Since when did path get competitive??

This forum made possible through the generous support of SDN members, donors, and sponsors. Thank you.

Analyzethis

Membership Revoked
Removed
10+ Year Member
15+ Year Member
Joined
Sep 7, 2006
Messages
205
Reaction score
0
So I was looking at the NRMP stats graphs and Path is getting up there-I mean they had higher mean step 1 scores than gen surg and IM and a lot of other things. I mean it is nowhere near the top specialiies but I was under the impression path was in the ranks of FP, Psych, PMnR etc- when did this happen or why is this happening-do thy have good schedule or great money or what? Or are patients becoming so repulsive that all the fields with no patient contact are becoming desirable!
 
I noticed that and was trying to figure it out. I guess part of the reason may be that pathology is a major portion of the USMLE, and those who like it study hard for it and do well on Step 1. I've always thought of Path as more being in the ranks of things like gen surg and some good IM programs, though. I would put it in the "intermediate competitiveness" category from what I know (As a second year med student, which is really nothing).
 
I think that Path is idiosyncratic - the numbers for people doing it are good-to-great, and the pay (after residency) and lifestyle (during AND after residency) are similarly good-to-great, but it's not per se that "competitive" (as to applicants-to-spots). The specialty self-selects, and who self-selects tend to be smart and have a good work ethic.
 
maybe i'm being too cynical, but i think this is part of the greater trend of students choosing the lifestyle specialties. (i don't have any numbers for this, just a recent newspaper article that did have numbers, which i don't remember now) as a whole, i think we're getting more and more tired of putting up with all the administrative crap, malpractice issues, lowering reimbursement, AND not getting to see our families.

i think pathology offers a great opportunity to avoid many of these issues, and - at least until now - you didn't have to completely bust your a$$ to get into it.
 
as a whole, i think we're getting more and more tired of putting up with all the administrative crap, malpractice issues, lowering reimbursement, AND not getting to see our families.

i think pathology offers a great opportunity to avoid many of these issues, and - at least until now - you didn't have to completely bust your a$$ to get into it.

With the exception of getting home by 5 or 6 every night and sleeping in your own bed, pathologists deal with each of the issues that you mentioned, probably on par with the clinical specialties.
 
Well with that thought-I would think psych would be off the charts competitive. Honestly I have never met a psychiatrist that did not have an amazing lifestyle, residents that were not completely chill and rested with tons of free time and to top it off, unless you are wanting to do academia, you can set up a private practice that only takes cash-pay, never deal with insurance and rake in 200k plus easily. Sure its not tha 400k that rads or anesthesia or the 750k neurosurg makes but I would think that the lifestyle plus lack of insurance dealings and a SUPER easy residency would bring a few more people in but last I checked it was the 3rd least competitive field behind FP and PMnR. anyway it is intriguing-Like Derm-to me the only reason it is competive is lifestyle and money but ie psych or path-probably a better schedule than derm and maybe 100k less per year-but is 100 k diff really enough to make something taht competitive?

It boggles my mind why some fields are compt and some are not
 
Well with that thought-I would think psych would be off the charts competitive. Honestly I have never met a psychiatrist that did not have an amazing lifestyle, residents that were not completely chill and rested with tons of free time and to top it off, unless you are wanting to do academia, you can set up a private practice that only takes cash-pay, never deal with insurance and rake in 200k plus easily.

I know of at least three psychiatrists who "offed" themselves all because they could not take the constant daily offloading of other people's baggage onto them. With Path you are a Doctor's doctor (assisting them with their diagnosis and treatment). For me it is less personal ...the only time my patient has a face is during autopsy or procedures. My work environment is very pleasant and laid-back....no crazies, druggies, malingerers or the like..... not that I have anything against them.
 
Path is the daddy. we're after Radiology y'know 😉

residency is great so far...i wouldn't do anything else. i look at the poor IM and FP residents and feel so bad for them.....BAHAHAHA

it really is becoming more and more competitive. high scores, lots of AMGs, lots of PhDs, lots of AoA, it's all adding up y'know...it is the core of all medicine y'know and more and more people are realising this.
 
People are gonna laugh/scoff BUT in the 1980s the 'competitiveness' scale was considerably different.

*Back in 1981-1985 you essentially needed to be in the top 20%/AOA to get into gas, yet by 1999 less than 70 American medical grads nationwide entered the match for it, programs began closing simply due to lack of enough trainees.

Pathology was at one point very competitive, so much so that the spigot on the #/year was opened very wide....essentially too wide. At the same time (about 1983) the rules for clinical path billings changed disallowing professional part CPT codes for most lab tests. Labs which had all been owned by pathologists began to be bought up by hospitals and public corporations. At the same time average salaries went from 500,000+ (and that is in late 1970s dollars, easily 1million today) to less than 250K/year, the number of trainees doubled. Hence Pathology went into a tailspin for the better part of 20 years. The current upswing has to do primarily with one thing: the greater lifestyle considerations med students are making. This 'lifestyle' focus is due to another new phenom: the massive influx of women into medical school. As the number of women matches and then exceeds men in MD programs look for lifestyle fields like derm, path, rads, optho and the like increase in competitiveness dramatically. Also look for traditionally competitive fields like gsurg, neurosurg, cardiology fellowships, ortho etc to seriously take a nosedive.
 
People are gonna laugh/scoff BUT in the 1980s the 'competitiveness' scale was considerably different.

*Back in 1981-1985 you essentially needed to be in the top 20%/AOA to get into gas, yet by 1999 less than 70 American medical grads nationwide entered the match for it, programs began closing simply due to lack of enough trainees.

Pathology was at one point very competitive, so much so that the spigot on the #/year was opened very wide....essentially too wide. At the same time (about 1983) the rules for clinical path billings changed disallowing professional part CPT codes for most lab tests. Labs which had all been owned by pathologists began to be bought up by hospitals and public corporations. At the same time average salaries went from 500,000+ (and that is in late 1970s dollars, easily 1million today) to less than 250K/year, the number of trainees doubled. Hence Pathology went into a tailspin for the better part of 20 years. The current upswing has to do primarily with one thing: the greater lifestyle considerations med students are making. This 'lifestyle' focus is due to another new phenom: the massive influx of women into medical school. As the number of women matches and then exceeds men in MD programs look for lifestyle fields like derm, path, rads, optho and the like increase in competitiveness dramatically. Also look for traditionally competitive fields like gsurg, neurosurg, cardiology fellowships, ortho etc to seriously take a nosedive.


LA DOC,

Has the Elven Forest always been in SF, or did they just build it recently?😀

OK, that was obnoxious.
 
People are gonna laugh/scoff BUT in the 1980s the 'competitiveness' scale was considerably different.

*Back in 1981-1985 you essentially needed to be in the top 20%/AOA to get into gas, yet by 1999 less than 70 American medical grads nationwide entered the match for it, programs began closing simply due to lack of enough trainees.

Pathology was at one point very competitive, so much so that the spigot on the #/year was opened very wide....essentially too wide. At the same time (about 1983) the rules for clinical path billings changed disallowing professional part CPT codes for most lab tests. Labs which had all been owned by pathologists began to be bought up by hospitals and public corporations. At the same time average salaries went from 500,000+ (and that is in late 1970s dollars, easily 1million today) to less than 250K/year, the number of trainees doubled. Hence Pathology went into a tailspin for the better part of 20 years. The current upswing has to do primarily with one thing: the greater lifestyle considerations med students are making. This 'lifestyle' focus is due to another new phenom: the massive influx of women into medical school. As the number of women matches and then exceeds men in MD programs look for lifestyle fields like derm, path, rads, optho and the like increase in competitiveness dramatically. Also look for traditionally competitive fields like gsurg, neurosurg, cardiology fellowships, ortho etc to seriously take a nosedive.

you nailed it, bro.
 
Alternate theory: I notice alot of IMGs in Path programs at least around my institution. I have heard that it is not uncommon for an IMG to spend 1 year studying for step1 and that often they do extremely well. Path is then a specialty that is traditionally more friendly to foreign grads than many other fields.
 
Alternate theory: I notice alot of IMGs in Path programs at least around my institution. I have heard that it is not uncommon for an IMG to spend 1 year studying for step1 and that often they do extremely well. Path is then a specialty that is traditionally more friendly to foreign grads than many other fields.

you're thinking of about 10 years ago. these days, there are many high score AMGs entering Pathology and less and less IMGs.
 
Path is trending more towards AMGs; the number of IMGs have been holding steady at ~200 for the last few years per NRMP stats:
2002 = 49% AMG (398 spots with 198 AMG filling them) versus 2006 = 60% AMG (525 spots with 315 AMG filling them).

The high Step scores are due to everything perviously said (path-concentrated steps, self-selection, increased AMGs...etc.) Like AmoryB. I know IMGs who take a year off to get their 99 step 1 score. I also know IMGs who return from practicing in their country and sit at Kaplan for a year or two to get all of their exams out of the way before applying to the match because this makes them more marketable (ECFMG certified, high scores, step 3 completed).

This in turn can leave some US IMGs who want to apply to Path left out in the cold or applying somewhere else because many Path programs per their websites want IMGs to be ECFMG certifed prior to interview (or sometimes ranking), US IMGs don't get their certifcate until after they have their med school diploma.
 
As the number of women matches and then exceeds men in MD programs look for lifestyle fields like derm, path, rads, optho and the like increase in competitiveness dramatically. Also look for traditionally competitive fields like gsurg, neurosurg, cardiology fellowships, ortho etc to seriously take a nosedive.

I too think this'll happen. Also consider the 3rd year of med school. What are two of the most demanding clerkships? Gen surg and medicine. A month straight of 65 hour work weeks (as a student), q 4 call, and getting barked at by nasty attendings is enough to send any sane person away from these two specialties. It's also a downward snowball - as fewer students apply some programs will start to go unfilled, leaving the work intended for 24 interns to only 22 interns, just exacerbating the situation. I see similar problems for OB/GYN residency programs. There's always gonna be the gunners out there willing to kill themselves, but I agree that there seem to be a lot more med students desiring a balanced life, and things like rad, path, derm, optho, emergency medicine, and PMnR can offer that while still allowing you to make at least $150K/year - and if you can't live pretty darn well on that kind of income you need to re-examine where your money is going.
 
Well with that thought-I would think psych would be off the charts competitive. Honestly I have never met a psychiatrist that did not have an amazing lifestyle, residents that were not completely chill and rested with tons of free time and to top it off, unless you are wanting to do academia, you can set up a private practice that only takes cash-pay, never deal with insurance and rake in 200k plus easily. Sure its not tha 400k that rads or anesthesia or the 750k neurosurg makes but I would think that the lifestyle plus lack of insurance dealings and a SUPER easy residency would bring a few more people in but last I checked it was the 3rd least competitive field behind FP and PMnR. anyway it is intriguing-Like Derm-to me the only reason it is competive is lifestyle and money but ie psych or path-probably a better schedule than derm and maybe 100k less per year-but is 100 k diff really enough to make something taht competitive?

It boggles my mind why some fields are compt and some are not

That's what I have been thinking as well. I keep thinking there's a 'catch' to why these 'lifestyle' specialities are not as competitive as the obvious ones like derm/rad/etc.

People are gonna laugh/scoff BUT in the 1980s the 'competitiveness' scale was considerably different.

*Back in 1981-1985 you essentially needed to be in the top 20%/AOA to get into gas, yet by 1999 less than 70 American medical grads nationwide entered the match for it, programs began closing simply due to lack of enough trainees.

Pathology was at one point very competitive, so much so that the spigot on the #/year was opened very wide....essentially too wide. At the same time (about 1983) the rules for clinical path billings changed disallowing professional part CPT codes for most lab tests. Labs which had all been owned by pathologists began to be bought up by hospitals and public corporations. At the same time average salaries went from 500,000+ (and that is in late 1970s dollars, easily 1million today) to less than 250K/year, the number of trainees doubled. Hence Pathology went into a tailspin for the better part of 20 years. The current upswing has to do primarily with one thing: the greater lifestyle considerations med students are making. This 'lifestyle' focus is due to another new phenom: the massive influx of women into medical school. As the number of women matches and then exceeds men in MD programs look for lifestyle fields like derm, path, rads, optho and the like increase in competitiveness dramatically. Also look for traditionally competitive fields like gsurg, neurosurg, cardiology fellowships, ortho etc to seriously take a nosedive.

Interesting. I knew that back in the late 80s/early 90s, we had family friends who were doctors from China who all matched into pathology because it was relatively easy and required less language skills than other, patient-facing specialities. I didn't know that path was raking in a ton of money before that. I'm still interested in path even though it doesn't pay as well. I figure having a balanced life is a good enough reason for the pay cut.

I think the increase of women into the medical profession will see more focus on lifestyle specialities but but it won't be the only reason for it. Many guys I've talked to seems to think having a less intense speciality is important. It's not onlly because guys are more thoughtful about spending time with family nowadays but also because many seem to expect that their wives will work in some capacity and will not have a housewife catering to their needs like physicians of the past. Perhaps the fact that our generation was the first to see middle class women entering into the workforce fulltime is a reason for this shift in persception.

Also, I think plenty of girls who go into med school are gunners and far enough removed from the 'having kids' stage during med school to consider the more competitive residencies, so girls aren't all going to push for family friendly specialities.

I think the end result is a push for lifestyle residencies brought on by a blurring of the "traditional" gender division of roles rather than by only the gals.
 
Path cannot be done with a nice PDA and a merck manual.......*cough* IM, FP *cough*

it requires ACTUAL intelligence...and we get rewarded with lifestyle perks. BUT, and a big BUT.....we have a TON of reading to do, and our hours during surgical pathology are nowhere near as cush as you might believe....but overall our weekends are totally free and outside of surgical path, there is quite a bit of time to learn and get all the knowledge inside us....it's a GREAT field, so scientific and literally the CORE of medicine. The main reason it is not competitive is the lack of exposure to the field..if more people rotated through Pathology, it would be right up there with Radiology....No wonder so many Surgery residents and OB residents transfer into Path.

There is plenty of money to be made in Path, although it is disintegrating just like any other medical field.
 
Eh, the OP had it right, patients are repulsive.
 
I've also noticed that Path is lately the speciality of choice for many MudPhuds, who by virtue of their grotesquely over-developed crania 🙂D ) have a tendency to CRUSH Step I & II and then move on to a life happily pureeing mouse parts and separating out the molecules on fancy sheets of Jello...🙄

(Seriously, love you guys...if I could tolerate the tedium I'd be doing it too.)
 
The main reason it is not competitive is the lack of exposure to the field..if more people rotated through Pathology, it would be right up there with Radiology...

Maybe it's that 4-6 months in the second year of med school that turns people to it or against it...then again, 4 weeks as a student vs 4 to 6 months - what's the comparison?

I'll say it right now - there is NO WAY path would ever be "right up there with radiology". Ever. It's a self-selecting group.
 
Maybe it's that 4-6 months in the second year of med school that turns people to it or against it...then again, 4 weeks as a student vs 4 to 6 months - what's the comparison?

I'll say it right now - there is NO WAY path would ever be "right up there with radiology". Ever. It's a self-selecting group.

I had a very interesting conversation with a radiologist who had transferred over from EM. Claimed radiology was great blah blah blah....and I was thinking one thing: Yeah until medicare cuts and rising health expenditures force outsourcing to India and China. I give radiology another good 10 years, then the party is over.
 
I had a very interesting conversation with a radiologist who had transferred over from EM. Claimed radiology was great blah blah blah....and I was thinking one thing: Yeah until medicare cuts and rising health expenditures force outsourcing to India and China. I give radiology another good 10 years, then the party is over.

so what kind of clock is path working with? you gotta believe it'll get screwed by something, what do you think it will be? i'm thinking about path so your thoughts could be very helpful.
 
so what kind of clock is path working with? you gotta believe it'll get screwed by something, what do you think it will be? i'm thinking about path so your thoughts could be very helpful.

Radiology will be the first because frankly its a HUGE frickin target for reimbursement cuts. I will say now Rads income will be a mere FRACTION of what it is today 10-20 years down the road. Im talking Peds will look like Bill Gates-level by comparison. Med students will run screaming from rads residencies, even though now that seems absurd. Trust me, I witnessed such cycles in other fields.

Teleradiology is really entering full maturity and is pretty supplanting hard films everywhere. Once payors realize that they can outsource the professional component, its over. Already the medicare cuts will slash the outpatient tech component (TC) for rads to crap, forcing lots of stand alone MRI units to close their doors. And good rittance. They had it too good for too long, and quite frankly they made the mistake of GREED.

Path likewise will eventually face outsourcing BUT it has 2 very unique barriers unlike Rads. For one, almost all of CP is managerial. Although the loss of clinical path professional income was a bane, it might actually end up being a BOON when outsourcing starts to tap others. Being a business minded pathologist should win out over the radiologist in the long run because you can never outsource clinical labs while still having stat capabilities for emergency folks.

Then there is the technical hurdle that glass slides cannot be cost efficiently sent electronically, the amount of visual data per slide is literally MILLIONS of times more than a radiology image. Storage of such information alone is decades away from being a reality even with terabyte sized hard drives. Then there would have to be a business model for actually do this cost effectively. Instead of just having a pathologist, you would also have to hire a certified PA to gross the specimen and select the sections to view under the scope, a technician to load the slides onto a reader, QA/QC material as well as make the slides AND hire a manager for all these additional people instead of having an on site pathologist to do it....see you could TRY to outsource path but it will never be cost efficient, path is already super cheap to operate, there is no margin of fluff. Meanwhile, Rads is fluff fest.

In the end, Pathologists got screwed in the early 80s by loss of a huge margin of their professional fee schedules, but have essentially reinvented themselves as business managers....which has no more risk of outsourcing than investment bankers, stock brokers or any number of mid to upper level management might.
 
Radiology will be the first because frankly its a HUGE frickin target for reimbursement cuts. I will say now Rads income will be a mere FRACTION of what it is today 10-20 years down the road. Im talking Peds will look like Bill Gates-level by comparison. Med students will run screaming from rads residencies, even though now that seems absurd. Trust me, I witnessed such cycles in other fields.

Teleradiology is really entering full maturity and is pretty supplanting hard films everywhere. Once payors realize that they can outsource the professional component, its over. Already the medicare cuts will slash the outpatient tech component (TC) for rads to crap, forcing lots of stand alone MRI units to close their doors. And good rittance. They had it too good for too long, and quite frankly they made the mistake of GREED.

Path likewise will eventually face outsourcing BUT it has 2 very unique barriers unlike Rads. For one, almost all of CP is managerial. Although the loss of clinical path professional income was a bane, it might actually end up being a BOON when outsourcing starts to tap others. Being a business minded pathologist should win out over the radiologist in the long run because you can never outsource clinical labs while still having stat capabilities for emergency folks.

Then there is the technical hurdle that glass slides cannot be cost efficiently sent electronically, the amount of visual data per slide is literally MILLIONS of times more than a radiology image. Storage of such information alone is decades away from being a reality even with terabyte sized hard drives. Then there would have to be a business model for actually do this cost effectively. Instead of just having a pathologist, you would also have to hire a certified PA to gross the specimen and select the sections to view under the scope, a technician to load the slides onto a reader, QA/QC material as well as make the slides AND hire a manager for all these additional people instead of having an on site pathologist to do it....see you could TRY to outsource path but it will never be cost efficient, path is already super cheap to operate, there is no margin of fluff. Meanwhile, Rads is fluff fest.

In the end, Pathologists got screwed in the early 80s by loss of a huge margin of their professional fee schedules, but have essentially reinvented themselves as business managers....which has no more risk of outsourcing than investment bankers, stock brokers or any number of mid to upper level management might.


I think your signature is a sign of how you like to make outlandish predictions without any real knowledge. This post reeks of sour grapes to me. Although I agree that rads salaries will undoubtedly decreased in the next 10 years, I don't think outsourcing will be a factor. Decreasing reimbursements from medicare and insurance companies for both the professional and technical fees will be the reason for this decline.
 
Eh, the OP had it right, patients are repulsive.

You so do not deserve to be a doctor. I hope you learn to be compassionate.

My compassion level is high, especially when I am fishing around in some constipated patient's rectum for "the plug."
 
You so do not deserve to be a doctor. I hope you learn to be compassionate.

My compassion level is high, especially when I am fishing around in some constipated patient's rectum for "the plug."

Way to be nonjudgmental! 👍
 
I think your signature is a sign of how you like to make outlandish predictions without any real knowledge. This post reeks of sour grapes to me. Although I agree that rads salaries will undoubtedly decreased in the next 10 years, I don't think outsourcing will be a factor. Decreasing reimbursements from medicare and insurance companies for both the professional and technical fees will be the reason for this decline.

Don't know about outsourcing either. But right now imaging is the #1 target for medicare cuts, followed by interventional pain procedures.

Eval & Mangement codes are getting a boost for next year.
 
I swear, if you had told me six years ago that I would be fishing in some senile, obese woman's rectum for a chunk of stool (manual disimpaction) I would have run screaming from the medical profession. This is perhaps the nastiest, most disgusting procedure I can even contemplate and I shudder thinking about it. I think I'm going to refuse to ever do this again. Absolutley refuse and if the patient is constipated, oh well. We'll try a soap suds enema and if that doesn't work I guess the patient is going to be full of crap.

Nah. But you know what I'm talking about.

And no, you can't pass this on to the nurses. With power comes responsibility.
 
I had a very interesting conversation with a radiologist who had transferred over from EM. Claimed radiology was great blah blah blah....and I was thinking one thing: Yeah until medicare cuts and rising health expenditures force outsourcing to India and China. I give radiology another good 10 years, then the party is over.

The only real barrier is liability and US board certification. My mother in law went to the ED after an accident, had a CT scan, and then the films were sent to Australia. They had to be read the next morning by a US radiologist, but that step could easily be bypassed if the right groups start lobbying Washington. I think the safest place in Radiology is also the place that is least desireable. Tat is in interventional.
 
I think your signature is a sign of how you like to make outlandish predictions without any real knowledge. This post reeks of sour grapes to me. Although I agree that rads salaries will undoubtedly decreased in the next 10 years, I don't think outsourcing will be a factor. Decreasing reimbursements from medicare and insurance companies for both the professional and technical fees will be the reason for this decline.

"Outlandish predictions" that even the many in the field have acknowledged?

There is no sour grapes, Im not a player hater bro, but I see the winds of change SERIOUSLY blowing against rads. I wish you guys the best, but cant help but think guys like:
LOS ANGELES – Martin Luther King Jr./Drew Medical Center paid $1.3 million for the services of a radiologist who claimed he worked an average of 20 hours a day during a stretch last year, it was reported Tuesday.

Los Angeles County health officials said Monday they are reviewing Dr. Harold A. Tate's hospital contract.

are raising the ire of the other clinicans. I think path is in the same boat, with maybe a better exit strategy but overall it will be a very painful future.
 
Radiology will be the first because frankly its a HUGE frickin target for reimbursement cuts. I will say now Rads income will be a mere FRACTION of what it is today 10-20 years down the road. Im talking Peds will look like Bill Gates-level by comparison. Med students will run screaming from rads residencies, even though now that seems absurd. Trust me, I witnessed such cycles in other fields.

Teleradiology is really entering full maturity and is pretty supplanting hard films everywhere. Once payors realize that they can outsource the professional component, its over. Already the medicare cuts will slash the outpatient tech component (TC) for rads to crap, forcing lots of stand alone MRI units to close their doors. And good rittance. They had it too good for too long, and quite frankly they made the mistake of GREED.

Path likewise will eventually face outsourcing BUT it has 2 very unique barriers unlike Rads. For one, almost all of CP is managerial. Although the loss of clinical path professional income was a bane, it might actually end up being a BOON when outsourcing starts to tap others. Being a business minded pathologist should win out over the radiologist in the long run because you can never outsource clinical labs while still having stat capabilities for emergency folks.

Then there is the technical hurdle that glass slides cannot be cost efficiently sent electronically, the amount of visual data per slide is literally MILLIONS of times more than a radiology image. Storage of such information alone is decades away from being a reality even with terabyte sized hard drives. Then there would have to be a business model for actually do this cost effectively. Instead of just having a pathologist, you would also have to hire a certified PA to gross the specimen and select the sections to view under the scope, a technician to load the slides onto a reader, QA/QC material as well as make the slides AND hire a manager for all these additional people instead of having an on site pathologist to do it....see you could TRY to outsource path but it will never be cost efficient, path is already super cheap to operate, there is no margin of fluff. Meanwhile, Rads is fluff fest.

In the end, Pathologists got screwed in the early 80s by loss of a huge margin of their professional fee schedules, but have essentially reinvented themselves as business managers....which has no more risk of outsourcing than investment bankers, stock brokers or any number of mid to upper level management might.

10 years later...

Rads reimbursement down? Yes
Down to Peds levels? Nope
USMD interest in Rads down? Yes
More outsourcing of Rads abroad? Nope
Path still sucks? Yep
 
Top