Which subspecialty is most resistant to encroachment or expansion?

This forum made possible through the generous support of SDN members, donors, and sponsors. Thank you.
SO do you recommend GI or cardiology as an escape for IM residents?

No one is going to realistically be able to answer this. Maybe this midlevel thing will destroy all fields of medicine. Maybe it will be a blip on the radar and ten years from now we all laugh about how SDN was worked up over it. Maybe someone will invent a perfect noninvasive CRC screening test and half of all colonoscopies vanish overnight. Maybe some new anti lipid drug cures coronary artery disease. Maybe healthcare reform makes both specialties less lucrative and suddenly all the gunner IM interns are interested in ID and endo.


Realistically the only thing that makes GI and cards similar is that they do procedures and make lots of money. Picking one based on what some people on a message board think about midlevel encroachment is not going to guarantee long term career happiness and success. Personally, I think GI is more vulnerable as a specialty because what makes it attractive (c-scopes and the money that comes from that) is a one trick pony, while cards is more broad, but I have no interest in either so you shouldn't trust my word on this topic.

Members don't see this ad.
 
  • Like
Reactions: 1 users
SO do you recommend GI or cardiology as an escape for IM residents?
Heme-Onc. The word “cancer” makes every patient demand the “best oncologist” to treat himself/herself. That person is not gonna be a NP/PA.
 
  • Like
Reactions: 5 users
No one is going to realistically be able to answer this. Maybe this midlevel thing will destroy all fields of medicine. Maybe it will be a blip on the radar and ten years from now we all laugh about how SDN was worked up over it. Maybe someone will invent a perfect noninvasive CRC screening test and half of all colonoscopies vanish overnight. Maybe some new anti lipid drug cures coronary artery disease. Maybe healthcare reform makes both specialties less lucrative and suddenly all the gunner IM interns are interested in ID and endo.


Realistically the only thing that makes GI and cards similar is that they do procedures and make lots of money. Picking one based on what some people on a message board think about midlevel encroachment is not going to guarantee long term career happiness and success. Personally, I think GI is more vulnerable as a specialty because what makes it attractive (c-scopes and the money that comes from that) is a one trick pony, while cards is more broad, but I have no interest in either so you shouldn't trust my word on this topic.
Veering a bit off topic from the OP about only midlevel encroachment here, but yeah every single (currently) lucrative specialty and subspecialties in all of medicine are quite susceptible to political winds of change. Acts of congress in the future can easily chop off reimbursement for any money making procedures (like GI, ophtho could be pressured by that in the future and rads was hit by both cuts to reimbursement plus the Great recession, see jacr article: DEFINE_ME )

Many high paying fields are also destined to follow the demise of EM due to private equity (dermatology is next) plus oversupply of residents plus a simultaneous hit by midlevel usage.

See: Is the demand for dermatologists keeping up with the insane residency growth rate?

and:

And technological advancements can also ruin well paid specialties. Radonc was destroyed by both oversupply and advancements reducing need for radiation treatments.
 
  • Like
Reactions: 3 users
Members don't see this ad :)
What I find surprising is how quickly emergency medicine went south. Five years ago, everyone I knew was falling over themselves trying to get into an EM residency..
 
  • Like
Reactions: 5 users
What I find surprising is how quickly emergency medicine went south. Five years ago, everyone I knew was falling over themselves trying to get into an EM residency..

Structurally one of the easiest to bastardize due to over reliance on the hospital and lack of viable ways out.

Even anesthesia, which is another, has pain, ASC work, etc.
 
  • Like
Reactions: 1 user
Heme-Onc. The word “cancer” makes every patient demand the “best oncologist” to treat himself/herself. That person is not gonna be a NP/PA.
Could say the same for cards. Chest pain, abnormal ekg, etc. freaks patients AND doctors out.
 
Could say the same for cards. Chest pain, abnormal ekg, etc. freaks patients AND doctors out.

Most of the time cardiology is consulted the response is a useless midlevel seeing the patient. Frequently 0 accountability on the attending's part. Cardiology has also had significant growth in training programs and positions in the last 5 years: now >1000 cardiology graduates each year. It might bite the field in the ass, give it time.
 
  • Like
Reactions: 3 users
Most of the time cardiology is consulted the response is a useless midlevel seeing the patient. Frequently 0 accountability on the attending's part. Cardiology has also had significant growth in training programs and positions in the last 5 years: now >1000 cardiology graduates each year. It might bite the field in the ass, give it time.
Cardiology gets benefit from the baby boomers. 4 years ago, 45% of cardiologists were 56 and older.

EM is new enough as a specialty that they don't have the imminent boomer retirement to help their workforce.
 
  • Like
Reactions: 1 users
Most of the time cardiology is consulted the response is a useless midlevel seeing the patient. Frequently 0 accountability on the attending's part. Cardiology has also had significant growth in training programs and positions in the last 5 years: now >1000 cardiology graduates each year. It might bite the field in the ass, give it time.
Yea I have that problem too.

back when I worked in a hospital with 2 cardiology groups there were no mid levels for that very reason. Competition is good, keeps people accountable.
 
  • Like
Reactions: 2 users
SO do you recommend GI or cardiology as an escape for IM residents?

Do it if you like it. I could never fault anyone for doing something they like. Question then is, do you stop with one fellowship, or will you have to do a sub-fellowship---advanced scopes, IC, EP, etc---to find meaningful work. It just seems like it never ends, that's why I stopped after IM. I chose to get off the crazy train. But again, do it if you have a genuine interest in it. If not, just be general IM (you can still find work, you can still make decent money . . .just don't let your kids do it!)

Heme-Onc. The word “cancer” makes every patient demand the “best oncologist” to treat himself/herself. That person is not gonna be a NP/PA.

Careful there, I don't know about that. My mother had breast CA. Saw an oncologist once, then a PA at every subsequent appointment.

Many high paying fields are also destined to follow the demise of EM due to private equity (dermatology is next) plus oversupply of residents plus a simultaneous hit by midlevel usage.

And technological advancements can also ruin well paid specialties. Radonc was destroyed by both oversupply and advancements reducing need for radiation treatments.

And we shouldn't be surprised. These are the engines of capitalistic economics.
 
  • Like
Reactions: 1 user
Do it if you like it. I could never fault anyone for doing something they like. Question then is, do you stop with one fellowship, or will you have to do a sub-fellowship---advanced scopes, IC, EP, etc---to find meaningful work. It just seems like it never ends, that's why I stopped after IM. I chose to get off the crazy train. But again, do it if you have a genuine interest in it. If not, just be general IM (you can still find work, you can still make decent money . . .just don't let your kids do it!)



Careful there, I don't know about that. My mother had breast CA. Saw an oncologist once, then a PA at every subsequent appointment.



And we shouldn't be surprised. These are the engines of capitalistic economics.
Was that PA working under an oncologist? Their plan of action/office visit might’ve just been billed by the oncologist.
 
Yeah, it makes sense. It is just very shocking and surprising.
Literally couple years ago 2017 there were posts in the ER forum still bragging about 500/hr rates. Then the bottom fell out.

Will be interesting to see how derm fares. Still hypercompetitive to get in but the writing is on the wall...
 
  • Like
Reactions: 5 users
Members don't see this ad :)
Heme-Onc. The word “cancer” makes every patient demand the “best oncologist” to treat himself/herself. That person is not gonna be a NP/PA.
I haven’t seen an independent oncology midlevel, but I’ve seen oncologists lead a team with mid levels just like other specialties.
 
Last edited:
Most of the time cardiology is consulted the response is a useless midlevel seeing the patient. Frequently 0 accountability on the attending's part. Cardiology has also had significant growth in training programs and positions in the last 5 years: now >1000 cardiology graduates each year. It might bite the field in the ass, give it time.
If technology advances further and things like this is successful and widespread after human trials. CAD rates could drop significantly and put pressure on available work for cards.

doubtful that will occur in my working career time though

 
I haven’t seen an independent oncology midlevel, but I’ve seen oncologists lead a team with mid levels just like other specialties.
IMO, that’s fine because the oncologist gets to bill the visit and all they have to do is pop their head in for 1-2 minutes at the end of a NP/PA visit and co-sign a note.

The threat/issue in other fields is that mid levels are independently seeing patients and billing themselves as the primary provider. This takes away market share from physicians.
 
IMO, that’s fine because the oncologist gets to bill the visit and all they have to do is pop their head in for 1-2 minutes at the end of a NP/PA visit and co-sign a note.

The threat/issue in other fields is that mid levels are independently seeing patients and billing themselves as the primary provider. This takes away market share from physicians.

Your responses are not well thought out. Do you realize that there is a decreased need for oncologists if the oncologist and midlevels as a collective perform the work that previously required multiple oncologists?

Anyone who thinks their field is immune to midlevel encroachment is mistaken. Everyone is going to feel it, some more than others. And "Pop their head in" is just the beginning.
 
  • Like
Reactions: 6 users
Midlevels are a two edged sword and are not likely to go away. They have powerful lobbies (especially NPs) and they provide cost savings for large systems and revenue increases for many private practices. They also negatively affect the physician job market by satisfying some of the market demand and mitigating the need to hire more physicians.

They will never replace us. There will always be physicians overseeing them to varying degrees. Honestly, for those of us that do land good jobs where we have midlevels working under us, we make more money than we would otherwise, take less call, deal with less BS, etc. While we may want to think this reduces quality of care, it probably doesn't in many cases. The bread and butter in most fields is very routine and often algorithmic. Most subspecialties can utilize midlevels for routine follow up once the physician has actually made the diagnosis and treatment plan. It's fields like primary care and the ED where having midlevels really scares me.

Medical school and residency over expansion is also a huge problem. We've now kicked the can down the road for competition. Not a great applicant for MD schools but easily accepted into carribean or DO schools? Think that competition was over? One of the ways to mitigate losing jobs to NPs and other physicians is to be more competitive on the market. Getting into a good medical school matters, because that opens up residency and fellowship pathways. This stuff matters. It's not like you just become a board certified whatever and all the sudden you're on equal ground with your colleagues. It may not matter to some large systems that are entirely corporate run or difficult to retain positions in critical access facilities, but it will matter to private practices and it often matters to medical directors hiring within large systems. You think that sweet private practice job in the nice suburb of a desirable city is just going to hire anyone for that opening in their practice? You think they don't know that their BCBS insured, middle to upper middle class patients are googling the doctors' backgrounds? They are way more likely to hire someone who trained along a reputable, recognizable pathway. At least this is supported by anecdotes and my experience with landing a solid PP job in a great city. This is probably more applicable to private practice and subspecialties...and I really only know about my field and my friends/wife's field So this is purely my opinion. If you had to go see a physician for your personal care, do you care where they went to school and trained? Lol I always tell the scheduler I'm not going to see a midlevel though.

tldr; Midlevels are here to stay. Make yourself as competitive as possible within your field.
 
  • Like
Reactions: 2 users
Most of the time cardiology is consulted the response is a useless midlevel seeing the patient. Frequently 0 accountability on the attending's part. Cardiology has also had significant growth in training programs and positions in the last 5 years: now >1000 cardiology graduates each year. It might bite the field in the ass, give it time.
Not at my hospital but one across town is like that, terrible. Not uncommon for patients to avoid that hospital or switch doctors because of it, and even referring PCP's too. The growth in positions is a concern, money grab by bottom tier hospitals, but we'll see.
 
  • Like
Reactions: 1 user
They will never replace us.

Well why not? The may come close, and that may be enough.

Make yourself as competitive as possible within your field.

Well what does that mean? Become ridiculously sub-specialized? How is that going to help? Say you're a PGY9+ Heart Failure/Cardiology specialist. Are you going to work a consult service for $200K/year. No way. You're going to demand $450k/year. Do you think your local hospital is going to pay you that, to titrate someone's Lasix, or would they rather pay a NP $150k/year to do the same?

I think it's actually better to stop training, get off the crazy train, be a generalist, get paid as much as you can now, become financially independent and quit this s#$% show. But that's my 2 cents.
 
  • Like
  • Care
Reactions: 5 users
Well why not? The may come close, and that may be enough.



Well what does that mean? Become ridiculously sub-specialized? How is that going to help? Say you're a PGY9+ Heart Failure/Cardiology specialist. Are you going to work a consult service for $200K/year. No way. You're going to demand $450k/year. Do you think your local hospital is going to pay you that, to titrate someone's Lasix, or would they rather pay a NP $150k/year to do the same?

I think it's actually better to stop training, get off the crazy train, be a generalist, get paid as much as you can now, become financially independent and quit this s#$% show. But that's my 2 cents.

You think CHF specialists just give everyone lasix? You don't think a hospital is going to pay a physician to actually know wtf they are doing with an RVAD/LVAD/Impella/Artificial heart/transplant etc etc on the money train of cardiac procedures? Midlevels (and probably you too) would kill those patients with their incompetence very quickly.
 
  • Like
Reactions: 3 users
You think CHF specialists just give everyone lasix? You don't think a hospital is going to pay a physician to actually know wtf they are doing with an RVAD/LVAD/Impella/Artificial heart/transplant etc etc on the money train of cardiac procedures? Midlevels (and probably you too) would kill those patients with their incompetence very quickly.
Yeah, was gonna say, having a heart failure specialist is a money generating machine for your hospital if you have CV surgery there as well. Imagine all the LVAD and transplants you get to bill for.
 
  • Like
Reactions: 1 user
Literally couple years ago 2017 there were posts in the ER forum still bragging about 500/hr rates. Then the bottom fell out.

Will be interesting to see how derm fares. Still hypercompetitive to get in but the writing is on the wall...
I've seen this a couple of places. Is derm really hurting?
 
You think CHF specialists just give everyone lasix?

Fine, let's do it. Let's all compete with each other---we are after all the same ahole premeds we were 25 years ago. Let's become uber subspecialists.

We're the victims of our own psyche. When the lions have killed each other off, the hippopotamus will become king of the safari jungle!

Midlevels (and probably you too) would kill those patients

I've never killed anyone that didn't deserve it.

Clint Eastwood Smoking GIF by hoppip
 
  • Like
Reactions: 1 user
I've seen this a couple of places. Is derm really hurting?
The problem is if it’s hurting, it isn’t widely apparent until it is too late. Like with EM, at first saturated areas were hit hard but everyone thought “well that’s just how desirable places always are”, then at a certain threshold percent, the job market collapses dramatically as we saw over the last 3 years.

see:
https://www.bloomberg .com/news/features/2020-05-20/private-equity-is-ruining-health-care-covid-is-making-it-worse

When individual doctors sell, they generally receive $2 million to $7 million each, with 30% to 40% of that paid in equity in the group. After the acquisition, doctors get a lower salary and are asked to help recruit other doctors to sell their practices or to join as employees.

At first, doctors are generally thrilled by all of this.

Doctors who join a private equity-backed group generally sign contracts that state they’ll never have to compromise their medical judgment, but some say that management began to intervene there, too. Dermatologists at most of the companies say they were pushed to see as many as twice the number of patients a day, which made them feel rushed and unable to provide the same quality of care. Others were forced to discuss their cases with managers or medical directors, who asked the doctors to explain why they weren’t sending more patients for surgery.
At Advanced Dermatology, several doctors say they were asked to claim that physician assistants, or PAs, were under their supervision when they weren’t seeing patients in the same building, or even the same town.Because PAs are paid less than dermatologists, this allowed the company to keep costs low while growing the business. In a statement, Eric Hunt, Advanced’s general counsel and chief compliance officer says that having PAs on staff enables the company to “provide access to quality dermatological care to more patients.”

Advanced Dermatology also started giving even more authority to PAs, according to doctors and staff. Without enough oversight some were missing deadly skin cancers, they say. Others were doing too many biopsies and cutting out much larger areas of skin than necessary, leaving patients with big scars. Doctors who complained about the bad behavior say they saw PAs moved to other locations rather than fired or given more supervision.

Many doctors may ultimately come to regret cashing out, but it’s hard to get out once you’re in. As part of an acquisition, the private equity groups typically require doctors to sign yearslong contracts, with noncompete clauses that prevent them from working in the surrounding area.

And:


“Currently, about 10% of dermatology practices in the United States are controlled by private equity. In 2009 there were 229 dermatology practices bought by private equity. In 2019, there were 747. “They are bragging that in 5 years they are going to own 80% of dermatology in the United States,” said Dr. Grant-Kels.

Private equity firms may let go of more seasoned physicians in the practice, replacing them with younger physicians, who will work for less, as well as physician extenders such as nurse practitioners and physicians’ assistants. A single physician may oversee as many as 5 to 10 physician extenders, who often see new patients or perform complex diagnoses and procedures that are beyond their scope of training. The private equity firm may also mandate more expensive treatment options, even if it goes against the patient’s best interests. “Any primary skin cancer on the face has to be sent for Mohs, even if you think you can excise it,” said Dr. Grant-Kels.


“They offer a young dermatologist a pretty good salary to start, and then they ‘normalize’ those salaries and lower them,” she continued. “They make them sign a noncompete [agreement]. … You owe your soul to them because the noncompetes can be very wide and very unreasonable. And although you could fight them if you go to court, that's very expensive to do it. Most young people don't have the funding to do that.”

There are wider consequences. Private equity firms are starting their own residencies and then hiring their own residents. “Residents are paid an unlivable wage and are [therefore] required to borrow from the private equity practice. When they graduate, they immediately have to pay it back or work for the private equity firm,” said Dr. Grant-Kels. “It’s a form of indentured servitude.” Specialists are hired away from academic medical centers, making it more difficult to train new dermatologists in academic settings.
 
  • Like
  • Sad
Reactions: 3 users
Your responses are not well thought out. Do you realize that there is a decreased need for oncologists if the oncologist and midlevels as a collective perform the work that previously required multiple oncologists?

Anyone who thinks their field is immune to midlevel encroachment is mistaken. Everyone is going to feel it, some more than others. And "Pop their head in" is just the beginning.
I don't know about other fields but the demand for medical oncologists has never been higher. Yes, mid-levels are taking a share of patients, namely running the survivorship clinics and such. But overall, their contributions have actually increased actual oncologist salaries. Oncologists don't make money doing procedures or talking to patients. The money is from signing chemo/immuno/targeted therapy orders. If an oncologist can do this more efficiently through the use of midlevels, I don't see how this hurts the field.

I do agree with the person who mentioned to try to gain a competitive edge over the competition. For example, don't just go to any random community heme-onc fellowship program, try to match into a NCI designated comprehensive cancer center. Likewise for other fields, don't just match into a community residency, try to get into academic programs to increase your competitiveness.

If we ever get to the point where mid-levels are prescribing chemo or mapping out treatment plans (where the big money actually lies), then this field is ****ed. However, I cannot see this country getting to that point because the word "cancer" strikes a different tone in the general population than other diseases, as I alluded to in my earlier post.
 
I don't know about other fields but the demand for medical oncologists has never been higher. Yes, mid-levels are taking a share of patients, namely running the survivorship clinics and such. But overall, their contributions have actually increased actual oncologist salaries. Oncologists don't make money doing procedures or talking to patients. The money is from signing chemo/immuno/targeted therapy orders. If an oncologist can do this more efficiently through the use of midlevels, I don't see how this hurts the field.

I do agree with the person who mentioned to try to gain a competitive edge over the competition. For example, don't just go to any random community heme-onc fellowship program, try to match into a NCI designated comprehensive cancer center. Likewise for other fields, don't just match into a community residency, try to get into academic programs to increase your competitiveness.

If we ever get to the point where mid-levels are prescribing chemo or mapping out treatment plans (where the big money actually lies), then this field is ****ed. However, I cannot see this country getting to that point because the word "cancer" strikes a different tone in the general population than other diseases, as I alluded to in my earlier post.

Bolded was said by many EM docs just a few years ago.

Anesthesia, emergency care, ventilators, life support, and even surgery all “strike different tones” but have have midlevel encroachment to varying degrees. “My field is going to be fine” is ignoring everything that’s happening and pretty naive:

Not Listening Rachael Ray GIF by ABC Network
 
  • Like
Reactions: 6 users
Well why not? The may come close, and that may be enough.



Well what does that mean? Become ridiculously sub-specialized? How is that going to help? Say you're a PGY9+ Heart Failure/Cardiology specialist. Are you going to work a consult service for $200K/year. No way. You're going to demand $450k/year. Do you think your local hospital is going to pay you that, to titrate someone's Lasix, or would they rather pay a NP $150k/year to do the same?

I think it's actually better to stop training, get off the crazy train, be a generalist, get paid as much as you can now, become financially independent and quit this s#$% show. But that's my 2 cents.
I'm not even referring to super sub specialty or multiple fellowship type training pathways. That is certainly one way to secure a position that is beyond mid-level encroachment. By my post, I'm referring to your overall CV for your given field. Obviously, this has always been a factor in academic positions, but it seems to be increasingly important in landing quality PP gigs now. I doubt its nearly as important in large systems, ie a 400+ bed community hospital that employs their own hospitalists and doesn't care who fills the spot as long as they're BC/BE and ready to move the meat.

There are still high quality PP groups out there in plenty of fields that are doing great. That's a sellers market though. The DO/carribean grad that trained at a community program is probably not going to get the spot over an MD from a great program that's known to have solid clinical training.

I agree that aspiring pre-meds and medical students should be cautious. I'd be scared if I were an MS1 at some unknown school who's got one hell of an uphill climb...but that MS1 at some name brand MD school who knows how to smash standardized tests probably still has some really bright options for a career. I saw people early in medicine residency who wanted to do a fellowship but just got tired after intern year and didn't want to play the game anymore, so they decided they'd just take hospitalist jobs instead. I'm still not sure that's the best play for the long term if you don't truly enjoy hospital medicine and you're just looking at lifestyle/money for the future. If you're financially savvy enough to stack cash, invest well, and get out...great. Most aren't.
 
  • Like
Reactions: 1 users
If you're financially savvy enough to stack cash, invest well, and get out...great. Most aren't.

I'm actually quite lucky, in that I joined the military, had my medical school paid for, got paid a great income as a trainee (there were some hardships: deployments, moving a lot, etc). In the end, I'll be completely debt free, with a nice portfolio, and a good pension.

I feel be bad for anyone with a large 6 figure debt and trying to practice as a generalist . . . you were definitely sold a product not as advertised!
 
  • Like
Reactions: 1 users
I feel be bad for anyone with a large 6 figure debt and trying to practice as a generalist . . . you were definitely sold a product not as advertised!

What was the advertised product? American medicine hates generalists. Most of the elite medical schools don't even have family medicine programs. For the other generalist fields (hospital medicine, emergency), medicine views them as dirty, disdained things.

Guess that hasn't stopped the meteoric growth of hospitalists as a profession though.
 
Do it if you like it. I could never fault anyone for doing something they like. Question then is, do you stop with one fellowship, or will you have to do a sub-fellowship---advanced scopes, IC, EP, etc---to find meaningful work. It just seems like it never ends, that's why I stopped after IM. I chose to get off the crazy train. But again, do it if you have a genuine interest in it. If not, just be general IM (you can still find work, you can still make decent money . . .just don't let your kids do it!)



Careful there, I don't know about that. My mother had breast CA. Saw an oncologist once, then a PA at every subsequent appointment.



And we shouldn't be surprised. These are the engines of capitalistic economics.

I assume though as a Doctor yourself, you could ask the oncologist to see your mother directly?

I grew up in a household with a Doctor as a parent and often times he chewed out Doctors who used a PA/NP instead to see me or close relatives in medical visits (literally saw my parent bark over the phone at a prestigious PM&R head for not rounding on a relative who just underwent a serious accident and started rehab and instead sent PGY1/PGY2s).

Often times Doctors and their relatives with their influence get preferential treatment/more thorough followup because it's bad for business if you say "no" as the attending.
 
I'm actually quite lucky, in that I joined the military, had my medical school paid for, got paid a great income as a trainee (there were some hardships: deployments, moving a lot, etc). In the end, I'll be completely debt free, with a nice portfolio, and a good pension.

I feel be bad for anyone with a large 6 figure debt and trying to practice as a generalist . . . you were definitely sold a product not as advertised!
Generalist like FM and outpt IM? Those guys are actually doing quite well. You’re better off as a physician PCP nowadays than a lot of non procedural specialists.
 
  • Like
Reactions: 3 users
Generalist like FM and outpt IM? Those guys are actually doing quite well. You’re better off as a physician PCP nowadays than a lot of non procedural specialists.
Yep. Short training, loads more loan repayment options out there, plenty of free time to moonlight if you want to pay things off more quickly.

Or, refinance your loans at 2.6% and ride them out the full 10+ years.
 
Yep. Short training, loads more loan repayment options out there, plenty of free time to moonlight if you want to pay things off more quickly.

Or, refinance your loans at 2.6% and ride them out the full 10+ years.
Even more than that - the local primary care group here is huge, and have shared savings programs with a handful of big insurers. It's basically a micro-Kaiser model. Whatever money is saved from a patient panel, the insurer splits it with the group. Their docs get all the shared savings, and the numbers are six figures on average. It puts the PCPs' incomes on par with many of the procedural specialists in the area.

Even my academic institution is starting to emulate this model, and are now paying extra to the PCPs based on panel size. Their incomes are approaching our GI faculty.
 
  • Like
Reactions: 3 users
Even more than that - the local primary care group here is huge, and have shared savings programs with a handful of big insurers. It's basically a micro-Kaiser model. Whatever money is saved from a patient panel, the insurer splits it with the group. Their docs get all the shared savings, and the numbers are six figures on average. It puts the PCPs' incomes on par with many of the procedural specialists in the area.

Even my academic institution is starting to emulate this model, and are now paying extra to the PCPs based on panel size. Their incomes are approaching our GI faculty.
We have the same thing in both areas, though the shared savings aren't what they were 5-10 years ago.
 
We have the same thing in both areas, though the shared savings aren't what they were 5-10 years ago.
Is it shrinking drastically now? Seems like the PCP incomes are only starting to go up in my neck of the woods.
 
Last edited:
I don't know about other fields but the demand for medical oncologists has never been higher. Yes, mid-levels are taking a share of patients, namely running the survivorship clinics and such. But overall, their contributions have actually increased actual oncologist salaries. Oncologists don't make money doing procedures or talking to patients. The money is from signing chemo/immuno/targeted therapy orders. If an oncologist can do this more efficiently through the use of midlevels, I don't see how this hurts the field.

I do agree with the person who mentioned to try to gain a competitive edge over the competition. For example, don't just go to any random community heme-onc fellowship program, try to match into a NCI designated comprehensive cancer center. Likewise for other fields, don't just match into a community residency, try to get into academic programs to increase your competitiveness.

If we ever get to the point where mid-levels are prescribing chemo or mapping out treatment plans (where the big money actually lies), then this field is ****ed. However, I cannot see this country getting to that point because the word "cancer" strikes a different tone in the general population than other diseases, as I alluded to in my earlier post.
Because if it previously took 5 oncologists to do XYZ, but now because of “efficiency due to mid levels” it now takes 2, you don’t see how that hurts the field? Yes in the short term those 2 make more money, but now there are 3 that don’t have a position. This is the exact same thing we’ve talked about with every other specialty facing the mid level problem.
 
  • Like
Reactions: 1 users
Because if it previously took 5 oncologists to do XYZ, but now because of “efficiency due to mid levels” it now takes 2, you don’t see how that hurts the field? Yes in the short term those 2 make more money, but now there are 3 that don’t have a position. This is the exact same thing we’ve talked about with every other specialty facing the mid level problem.
LOL if you're in a practice where 2 midlevels are doing the work that 3 oncologists used to do, those oncologists deserve to lose their jobs.
 
at no point in my post did I say how many midlevels were involved.... so LOL at yourself?
My bad, I misread your post.

I think midlevels will displace SOME oncologists, but most of their work will be on the inpatient side (which oncologists hate dealing with) or in seeing followups. Even the least educated patients are scared of cancer and don't want to settle for someone who isn't an oncologist.
 
  • Like
Reactions: 1 user
My bad, I misread your post.

I think midlevels will displace SOME oncologists, but most of their work will be on the inpatient side (which oncologists hate dealing with) or in seeing followups. Even the least educated patients are scared of cancer and don't want to settle for someone who isn't an oncologist.
yes I dont think people will ever accept a completely independent midlevel to be their "cancer doc". But again, anything a midlevel does to extend the practice of a physician, decreases demand for other physicians.
 
  • Like
Reactions: 1 user
yes I dont think people will ever accept a completely independent midlevel to be their "cancer doc". But again, anything a midlevel does to extend the practice of a physician, decreases demand for other physicians.
By that logic we shouldn't employ billers, phlebotomists, MAs or nurses because they all do things that would take up doctors' time and thus 'decreases demand for other physicians..."

Having a midlevel see someone on an onc regimen for some insurance mandated followup to check labs and justify a PET scan to an insurance company isn't exactly mission critical need a 3 year fellowship stuff. Same applies to a vented dispo-proof rock in the ICU or a demented fall waiting for SNF on the floor.
 
By that logic we shouldn't employ billers, phlebotomists, MAs or nurses because they all do things that would take up doctors' time and thus 'decreases demand for other physicians..."

Having a midlevel see someone on an onc regimen for some insurance mandated followup to check labs and justify a PET scan to an insurance company isn't exactly mission critical need a 3 year fellowship stuff. Same applies to a vented dispo-proof rock in the ICU or a demented fall waiting for SNF on the floor.
ehhh I think you're going too far with some of those to make your point. A phlebotomist is specifically trained to draw labs, and better at it, etc. I'm okay with a very minor role for midlevels directly working under a doctor's supervision and direction with hiring/firing/etc decisions.
 
The problem with midlevels is that they save money for large institutions and can add significant money to private practice partners in almost any field. They certainly reduce the demand for physicians and hurt the job market for new grads. Trying to convince the hospitals and high earning PP docs to stop this practice simply to help the future docs is probably a pointless effort. The large hospitals for sure don't GAF. Asking a private practice doc to forgo hundreds of thousands of extra income per year is a lot to ask. Would you give up that extra money simply to keep the job market healthy?
 
  • Like
Reactions: 1 users
Because if it previously took 5 oncologists to do XYZ, but now because of “efficiency due to mid levels” it now takes 2, you don’t see how that hurts the field? Yes in the short term those 2 make more money, but now there are 3 that don’t have a position. This is the exact same thing we’ve talked about with every other specialty facing the mid level problem.
I see your point but to play devils advocate, the way most private practice oncologists can maintain a half million salary is by utilizing those mid-levels to their advantage. If we got rid of all mid levels and just had oncologists do all the simple follow up and other scut, average salary will also likely suffer.
Assuming we want our salaries to be where it’s currently at or higher, the solution to this would be to make yourself the most marketable (double boarded in heme and onc, go to NCI designated comprehensive cancer center fellowship, gain connections, etc).
 
I see your point but to play devils advocate, the way most private practice oncologists can maintain a half million salary is by utilizing those mid-levels to their advantage. If we got rid of all mid levels and just had oncologists do all the simple follow up and other scut, average salary will also likely suffer.
Assuming we want our salaries to be where it’s currently at or higher, the solution to this would be to make yourself the most marketable (double boarded in heme and onc, go to NCI designated comprehensive cancer center fellowship, gain connections, etc).

Yeah, physicians screwing other physicians (by eliminating what used to be physician-designated jobs). That's what we're all about.

Why are we surprised? Again, we're the same ahole deuchy competitive pre-meds that we were 25 years ago. We screwed each other when we were trying to get into medical school, then into residency, why not now?! At least buy me dinner first.

That's right, become quadruple-boarded, so you can be the guy hiring NPs and eliminating physician jobs.
 
  • Like
  • Sad
Reactions: 3 users
Assuming we want our salaries to be where it’s currently at or higher, the solution to this would be to make yourself the most marketable (double boarded in heme and onc, go to NCI designated comprehensive cancer center fellowship, gain connections, etc).

Most comprehensive cancer centers are academic institutions and the only way those admins can get an erection is by horrendously low balling you. I've heard sub 200k for oncologists at some places, though that's only by word of mouth.
 
Most comprehensive cancer centers are academic institutions and the only way those admins can get an erection is by horrendously low balling you. I've heard sub 200k for oncologists at some places, though that's only by word of mouth.
My oncology program director makes 220k a year. His job is relatively chill though: do 1 week of benign heme consults per month, staff the fellow clinic, have his own clinic (benign heme) 2 times per week, and read apps/interview candidates.

In terms of private practice, I guess it doesn’t matter too much if you went MSK vs any other comprehensive cancer center. Perhaps the NCI designation doesn’t even matter that much. But I would think you’d be a much more attractive candidate for a pp job if you trained at a comprehensive cancer center vs a no name fellowship without any designation (comprehensive nor NCI).
 
Top