Will Physician Salaries continue to go down?

Started by nir1009
This forum made possible through the generous support of SDN members, donors, and sponsors. Thank you.
Get help with your application

Use all the free resources available to you from SDN: articles, guides, expert advising, forums discussions, and school research.

Advertisement - Members don't see this ad
The AMA and AMSA reals you in with all the big talk about how the speak for us... yada yada yada... while being ultra liberal on all social issues. They are extremely politcally motivated and active - they endorse candidates, strongly advocate abortion, are anti-military.
I am extremely politcally active in a pro-physician way, but you don't have to be a member of AMSA or AMA to do that. I write letters, I show up at the capital etc, etc, etc...
I wouldn't touch AMA with a 10 foot pole. They are not what they claim to be at all. In my humble opinion. I don't think the answer to all is the great AMA. They have a very specific political agenda and I think it has a lot more to do with free healthcare for all and socialism than it does protecting physicians. I tried multiple time to cancel my AMSA membership but they won't let me. It was the worse mistake I ever made.
 
MacGyver said:
It is inevitable that doctor salaries will decline. I predict they will decline to about on par with what european and canadian doctors make before the salary decline stops.

<cut>

When that happens (and it will happen), doctors salaries will start teh precipitous decline towards canadian and euro salaries. That translates to roughly 80-100k per year average for primary care, and 120-180k for specialists. Check the Canadian doctor salary surveys. Of course it will be worse in the states because we have to deal with this godawful lawsuit culture that doesnt exist in Canada or Europe.

My only hope at this point is that the bureaucrats are smart enough to cut specialists fees without cutting primary care fees. Some specialties AVERAGE over 400k per year. Hopefully govt will cut those down first before touching the poor FP doc who only makes 120k per year.

In the United Kingdom at the moment GPs earn far more than most hospital specialists with salaries around 100K POUNDS (170K USD approx) vs. starting salary of 70K Pounds for a new Specialist Hospital Consultant (with typically several years more training than a US attending). Specialists may add some private practice earnings or excellence awards to this figure to typically bring their earnings in line with those of GPs.

GP training is 5yrs postgrad in UK (56hr/wk max though). A popular career choice at the moment.

Universal health care coverage like we have in the UK can produce counter-intuitive results like this in regard to physician salaries (the high rates of GP pay here are a result of a recent new contract that paid based on treatment targets for their entire patient population rather than for individual pieces of work or a simple set salary scheme).

Just wanted to point out it doesn't all have to be doom and gloom.
 
Stephanieukmed said:
Not true Penguin, the sole purpose of the AMA is to provide a unified voice for physicians. Our major problem is that unlike say lawyers, we spend our time actually doing our jobs and treating patients and ignoring all the public interest issues that affect our ability to practice. The AMA is attempting to make huge strides in terms of physician reimbursement, access to care, CME, etc.; but as physicians we have to actually realize the importance of these issues and help out because no congressman is going to listen to a lobbiest but they will sure as s--- listen to a doc who says if you don't do something I'm going to close my office because I can't afford to keep it open. That's multiple jobs and untreated patients --> politicos don't like that idea. Until you go to an AMA meeting and see what they talk about and participate in the process I would refrain from making any comments about the AMA...those of us who spend the time and money to go would appreciate it.

Respectfully, people spend a lot of time and money on a lot of things and I think everyone would agree that people are allowed to disagree with you anyway.
As a med student, I didn't find out what AMSA was really all about until it was too late. I had friends warn me but I thought it would be better to be in their camp for a while so I could know what I was talking about if I discovered they were right.
Like you suggest - arguements aren't worth much if you don't have any experience with them.
There are alternatives to the AMA. People should be aware that there is more to that organization than meets the eye.
 
Advertisement - Members don't see this ad
and yes - UK medical schools are effectively tuition-free for UK residents (nominal 1K pounds a year tuition for only some of the years - average 3-4K total tuition over total course!). You do have to pay own living expenses though - and of course the (predominately middle class) students still complain about their debt and even having to pay these fees :laugh:
 
KentW said:
Today's "golden" specialties could fall from favor overnight with a simple change in insurance reimbursement. One notable example is cataract surgery. A decade or so ago, cataracts reimbursed pretty well, and many an ophthalmologist cashed in on "cataract mills", just cranking 'em through. That all changed when Medicare drastically lowered the reimbursement for cataract extraction.

There's a reason behind that. Cataract mills, as you call them, started with the invention of phacoemulsification. Cataract sugery went from taking close to an hour (give or take) to taking about 10-15 minutes. A good surgeon with multiple ORS can do 5-6 cataracts per hour. There is no reason to reimburse this method the same as the one that took closer to an hour. Now, its around $500. If you can do 4-6 an hour, that's 2-3 thousand dollars an hour. It used to reimburse about 2 grand for the hour procedure. The average hourly rate hasn't changed, the surgery just got a hell of a lot faster/easier. I don't have a problem with that.
 
you guys are forgetting about our achilles heel... the FMG... what happens when salaries go low enough that US citizens no longer go into medicine? There will be tons of FMGs clamoring to get into this country to do any work we don't want... just look at internal med, family practice these days... we DO NOT have anywhere near a monopoly...

I will see you in the bread line in a couple of years... or maybe your taxi driver will be an MD in the future...
 
GoPistons said:
you guys are forgetting about our achilles heel... the FMG... what happens when salaries go low enough that US citizens no longer go into medicine? There will be tons of FMGs clamoring to get into this country to do any work we don't want... just look at internal med, family practice these days... we DO NOT have anywhere near a monopoly...

I will see you in the bread line in a couple of years... or maybe your taxi driver will be an MD in the future...

Be proactive, and work for immigration reform.
 
penguins said:
The AMA and AMSA reals you in with all the big talk about how the speak for us... yada yada yada... while being ultra liberal on all social issues. They are extremely politcally motivated and active - they endorse candidates, strongly advocate abortion, are anti-military.
I am extremely politcally active in a pro-physician way, but you don't have to be a member of AMSA or AMA to do that. I write letters, I show up at the capital etc, etc, etc...
I wouldn't touch AMA with a 10 foot pole. They are not what they claim to be at all. In my humble opinion. I don't think the answer to all is the great AMA. They have a very specific political agenda and I think it has a lot more to do with free healthcare for all and socialism than it does protecting physicians. I tried multiple time to cancel my AMSA membership but they won't let me. It was the worse mistake I ever made.

You do realize that the AMA donated more money to Republican candidates in the 2004 election. Over the last 16 years they have donated 13million dollars to republicans and 8 million to dems.
Take a look at this.
http://www.opensecrets.org/orgs/summary.asp?ID=D000000068&Name=American+Medical+Assn
 
CTSballer11 said:
You do realize that the AMA donated more money to Republican candidates in the 2004 election. Over the last 16 years they have donated 13million dollars to republicans and 8 million to dems.
Take a look at this.
http://www.opensecrets.org/orgs/summary.asp?ID=D000000068&Name=American+Medical+Assn

It isn't about how much money they have donated to one party over the other. It is about what causes they favor and push, push, push.
I don't care if they are single handedly responsible for my dear George getting into office... if they are advocating abortion and other social issues that I find highly offensive.
It would be like taking 1 step forward and 3 steps back for me to support them. It would be better for me to take my cash and give it directly to my candidate and then write my own letters, network with my own people, etc. It is like union members who have no choice but to belong and have to give up part of their paycheck and then have no control over where it goes and end up supporting things they don't support. Thankfully, we have a choice about whether or not to belong to the AMA.

They should stick to the basics - protecting/helping physicians - and not meddle in social issues. For that matter, even if they agreed with my social agenda, I don't think it is their place to push it since that is not what they claim to be.

Thank you for the information and the link. It is good information to pass on.
 
penguins said:
It isn't about how much money they have donated to one party over the other. It is about what causes they favor and push, push, push.
I don't care if they are single handedly responsible for my dear George getting into office... if they are advocating abortion and other social issues that I find highly offensive.
It would be like taking 1 step forward and 3 steps back for me to support them. It would be better for me to take my cash and give it directly to my candidate and then write my own letters, network with my own people, etc. It is like union members who have no choice but to belong and have to give up part of their paycheck and then have no control over where it goes and end up supporting things they don't support. Thankfully, we have a choice about whether or not to belong to the AMA.

They should stick to the basics - protecting/helping physicians - and not meddle in social issues. For that matter, even if they agreed with my social agenda, I don't think it is their place to push it since that is not what they claim to be.

Thank you for the information and the link. It is good information to pass on.

Well one could easily say that supporting abortion is good for physicans, especially OB/GYN's, because of the simple fact that it brings in more business. The reason that the AMA gives money to certain congressional candidates is that they believe and expect that these candidates will push their agenda. Republicans are just as responsible as Democrats for the current state of medicine.
 
stephend7799 said:
I am 3 years in practice and i am so friggin jaded.. I owe upwards of 200k on my student loans.. the amount per month after consolidation is almost 1300.. one thousand of that is interest.. I am not getting anywhere for a while with that kind of situation. Im just lucky i did not pick family medicine or internal medicine as my specialty of choice...

Maybe I'm naive, but that's only about 16k/year. With a salary of at least 140k, how is that much of a burden?
 
CTSballer11 said:
Well one could easily say that supporting abortion is good for physicans, especially OB/GYN's, because of the simple fact that it brings in more business. The reason that the AMA gives money to certain congressional candidates is that they believe and expect that these candidates will push their agenda. Republicans are just as responsible as Democrats for the current state of medicine.

That is a pretty crazy justification. I won't even comment on it.

I never said anything about which party is responsible. The point is that the AMA shouldn't get involved in social issues.

Oh, wait, I have to. I think a term delivery brings in more money than the couple hundred dollar abortion. And... no guilty conscience.
 
(nicedream) said:
Maybe I'm naive, but that's only about 16k/year. With a salary of at least 140k, how is that much of a burden?


Yea, I was wondering that myself.

Could it be that the repayment is for 30 years? ]


Let us know.
 
GoPistons said:
you guys are forgetting about our achilles heel... the FMG... what happens when salaries go low enough that US citizens no longer go into medicine? There will be tons of FMGs clamoring to get into this country to do any work we don't want... just look at internal med, family practice these days... we DO NOT have anywhere near a monopoly...

I will see you in the bread line in a couple of years... or maybe your taxi driver will be an MD in the future...

This will be HUGE in the future.

Doctors are fighting a losing battle, and we are rapidly losing leverage.

There will come a day and time when doctors try to protest against getting squeezed. When that happens, the government bureaucrats will say "SCREW YOU" and open the floodgates for the FMGs to come in.
 
Advertisement - Members don't see this ad
MacGyver said:
This will be HUGE in the future.

Doctors are fighting a losing battle, and we are rapidly losing leverage.

There will come a day and time when doctors try to protest against getting squeezed. When that happens, the government bureaucrats will say "SCREW YOU" and open the floodgates for the FMGs to come in.

It seems like in a specialty such as EM there is a pronounced shortage of doc's forcasted until atleast 2020. The fact that they already have a high rate of non payment, which is much worse than shrinking medicare, and yet their new attendings are getting anywhere from 250k - 400k depending on location etc, it seems to me this type of specialty will not be as affected as others by the salary reduction etc.

Do others agree?
 
MacGyver said:
This will be HUGE in the future.

Doctors are fighting a losing battle, and we are rapidly losing leverage.

There will come a day and time when doctors try to protest against getting squeezed. When that happens, the government bureaucrats will say "SCREW YOU" and open the floodgates for the FMGs to come in.

Hmm...possible but not probable.

One careless mistake from these FMGs, one accidental death, (I'm not implying they are of lower quality...but I would think that the best medical education still occurs in the US) and that will be the end of that
 
businessmd06 said:
It seems like in a specialty such as EM there is a pronounced shortage of doc's forcasted until atleast 2020. The fact that they already have a high rate of non payment, which is much worse than shrinking medicare, and yet their new attendings are getting anywhere from 250k - 400k depending on location etc, it seems to me this type of specialty will not be as affected as others by the salary reduction etc.

Do others agree?

Agreed - especially with our lobbying power 😉
 
I just got out of my financial aide exit interview and now reading this. . . man, hard not being depressed 🙁
 
businessmd06 said:
It seems like in a specialty such as EM there is a pronounced shortage of doc's forcasted until atleast 2020. The fact that they already have a high rate of non payment, which is much worse than shrinking medicare, and yet their new attendings are getting anywhere from 250k - 400k depending on location etc, it seems to me this type of specialty will not be as affected as others by the salary reduction etc.

Do others agree?

There are shortages in all areas of medicine. If salaries go down, it will likely be across the board. I think hospital administrators will be happy to hire primary care docs to work in their ERs if they need to, especially if this helps keep costs down.
 
Pooh & Annie said:
There are shortages in all areas of medicine. If salaries go down, it will likely be across the board. I think hospital administrators will be happy to hire primary care docs to work in their ERs if they need to, especially if this helps keep costs down.

They will be happy with non EM board certified docs until the lawyers get ahold of them. God bless the lawyers.
 
skypilot said:
They will be happy with non EM board certified docs until the lawyers get ahold of them. God bless the lawyers.

That sounds right, but residents have been moonlighting in ERs for years. If they haven't been chased out yet, I don't see why they will in the furure.
 
As for opening the flood gates to the FMGs, it is certainly a possibility. It occurred in the 1970's, which is when the surge of asian medical professionals came here due to a shortage of american students. It could easily happen again.Lawyers will not do much to stop it since they are still board certified and licensed.
 
The same thing happened with anesthesiology a while back. I think there was a huge shortage of applicants and a lot of the spots were filled with FMGs!
 
penguins said:
As a med student, I didn't find out what AMSA was really all about until it was too late. I had friends warn me but I thought it would be better to be in their camp for a while so I could know what I was talking about if I discovered they were right.
Like you suggest - arguements aren't worth much if you don't have any experience with them.

:laugh:
I was duped as well. Actually, I joined for the "free" Netter's, although nothing is free in life. That socialist organization dupes many naive recent grads into believing their claptrap. I openly made fun of the people who belonged to this organization. Here is something most people do not, or will not understand about medicine...IT IS A BUSINESS. No, it's not malevolently heartless, it is all about the bottom line. If you generate revenue for the hospital, you will get more of what you ask. If your cost center is a negative drain on the bottom line, you will get less/nothing. It's all economics people. I forgot though, public schools also have an agenda that capitalism=bad and socialism=good. Freakin' wankers.


OK, I'm done now.
 
ericdopt said:
:laugh:
I was duped as well. Actually, I joined for the "free" Netter's, although nothing is free in life.

Free Netter's?! All I got was a silly T-shirt!
 
You guys are actually residents and STILL feel threatned by IMG's??? IMG's will drive down prices? Are you on crack!!!! because of the leadership of your AMA/AAMC that erroneously decided 20 years ago that there was a doctor glut and refused to allow more US students in and build more US schools and now EVERY discipline has a shortage..its our fault?? AMA should take lessons from the ANA(nurses) who have Congress wrapped around their fingers and just about do everything they want. the midlevels (taking advantage of the shortage crisis that they saw years ahead of AMA) increase their role every year. Soon nurses will actually have the title doctor and then it really will be all over. Take a look at the allopathic forum. There are students with 35 MCATS applying for the 2nd and 3rd times!!! I'm US citizen, went to Europe for my MD and will start in July in a program that will have 60% IMG's in IM, because no US grad wants to go there.. and it s a fabulous place to live and practice!! IMG's have nothing to do with depressed doc salaries. Quite the contrary, all of you who thinks the sky is falling will see that the system will take care of it. (remember Anesthesia 10 years ago, everyone thought CRNA's would put them out of business?) It really is appalling that MD's still are that naive about the health system. Work hard and be smart and you will make a comfortable living. I will be a hospitalist, but I also plan to be making 200k+ after 5 years because I have two homes (one in europe one in US, so I'll have to work a little harder the first few years..so what..I can do it..and no IMG or US grad will prevent me from that. Anyway, some of you are really silly....
 
ericdopt said:
:laugh:
I forgot though, public schools also have an agenda that capitalism=bad and socialism=good. Freakin' wankers.
.

LMAO. Its sadly very true, medical school has to be one of the worst though, so many people complaining about high pay (in reality not that high relatively) and feeling guilty and ashamed when they want more money.

Terrible. 👎
 
it's funny how ppl think that 100-200 K is 'comfortable living'.

are you kidding me? with the expenses of having an office, overhead, insurance, life insurance, a home, a nice car, electricity and other bills, and having kids that hopefully will go to the best school....the stuff costs MONEY ladies and gent.

a docs salary, unless it's >400K can be called 'comfortable'. we're living in teh 21st century, the low six figures are not really a security blanket anymore. ppl, you have to realize that inflation has occurred!
 
it's funny how ppl think that 100-200 K is 'comfortable living'.

Well if you are private practice, yes 200K wont do, but if you will be a hospitalist, like me, 200k puts me in the top range for that discipline and remember, the hospital is picking up the tab...for everything. I just show up and see patients. And with flexible shift scheduling so common in hospitalist practices, you could locum tenum and add an extra 40-60k a year to your base salary, but I guess would be a ball breaker schedule. Anyway, its midlevel encroachment and the continued sharing the reimbursements with the increased midlevel role that is a threat to doc salaries..not IMG's as said earlier...if that is the mind set of the graduating US grad..we are in big trouble.
 
Advertisement - Members don't see this ad
There is no overhead that I can think of as an EM physician. I also like the idea of midlevel providers because they will boost my patients per hour seen (I will get 2/3 payment for each patient a PA or NP sees), leaving more time to see and manage the sicker patients (and bill for a higher level of care). Midlevel providers actually provide physicians with more revenue because they add to our productivity. Several ED studies have been done to evaluate the impact of midlevel providers on the total ED revenue. The results: More billing by the ED, less overhead, and the ability to hire more (yes MORE) ED physicians to cover shifts. Tell me where the "encroachment" of midlevel providers is bad again.
 
You are right. Optimal use of midlevels in managed care and private practice will increase the bottom line for those practices. And the docs that are AROUND will benefit, but since there are not enough docs, the midlevels will usurp that role...NP and PA working for NP's and PA's will just substitute for the missing doc =(poor kid from Arkansas who only scored a 31 on the MCAT and did not get into med school and is now the PA or MBA somewhere!) I guess it boils down to whether you want more docs making 150k yr or less docs making 250k a year..thats what it really means...Thats been the AMA strategy all these years, ...who knows where it will end? JMHO 😱
 
NinerNiner999 said:
Tell me where the "encroachment" of midlevel providers is bad again.

When they start convincing everybody that they can do your job cheaper and even better than you can.

Sorry Niner, but I disagree. I think Apache is absolutely correct on this one. I don't view IMGs as a problem (and I'm not one BTW). I think the biggest threat to physicians and patients is the increasing scope of practice and autonomy of midlevel and alternative providers. There are TONS of people that want the autonomy, salary, privileges, and respect of the physician without commensurate education.

As a convert I can tell you that you cannot imagine the push there is for this. The nurse practitioners in particular have slowly and steadily increased their role in most states. They take classes that focus on politically advancing their agenda. There are many states where they can practice autonomously. You don't see a problem there?

I read an article yesterday in the American Medical News about the Naturopaths pushing for expansion of license and scope of practice. Look at all the midwives opening up their own "birthing centers" minus the OB. Look at the CRNAs passing gas without an MD/DO in the hospital or opening up pain clinics. How 'bout the psychologists writing prescriptions. Then there's the optometrists doing surgeries. You don’t think they’re going to start chasing the $$ too?

Our greed now by using them to make physicians “more revenue because they add to our productivity" will bite us in the butt later. Imagine how patient care is going to suffer.

Sorry, but I for one am not going sell out my profession or allow my patients to receive sub-optimal care so I can make a few bucks by allowing people with a fraction of my training to do my job.
 
This has become an interesting topic! 🙂 It is my view that as physicians, we have set the standard (clinically and legally) for credentialing and liability. Essentially, the buck stops here. I do not see PA's or NP's ever being able to successfully defend themselves as sole providers in court - it will simply never happen as long as there are licensed medical doctors in practice. This is why each state has their own medical board, and there is a national board of medical examiners to ensure that MD's are certified and credentialed as the final entity in healthcare. What others are suggesting on this board is that midlevel providers will supplant MD's in the workforce. The credentialing, training, and legal issues with solo PA or NP practice alone make this impossible. Further, just as the AAMC regulates the credentialing of medical schools and the RRC/ACGME regulate post-graduate training, the philosophy of midlevel training institutions can never accomodate such huge credentialing requirements.

In short, PA's and NP's will never replace the role of the MD or DO in holding the ultimate medical liability and, as such, they will never have the ability to surpass licensed physicians in this capacity. There is no fear of PA's or NP's reducing our compensation, especially with projected increases of patient volume. Count the number of new hospitals being built nationwide (approximately $75 Billion just this year). Physicians will continue to be needed and, so will midlevels.

Any thoughts?
 
ninetyniner, you are caught in a time warp, in a time where marcus welby was the model of practice with subservient staff to follow orders and be happy about it. these days, that "staff" is NOT happy...they are bitter and they want more. The nurses have been outflanking the docs for years now. Hippocrates, Osler knows whom best serves the ailing patient. But in the US, its the Congress!! And the nurses have the upper edge. More constituents!!! more money!!! 20 years ago, would you believe there would be naturopathic medical school, acupuncture medical schools, psychologist writing scripts, etc, etc. These pleasant staff are only biding their time. Since no US med grad will go to undeserved areas, the nurses have brillianty used this trojan horse to increase the practice scope. First, Littletown, USA... then 7th avenue!!! They will quit the next day, after the legislator gives them more autonomy...then ninetyniner will be working for the man!!! 🙂 BUt this point has been argued before in other post so I'll stop now...Hopefully I can pay off my student loans, before Congress gives nurses and PA full practice rights!! 😀
 
APACHE3 said:
The nurses have been outflanking the docs for years now....Congress gives nurses and PA full practice rights!! 😀

Just how have the nurses been outflanking doctors? To this date, I can't recall a nurse calling me in the morning to tell me all the orders she wrote, faxed to the pharmacy, and administered to the patient her/himself. I can't remember an attending ever being told not to sign a chart before a patient goes to the floor or goes home. I can't remember a PA ever being named individually on a law suite (or an NP for that matter). I guarantee you that if this happens just once, it will open the eyes of the midlevel providers to the level of the game they want to play. But, I think we all know that the liability falls on the shoulders of the MD, and this will continue as long as credentialed hospitals have deep pocketbooks.
 
Well I hate to say, it may be the lawyers that finally put a stop to the ever increasing, broadening roles that midlevels play. Eventually with that increased powers to serve the patient, comes the increased oversight and increased penalties for malpractice. and after a few well highlighted mishaps, then this trend may slow down. I am not a midlevel hater. But you're missing the point. The midlevels are only filling a vacuum left because there are no docs to serve those areas or roles! And my point is, after getting increased privileges to practice in the rural or underserved areas, what makes you think they will stop there? I agree some of those midlevels are great, but they didnt go to medical school nor do a residency!!! I did an elective rotation in Houston and the surgical -PA's were doing the saphenous graft excision while the surgeon opened the chest. I was like WTF? man,.. health care is changing! Does not mean they aren't good, but where does it stop? And to imply that the midlevels love their role..can you say you never have to bite your lip when trying to get orders done from the unit secretary or nurse and as boiling mad as you are, you just smile and sit and take it because if you piss off that unit secretary, your day is fu----! well, they do the same to us, just smile, hop to it and then out of ear shot complaiin how much better they can do the job! I know! I was a nursing tech before medical student. I heard it all. Anyway, let me say this, many nurses have saved my a$$ on orders, etc. They taught me a lot (especially unit nurses) And as a future intern, I will depend on them heavily. I respect them and treat them as equal. They will know more than me in my first few months. But if there had been more docs in the first place, this may not have happened as it is
 
But if there were more docs, salaries would be lower across the board (you know, the whole supply and demand thing)...
 
NinerNiner999 said:
But if there were more docs, salaries would be lower across the board (you know, the whole supply and demand thing)...

Supply and demand has little to do with how most physicians are compensated, except perhaps in certain instances where doctors are being lured to underserved locales.
 
APACHE3 said:
The midlevels are only filling a vacuum left because there are no docs to serve those areas or roles! And my point is, after getting increased privileges to practice in the rural or underserved areas, what makes you think they will stop there? I agree some of those midlevels are great, but they didnt go to medical school nor do a residency!!! I did an elective rotation in Houston and the surgical -PA's were doing the saphenous graft excision while the surgeon opened the chest.

Yes, if docs weren't abandoning primary care and rural areas there wouldn't be such a demand for nurse practitioners.

Its a good thing there are midlevels because without them in some areas there would be no one left to treat and refer the patients.

As far as the saphenous graft excision, would you want to be doing those all day long? Day after day? Certainly it would be a waste of a surgeon's talent to be assigned to that task.
 
KentW said:
Supply and demand has little to do with how most physicians are compensated, except perhaps in certain instances where doctors are being lured to underserved locales.


I wholeheartedly disagree- it has EVERYTHING to do with salary. Compare the salaries of San Diego, LA, The Northeast, and any other desirable location to those not as desireable (but still nice) i.e. Oklahoma, South Dakota, etc..

Then again, one could define "underserved" as "lacking supply."
 
AMA has artificially elevated physician salaries, by not allowing enough US students in existing schools and not endorsing future schools. Many,many qualified students get turned away because "there's no room at the inn". Some give up, many go PA, some MSN,NP, MBA, lawschool, etc. The country could have absorbed many more doctors, HOWEVER, as supply and demand go, that may have driven down salaries. To be a US doc these past few decades has been a wonderful experience for those lucky enough to have gotten in the club. Now shortages exist in all ranks of the profession. Even us "lowly" hospitalist are being courted with PGY-3 stipends if we sign contract to join a practice once we are out! Life is good. Now that the apple has fallen on the AMA head, and they admit that there will need to be an ADDITIONAL 5000 more graduates per YEAR for the next 15 years just to meet the projected poulation of US by 2020. Even if they started to build schools tomorrow, it would take a decade just to fill them and another for them to actually hit mainstream medicine. So unfortunaetly for a few of you, a few more IMG's like me, in the short term! 🙂 Anyway, has no one read my post..yes its great the NP goes out to BFE and delivers quality health care...but once there..why stay there? If an NP is good enough for BFE, then by golly, there're good enough for big city USA. The ANA lobbiest are masters of baby-stepping the way for the entire profession. Once in law, its hell to change, and they just keep adding small amendments at a time, staying low under the radar until its too late.
If we can just hold our ground, regain the public trust and reorganize the AMA (fire them) then we can slowly reclaim the trust we lost and once again become the true advocate of the patient. Fore score and seven years ago....oops wrong forum! 😀
 
NinerNiner999 said:
Just how have the nurses been outflanking doctors? To this date, I can't recall a nurse calling me in the morning to tell me all the orders she wrote, faxed to the pharmacy, and administered to the patient her/himself. I can't remember an attending ever being told not to sign a chart before a patient goes to the floor or goes home. I can't remember a PA ever being named individually on a law suite (or an NP for that matter). I guarantee you that if this happens just once, it will open the eyes of the midlevel providers to the level of the game they want to play. But, I think we all know that the liability falls on the shoulders of the MD, and this will continue as long as credentialed hospitals have deep pocketbooks.
Your view is shaped by speaking from the sheltered tower of JH. In the rest of the world NPs do everything you listed as not witnessing and more.
http://www.aafp.org/fpm/981000fm/nurse.html

NPs have mastered the art of advancing their goals of complete autonomy. With stand alone practices here in the great, bleak North their incomes rival PCPs. They reap 6 digit salaries after 5 semesters of "advanced nursing".
A large chunk of their successes lies w/ their command of semantics. Right now the big push is to have state nursing and medical boards refer to the physician/NP relationship as "collaborative" rather than "supervisory". How many state senators would care, nuch less balk at such tiny requests? The answer is very few, because what nurses say right now goes. As Apache says, it's the baby steps under the radar. While medicine fights the big wars over tort reform (that will eventually benefit PEs) the NPs are spending all of their considerable lobbying energy on obtaining evrything doctors have traditionally held except the title. Oops! They want that too!!!

The PE moniker used to mean physician extender. As of this week in the FP practice I am rotating with PE now means physician equivalent So I was instructed by an NP. She detailed how she has 7 years of education. "just like a doctor". This lengthy process included her BSN of 4 years, her 2 years of graduate nursing and six months "interning" at a family practice clinic. "See it's really the same", she beamed.

As a nurse who didn't want to fake it as a midlevel provider, I resent the heck out of the equal recognition, equal pay, and fraction of the risk that these people now enjoy. I am now squandering 7 years of income, incurring mammoth debt, and living a less than pleasant existence for the pleasure of running a higher risk and hopefully providing the best care.

My quest for doctor hood was driven by a desire to guess a lot less and know a lot more as a hopeful EM physician. The privilege of practicing Emergency Medicine was something
I felt could only be accomplished as a DO/MD. I would be lying if I didn't think the cost would carry some fiscal reward in addn to the ability to provide the best care.

Looking at the evolution of midlevel encroachment onto what once physician ground and privilege I realize I have way more education. But, at the end of the day and at the bank......who's the stupid one?
 
So sheltered tower here - I've worked in all hospital settings. Believe me - there will never be a "physician equivalent" status between midlevel providers and physicians. The legal climate of our country will never stand for it...
 
NinerNiner999 said:
So sheltered tower here - I've worked in all hospital settings. Believe me - there will never be a "physician equivalent" status between midlevel providers and physicians. The legal climate of our country will never stand for it...

But aren't many physicians give up much of their in hospital care to hospitalists? This makes the difference between the midlevel and the FP less apparent.
 
Advertisement - Members don't see this ad
NinerNiner999 said:
So sheltered tower here - I've worked in all hospital settings. Believe me - there will never be a "physician equivalent" status between midlevel providers and physicians. The legal climate of our country will never stand for it...
It's already here. In Portland Me. one of the hospitals has a hospitalist service fully run by NPs and PAs. Equivalent? I don't know, but they admit, consult, order diagnostics and discharge. Sounds like doing the job to me.
I thought I was pretty up on what was happening in the 2nd tier world. The past year as a traveling and rotating MSIII has shown me how out of touch I was.
 
So sheltered tower here - I've worked in all hospital settings. Believe me - there will never be a "physician equivalent" status between midlevel providers and physicians. The legal climate of our country will never stand for it...

hellooo? Will you re-read fuegorama's post one more time! It's a much more eloquent rebuttle to your insistance that the chairs on the Titanic do look better if rearranged! I remember one hospital I rotated at the doctors did not have MD after their names, but the nurses, PT's etc, had every initial since girl scout badges, after their names. Since the nurses run the hospital administration/HR they made the decision to take off the MD, and nothing the docs could do. Not that it matters, but as one resident told me, just another way to marginalize the docs, and reassert that the nurses are the patient advocate to protect them from the...doctors!!!! 99'r with your line of thinking, you're a shoe in for vice-president or even pesident of the AMA. So out of touch its really scary. I need not say more..fuegorama's post is perfect! and TRUE! Oh I also heard that PA's now want to be called Physician Associates, not assistants anymore. Again, where does it stop. whew, I'm out of breath...
 
NinerNiner999 said:
I also like the idea of midlevel providers because they will boost my patients per hour seen (I will get 2/3 payment for each patient a PA or NP sees) leaving more time to see and manage the sicker patients (and bill for a higher level of care). Midlevel providers actually provide physicians with more revenue because they add to our productivity. Several ED studies have been done to evaluate the impact of midlevel providers on the total ED revenue. The results: More billing by the ED, less overhead, and the ability to hire more (yes MORE) ED physicians to cover shifts. Tell me where the "encroachment" of midlevel providers is bad again.

I guarantee you that will start fading fast. You mistakenly assume that PAs and NPs are satisfied with the status quo. They are not. They are actively lobbying for full 100% independence. Eventually, Medicare will realize that it can save a ton of money by just paying hte NPs/PAs directly for their work and skipping the MD "middleman." When that happens, say goodbye to your nice little revenue stream

You gotta look at hte long term picture. IN the beginning, MDAs got paid for everything CRNAs do under their watch. 20 years later and its now a totally different ball game. Now CRNAs get paid INDEPENDENTLY of what MDAs do in many states, meaning the MDA revenue stream based on midlevels has gone bye-bye

I guarantee you the same thing will happen in the ER.
 
It's already here. In Portland Me. one of the hospitals has a hospitalist service fully run by NPs and PAs. Equivalent? I don't know, but they admit, consult, order diagnostics and discharge. Sounds like doing the job to me.

Darn it..I better look back into EM again!!! 😀
 
NinerNiner999 said:
I wholeheartedly disagree- it has EVERYTHING to do with salary. Compare the salaries of San Diego, LA, The Northeast, and any other desirable location to those not as desireable (but still nice) i.e. Oklahoma, South Dakota, etc..

Then again, one could define "underserved" as "lacking supply."

We're saying the same thing.

A lot of those regional differences have to do with cost of living.