Compensation ceiling

[medgator]

It absolutely would. Radiology is a volume business. Read a ton of studies and generate a ton of RVUs. Mostly done by groups contracted that collect professional fees, or employees. If RVUs go down, pro fees go down. Radiology is also more fungible in that reads can be done by outside or centralized companies.

Remember they are downstream of the referral chain. They don't bring in Imaging studies. They are a necessary factor to make the studies happen, much like anesthesia. So there is probably some minimum salary as hospitals would subsidize to ensure availability, but it could definitely go down.

Maybe not the best example. Gu and heme onc in some markets probably better ones

---

Members don't see this ad.

 

[CurbYourExpectations]

It absolutely would. Radiology is a volume business. Read a ton of studies and generate a ton of RVUs. Mostly done by groups contracted that collect professional fees, or employees. If RVUs go down, pro fees go down. Radiology is also more fungible in that reads can be done by outside or centralized companies.

Remember they are downstream of the referral chain. They don't bring in Imaging studies. They are a necessary factor to make the studies happen, much like anesthesia. So there is probably some minimum salary as hospitals would subsidize to ensure availability, but it could definitely go down.

Agreed completely. The most important thing is being needed.

People always talk about Radiology here like it would be better than RadOnc, but this doesn't even touch on how every company will be looking at how AI can make docs read faster/better, cutting down on the demand, driving down salaries eventually. They also have the whole fight against out of country docs doing all the reads for them, etc, which has some legal precedence, but those things change.

We are at least 20-30 years before surgeons have to worry about someone doing their surgery virtually from somewhere else. People should be surgeons if they don't want to worry as much about the future.

 

[medgator]

Agreed completely. The most important thing is being needed.

People always talk about Radiology here like it would be better than RadOnc, but this doesn't even touch on how every company will be looking at how AI can make docs read faster/better, cutting down on the demand, driving down salaries eventually. They also have the whole fight against out of country docs doing all the reads for them, etc, which has some legal precedence, but those things change.

We are at least 20-30 years before surgeons have to worry about someone doing their surgery virtually from somewhere else. People should be surgeons if they don't want to worry as much about the future.

Rads still in better shape than us, with or without AI, curb. They didn't up spots like we did and they have increasing demand, not less or no fractions

 

[CurbYourExpectations]

Maybe they are, they were in a bad spot a few years prior to us and then the boomers showed up. There are also still many doing 1-2 fellowships, but I believe it's gone down some. I don't think I've seen too many RadOnc fellowships at all recently, but haven't been looking.

I am under the impression that the job market currently is as good as it has been since probably early 2000s? What are your thoughts?
Not saying it will last by any means. But demand has increased some, of course whether that is enough for the supply increases, I don't know. If I was a betting man (which I am), I would bet it probably won't last, because most good things come to an end.

 

[Barcelona PSG]

The job market is still pretty decent, as anyone who has searched for jobs in the last two years can attest. The downside is that due to widespread expansion, a large number of jobs are academic satellite jobs, with a starting salary range from 275 to 400. Some well-established centers low-ball quite a bit, but most places offer a starting salary of 375- 400k with no room for negotiation.

My co-residents who went to private practice got a starting salary of 325-375k, but with a 3-4 year partnership track. So there is a slight oversupply, which allows both academic and private practice to offer lower salaries.

 

[medgator]

Maybe they are, they were in a bad spot a few years prior to us and then the boomers showed up. There are also still many doing 1-2 fellowships, but I believe it's gone down some. I don't think I've seen too many RadOnc fellowships at all recently, but haven't been looking.

I am under the impression that the job market currently is as good as it has been since probably early 2000s? What are your thoughts?
Not saying it will last by any means. But demand has increased some, of course whether that is enough for the supply increases, I don't know. If I was a betting man (which I am), I would bet it probably won't last, because most good things come to an end.

Rads fellowships are acgme accredited and necessary for certain jobs.

Rad onc fellowships aren't accredited and often aren't necessary if you come from an adequate training program

 

[CurbYourExpectations]

4 years is insanity

 

[BobbyHeenan]

It absolutely would. Radiology is a volume business. Read a ton of studies and generate a ton of RVUs. Mostly done by groups contracted that collect professional fees, or employees. If RVUs go down, pro fees go down. Radiology is also more fungible in that reads can be done by outside or centralized companies.

Remember they are downstream of the referral chain. They don't bring in Imaging studies. They are a necessary factor to make the studies happen, much like anesthesia. So there is probably some minimum salary as hospitals would subsidize to ensure availability, but it could definitely go down.

I agree.

And even if they did get 25% more per RVU....that process of correcting it upwards would move at a glacial pace. First CMS would cut, then private payers. There are lags in billing to receivables. It will take 1-2 years to see a big cut on the bottom line. Then it will take years of negotiations to "correct" the dip. In big hospital systems things move at a glacial pace and some contracts are locked in for a long period of time.

I agree largely that pro fees in general have become disconnected from salary due to supply/demand factors....but I think people are too dismissive of big pro fee cuts and how it will impact employed doctors. It does matter.

 

[drowsy12]

It absolutely would. Radiology is a volume business. Read a ton of studies and generate a ton of RVUs. Mostly done by groups contracted that collect professional fees, or employees. If RVUs go down, pro fees go down. Radiology is also more fungible in that reads can be done by outside or centralized companies.

Remember they are downstream of the referral chain. They don't bring in Imaging studies. They are a necessary factor to make the studies happen, much like anesthesia. So there is probably some minimum salary as hospitals would subsidize to ensure availability, but it could definitely go down.

I'm glad you post here.