississippi, and Medicaid rates vary significantly by state.

As for making a million dollars annually - forget about it (unless, in some rare cases, you want to work 2+ hours from any major city, like Midland TX or North Dakota). So many private groups are being acquired by hospitals. It is becoming far more rare for a generalist to make $500K+, or an interventionalist to make $800K+. Sure, there are a few EP docs who make over $1M, but to even be thinking about that as a realistic goal is just silly.

The long and the short of it is that owning your own practice in a specialty field is becoming far less common, and that trend isn't going to change any time soon.

 

[Limvostov]

I think that once you have your PSLF finished (if that comes to pass) a physician owned group is the way to go. Then you have people with like-minded interests working together to keep salary competitive, and make sure to keep administration costs low. Hospitals have no interest in keeping administration costs low. They see physicians as overpaid and work to skim their salary and hire more admins with that money. I would only work as a locum for a hospital if I have my way once I get my 120 months of payments of PSLF.

Just my thoughts...

 

[IMDoc607]

Lol, save your money on an MBA... it isn't exactly a degree that teaches you how to do anything. Sure, if you're gung ho about trying to break into the finance or management consulting business, then I guess spending $150k on a MBA would be worth it since there's no other real avenue. Nowadays, an MBA wouldn't even get you a fast track into the C suite as a health care administrator.

If you're looking to make the most amount of money, then you gotta do your own business. The downside is risk obviously. Honestly, I think the days of relying on reimbursements in a FFS model to make you rich is approaching extinction. MACRA anyone?

So I have been interviewing and looking for jobs....finally after 3 fellowships. My lowest starting is $300K with potential for 500k in a grossly underpaying institution. The other offers are 600K plus with some over 750K. All is well with my jobs Bronx. Thanks for all your horrible advice that I didn’t listen to. One institution is offering me starting at 600K with a raise every year for 4 years.

 

[epicandprivate]

Congrats on the great offers! What fellowships if you dont mind me asking.

So I have been interviewing and looking for jobs....finally after 3 fellowships. My lowest starting is $300K with potential for 500k in a grossly underpaying institution. The other offers are 600K plus with some over 750K. All is well with my jobs Bronx. Thanks for all your horrible advice that I didn’t listen to. One institution is offering me starting at 600K with a raise every year for 4 years.

 

[IMDoc607]

Congrats on the great offers! What fellowships if you dont mind me asking.

I rather not since what I did was somewhat unique and can easily be Identified. Don’t listen to Bronx. The good jobs are out there.

 

[bronx43]

So I have been interviewing and looking for jobs....finally after 3 fellowships. My lowest starting is $300K with potential for 500k in a grossly underpaying institution. The other offers are 600K plus with some over 750K. All is well with my jobs Bronx. Thanks for all your horrible advice that I didn’t listen to. One institution is offering me starting at 600K with a raise every year for 4 years.

3 fellowships? Wtf have you been doing?

Since I have no idea what you are actually doing, I can't really respond to anything you are talking about... but, the post you just quoted is kind of a non-sequitur unless you're arguing that your field isn't affected by MACRA or other potential reimbursement changes.

 

[IMDoc607]

3 fellowships? Wtf have you been doing?

Since I have no idea what you are actually doing, I can't really respond to anything you are talking about... but, the post you just quoted is kind of a non-sequitur unless you're arguing that your field isn't affected by MACRA or other potential reimbursement changes.

I did a general cardiology fellowship plus 2 additional fellowships. They have gotten many offers in nice areas. My point in for years you’re talking about how bad cardiology has become. IMO, it’s a great field that I have niche myself in and it’s working out from many standpoints, including salary.

 

[bronx43]

I did a general cardiology fellowship plus 2 additional fellowships. They have gotten many offers in nice areas. My point in for years you’re talking about how bad cardiology has become. IMO, it’s a great field that I have niche myself in and it’s working out from many standpoints, including salary.

From what I've heard from fellows at my institution and looking at what they signed for and where they signed, I was underwhelmed given the amount of work that was expected of them. If you're happy with your offers after 3 fellowships, then I'm happy for you. My position has always been that I think cardiology is overtraining. I honestly don't think specialties should just kick the dust under the rug in terms of overtraining... because sooner or later the market forces will catch up to you. In my specialty, they are trying to increase training spots due to a "workforce study" that had questionable validity. I, as well as many others, are against large increases in fellowship positions, as this move only helps leadership in academia in terms of free labor and being able to low ball graduates who are unable to find substantially better positions in the private sector.

 

[TraderDoc]

From what I've heard from fellows at my institution and looking at what they signed for and where they signed, I was underwhelmed given the amount of work that was expected of them. If you're happy with your offers after 3 fellowships, then I'm happy for you. My position has always been that I think cardiology is overtraining. I honestly don't think specialties should just kick the dust under the rug in terms of overtraining... because sooner or later the market forces will catch up to you. In my specialty, they are trying to increase training spots due to a "workforce study" that had questionable validity. I, as well as many others, are against large increases in fellowship positions, as this move only helps leadership in academia in terms of free labor and being able to low ball graduates who are unable to find substantially better positions in the private sector.

Definitely agree that over-training is a problem within Cardiology, just frustrating that it is out of our hands at the moment.

 

[Mochajonz]

So you guys are telling me all this training and the job market will stink when I'm done?

 

[IMDoc607]

From what I've heard from fellows at my institution and looking at what they signed for and where they signed, I was underwhelmed given the amount of work that was expected of them. If you're happy with your offers after 3 fellowships, then I'm happy for you. My position has always been that I think cardiology is overtraining. I honestly don't think specialties should just kick the dust under the rug in terms of overtraining... because sooner or later the market forces will catch up to you. In my specialty, they are trying to increase training spots due to a "workforce study" that had questionable validity. I, as well as many others, are against large increases in fellowship positions, as this move only helps leadership in academia in terms of free labor and being able to low ball graduates who are unable to find substantially better positions in the private sector.

I actually agree with you on this. I could of trained 1 or 2 years less and been the same cardiologist I am today.

 

[Pinkyblack]

If you want to live in a major city or other attractive area, jobs will be scarce and your pay will be comparatively meager. I got a ~$200K offer in Seattle (which I declined), and I know a guy who got a ~$200K offer in southern California (which he literally laughed at). Otherwise: non-invasive is pretty strong, and people I know are still getting good offers (350-450K) in mid-sized cities. The interventional market is okay, but the pay differential isn't much (or is non-existent) and just doing coronaries isn't enough in most markets (i.e. add peripherals, structural, or something else to your skill set to make you an attractive candidate). EP is completely saturated and dismal.

I plan to return to seattle. I was wondering if 200k was the common offer rate or there were any better offers at all? Thank you

 

[JACO22]

I plan to return to seattle. I was wondering if 200k was the common offer rate or there were any better offers at all? Thank you

A lot of practices are looking to hire in the Seattle metro area(including my practice). Starting salaries should be in the 300-350K range.

 

[Pinkyblack]

Any noninterventionalists looking for a position in an urban area in the Pacific Northwest?

Where in seattle is this?

 

[IMDoc607]

From what I've heard from fellows at my institution and looking at what they signed for and where they signed, I was underwhelmed given the amount of work that was expected of them. If you're happy with your offers after 3 fellowships, then I'm happy for you. My position has always been that I think cardiology is overtraining. I honestly don't think specialties should just kick the dust under the rug in terms of overtraining... because sooner or later the market forces will catch up to you. In my specialty, they are trying to increase training spots due to a "workforce study" that had questionable validity. I, as well as many others, are against large increases in fellowship positions, as this move only helps leadership in academia in terms of free labor and being able to low ball graduates who are unable to find substantially better positions in the private sector.

Signing a contract.....starting $600K, directorship position and 12 weeks of vacation. My pay starts when I sign. 60 minutes outside of top 7 sized city in the nation.

 

[bronx43]

Signing a contract.....starting $600K, directorship position and 12 weeks of vacation. My pay starts when I sign. 60 minutes outside of top 7 sized city in the nation.

That's pretty good, dude. Congrats.

 

[nlax30]

Signing a contract.....starting $600K, directorship position and 12 weeks of vacation. My pay starts when I sign. 60 minutes outside of top 7 sized city in the nation.

General? Interventional?