P2P semi-retired radiation oncologists

[yesmaster]

Advertisement - Members don't see this ad

I’ve noticed an increasing number of radiation oncologists from reputable institutions doing P2P, including decent academic programs and community practices. Typically they are older and might be retired, 55+. We are reasonable and hypofractionate for breast, prostate, skin, and do not have fancy expensive or unproven technologies, and still get denials regularly.

My question is why? I see the evicore UHC ads on LinkedIn and the pay is crap, 196-328k for purportedly full time job. Expensive divorce? Special needs children? An abiding love for private insurance admins and their clinical guidelines and loss ratios?

 

[randomname2018]

Why? Aged-out academics love providing unsolicited advice and the sound of their voice.

 

[communitydoc13]

pay is crap, 196-328k for purportedly full time job

For remote work...come on....this is excellent pay...ask the rest of the world.

Not great pay for a full time clinical radonc huffing 8-10 consults per week.

 

[Tigerstang]

Greed is a powerful force

 

[RickyScott]

I dont judge anyone. I know several reviewers who can’t find work locally. Blame the greedy chairs. If I was 55-60 and needed to work part time but did not have local options, would probably do the same.

 

[Mandelin Rain]

$328k is CRAZY money for sitting at home, reviewing charts and discussing cases on the phone.

I currently do that for $0 daily.

 

[seper]

I’ve noticed an increasing number of radiation oncologists from reputable institutions doing P2P, including decent academic programs and community practices. Typically they are older and might be retired, 55+. We are reasonable and hypofractionate for breast, prostate, skin, and do not have fancy expensive or unproven technologies, and still get denials regularly.

My question is why? I see the evicore UHC ads on LinkedIn and the pay is crap, 196-328k for purportedly full time job. Expensive divorce? Special needs children? An abiding love for private insurance admins and their clinical guidelines and loss ratios?

reputable? I don’t come across reviewers currently employed at truly major centers. just a few from third tier type of programs.

Also, if a case went for p2p that means it violated policy / Evicore guidelines in some way.

 

[ramsesthenice]

In any field as small as ours, let me count the ways. Any number of iterations involving deciding you are done with your current position but not wanting to move/start over or continue carrying a full clinical load. I’m guessing it’s the best available option for most rather than a true preference. But you do what you gotta do sometimes.

 

[Gfunk6]

I dont judge anyone. I know several reviewers who can’t find work locally. Blame the greedy chairs. If I was 55-60 and needed to work part time but did not have local options, would probably do the same.

I judge everyone and expect to be similarly judged

 

[SneakyBooger]

What is 'reputable' - quite a subjective word. The UNH shooter was from a 'reputable' Ivy League institution.

What are their names? Asking for a friend who keeps a list of these things... 😉

 

[Lamount]

Given our current system, I love a reasonable doc on the inside. I've had some great MDs on a p2p really go to bat for my patients (despite "guidelines").

 

[fiji128]

Probably the more reputable the institution the lower the pay generally speaking, which might explain some of it.

 

[Gfunk6]

While it is possible to be a "reasonable" doc with some insurance products, just keep in mind that most will simply give you a piece of paper and tell you to read "NO" off of it. They are in the business of denying care to make profit, not health care.

Me to UHC "P2P" - I would like to request IMRT for this stage IIIB NSCLC.

Semi-retired (and probably semi-senile) UHC doc: