Does pharmacy over saturation parallel what could potentially happen in medicine?

[656844]

A boom in pathology assistants is a negative for pathologists (except the few who gain to benefit from it). Why hire 5 doctors when you can hire 1-2 docs to oversee a team of assistants?

Of course, this back fires over time since eventually midlevels will begin to believe they're equal to that of a physician and believe that they don't need oversight.

You really have no idea how the pathology assistant profession affects pathology. Read my previous response and you'll get a better idea. The ratio is usually 3 pathologists to 1 PA. And if you think that midlevel PAs eventually think they're equal to that of a physician (pathologist), you're dead wrong. They usually don't need oversight to begin with since their job is very independent in the grossing room. They only need oversight (I call it guidance) when they're presented with a complex cancer case and need the pathologist's assistance to determine what sections to take, etc.

Unless you're a pathology resident, a PA, or an actual pathologist, I don't think anybody else can state with accuracy exactly what will come of the pathology profession in the future. It's all uncorroborated speculation. Heck, according to the 2013 ASCP pathology resident survey, 41% of the residents have no clue.

---

Members don't see this ad.

 

[656844]

And speaking of PAs as midlevel practitioners, there will eventually be a glut of PAs. I think there are a total of 9 Master's level PA programs (combined USA and Canada), with Drexel recently opening a satellite school in California, the first one on the whole West Coast. Most of the programs are on the East coast and 1 or 2 in the Midwest. (Drexel's PA program is staffed by Quinnipiac graduates, and Quinnipiac is the university really controlling PA education in this country.)

As for the PA glut, that can either be bad or good....good in the sense that there might be an increased workload in the pathology profession as a whole (meaning we'll need to hire more pathologists as well), or bad in that there will just be an oversupply. Most PA schools have around 12 to 20 people per class. Multiply that by 9 and you have up to 180 new PAs churning out every year. Since the ratio is 3 pathologists to 1 PA, that means we'll need 60 pathologists every year as well. Then again, you have to realize that those PAs often change careers, most likely moving into supervisory or lab management positions. Like anything in life, it's a toss-up as to what could happen in that career.

 

[Psai]

For someone who sounds like they know what they are talking about, you know surprisingly little about pathology. It's a dead end field at the moment and few people are hiring. It's to the point where there are people who are doing multiple fellowships because there are no jobs. Btw pathologists aren't hired based on how many pathology assistants there are. What an absurd argument.

More midlevels absolutely means fewer doctors. Right now we're in a turning point of medicine where actual quality is ceasing to matter. What matters is the perception of quality. That's why there's this bizarre obsession with useless quality measures that don't measure anything of substance, press ganey surveys that allow people to grade the quality of a physician's care based on how long their er wait was and how clean their room is and jcaho mandates where the hospital pays a bunch of idiots to do a meaningless survey and tell you to do stupid things that can actually negatively impact patient care. Why pay a doctor when you can get someone to play dress up with a clean white coat and their stethoscope securely placed around their neck, introducing themselves as dr np?

Also don't believe what surveys say. Word a question the right way and you can make the numbers say anything.

 

[aegistitan]

And speaking of PAs as midlevel practitioners, there will eventually be a glut of PAs. I think there are a total of 9 Master's level PA programs (combined USA and Canada), with Drexel recently opening a satellite school in California, the first one on the whole West Coast. Most of the programs are on the East coast and 1 or 2 in the Midwest. (Drexel's PA program is staffed by Quinnipiac graduates, and Quinnipiac is the university really controlling PA education in this country.)

As for the PA glut, that can either be bad or good....good in the sense that there might be an increased workload in the pathology profession as a whole (meaning we'll need to hire more pathologists as well), or bad in that there will just be an oversupply. Most PA schools have around 12 to 20 people per class. Multiply that by 9 and you have up to 180 new PAs churning out every year. Since the ratio is 3 pathologists to 1 PA, that means we'll need 60 pathologists every year as well. Then again, you have to realize that those PAs often change careers, most likely moving into supervisory or lab management positions. Like anything in life, it's a toss-up as to what could happen in that career.

I actually knew little to nothing about pathology assistants before your posts, thanks for enlightening me. I agree with Psai though, I find it hard to believe that pathology is as blooming a market as you make it out to be.

 

[656844]

I actually knew little to nothing about pathology assistants before your posts, thanks for enlightening me. I agree with Psai though, I find it hard to believe that pathology is as blooming a market as you make it out to be.

If it isn't right now, at this very moment, it eventually will be. I should be just fine 15 years from now. I'm not going to be going through medical school for nothing, I can tell you that right now. And if pathology doesn't exist as a profession in 2025, I'll be sure to make it one (even if I have to procure my own specimens). I'm willing to go anywhere in the world to do it, so that should increase my chances a thousand fold.

http://www.bumc.bu.edu/busm-pathology/home/chairmans-blog/

Read up on that well-respected blog. Check out the December 2012 post as well as July 2011.
I quote: "My specific agenda is to encourage the brightest and the best to enter the field of pathology. The worry is that the substantial negativity posted on the internet will discourage medical students from applying to pathology residency programs."

It's clear that the substantial negativity is coming from people on SDN. Why? I have no idea. It doesn't make sense how Psai (a medical student, mind you) can be so negative about a profession that he/she knows nothing about. Crazy, huh? And these kinds of people are actually becoming doctors??? You gotta be kidding me. "Word a question the right way and you can make the numbers say anything." Really? Is that how you approach patient lab results? I honestly don't think you belong in the medical profession. Sorry.