P2P semi-retired radiation oncologists

[yesmaster]

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?

---

Members don't see this ad.

 

[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: