Unsolicited Jobs Thread

This forum made possible through the generous support of SDN members, donors, and sponsors. Thank you.
I wish there were more policy efforts to support these hospitals and their cancer centers supporting their oncologists, not enough of that. I do not like the idea of a remote academic physician leading care 200 miles away through an NP, but a lot of times I feel on an island with that opinion among "decision makers".

Oh I'm sure the "you need to be here 5 days a week no matter what to take care of your patients otherwise you're unprofessional" attitude of the chair quickly changes when the U. absorbs a rural clinic 200 miles away and sends you out there 1-2 days a week to take care of the poor whites. No argument there.

Members don't see this ad.
 
  • Like
Reactions: 4 users
Every single chairman:

Animated GIF


I'm sick of ASTRO, the hypocrisy and bull****tery, the brownnosing committees (hell I don't even like it in ACRO and thus backed away), the selection of some of the worst humans to lead etc etc.

But as someone who practices in a rural area, with a crack dosim/physics team and a "pretty good" set of therapists I'd say we're doing the lord's work well here. I would put my notes and plans up against anyone. I don't need another raodnc to "peer review" my routine work, and if I have any questions about what to do, there's always the internet/themednet/SDN peeps to help.

I don't need MOC (CME is fine thanks) and I definitely don't need some remote system/chairman telling us how to practice, burdening us with pointless administrative tasks/hoops to jump thru, and offering to swap out the doc instantly with another cheaper widget.

My brothers and sisters, working rural will change your lyfe. I've never more comfortable or satisfied than I am now across the board.

#
 
  • Like
Reactions: 4 users
This is wild.

So you are doing this out of the goodness of your heart? You think anybody believes that? There is nothing to defend? Because you say so?

So your expected profit margins are what by arbitraging what the hospital pays you and what you pay the physicians are what, exactly? Vs. those of us who actually would be interested in working full time in these facilities -- hindering our ability to negotiate directly with the hospitals? What rural food bank and health initiatives will you be donating all of your profits to?

I have worked in exactly the kind of facilities you are targeting, so I do know what you are talking about.

Again, "because academic centers already do it" is about the lamest justification I have heard.

The only solace I can take in this is that it won't be successful. I live in and work in a pretty undesirable area with many surrounding rural centers. I am frequently contacted for locums work and have told many centers that I would be willing to fill the gap coming out one day a week and doing the rest remotely until they can line up reliable coverage for a month or two, at an averaged daily rate much less than their typical coverage. Not a single one has ever entertained the discussion. They have always been able to staff 5 days a week with locums.

And no, I do not have an interest in calling you to doxx myself so you can insinuate defamation lawsuits or whatever else nonsense that thinly veiled threat is implying. Ridiculous.
Mehrlicht (keyboard warrior)--- Do you realize how many people today are treating without a doc or any (maybe a retired ER doc) ---the 5 day a week with a locum at $3800 (55% margin to the locum company) a day no longer works and should have bever worked. But linacs had 65% margins so.......
Agree, never met an admin who cared more about the patients then the top and bottom line. To be fair, that’s not their job but many (not all) do stand in the way of what I would consider increasing the importance of high quality health care even if it means cutting profits.

Just to give some food for thought:

Spot on, these salaries and the disregard to what would happen in the long term also helped get us where we are now. Also if you notice now the admin turn is 3-5 years. The excuse is always it is capitalism.......

70% of docs are now employed, which has fueled some of this mal-Distibution.
@Ray Auyshun brings up the best point many of these site are EOL. They were built at a time when RO was the $$$ king, not particularly for the patient. Now that has changed with 600+ linacs treating fewer than 10 patients.
Autonomy of the physician must be protected. the RUC and how they value time components will pay attention, if not. Like an IMRT plan that used to take 3-5 days to complete.
Academics aren't the comparison or justification. They utilize APPs and expand scope for them. this will continue. When you are employed and the spreadsheet needs to be balanced, you know what will happen.
We have platforms besides just a podcast. More than happy to send a link. we discuss it. The context does matter. And the agenda is what got us here.
 
  • Like
Reactions: 1 user
Members don't see this ad :)
Yeah and? How does BO help solve this problem other than exploit it for what it is - a money grab. I didn't like when Varian tried to exploit nighthawk dosimetry, and I like this even less. There is no "Remote Radiation Oncology" - our specialty requires hands on, mind active work and patient care - this is not path, or radiology. We take care of people and coordinate complex care.

BO stinks:

Patients will not get better care.
Hospitals may solve "a problem" on paper, but create a new one
Referring physicians will not like, at all
Patients will not like, if and when they realize they've been duped
NP's will flounder

When the first huge error is made, it will make front line news. NP's cannot*, can-f'in-not replace radiation oncologists. They cannot cost effectively substitute for low level FP work. And they miss stuff. In the ER, they MISS THINGS THAT GET PEOPLE SICK OR KILLED. Merely "supervising" them leads to laziness, and eventually, errors.

Our specialty societies should fight this as if our specialty will die because of it.. because I think it could very well push us off the cliff.

But hey, we know how good ASTRO handled ROCR.. so I'd say you've got about a year headstart.

Where's our new fearless leader of ASTRO to be on this matter? Paging SK to the white fone..
 
Someone please summarize this "Rural Waiver" - I have no clue.. does this mean freestanding centers get to go to General Supervision like HOPPS?

Or that NP's only have to staff the place half the time in HOPPS? Or what exactly??


The whole CAH thing was for hospitals. I assume this is about HOPPS. But some clarity here would help. I think any physician who is willing to let a pseudo-trained NP run the shop and remote in, then show up 1 day a week, is going to find that there will instead be a desire for the hospital to actually hire a starving but competent new/mid-career grad for about the same amount, who will commit to the local docs.

I don't think this business model will fly. I hope it doesn't. Rural Radonc will soon be absorbing the overflow of new trainees and they (perhaps without kids, or unmarried) WILL take those jobs... if the hospitals will have them.

The thing is kids.. radonc isn't just about being the book smartiest doc in the room. In rural america, you need people handling skills. Poor white folks may balk at seeing someone who can't command english (maybe its racist, maybe its ignorance), much less deal with doctors with poor social competence. And if you're not good at this part, the word will spread fast.

We are not all interchangeable widgets... ASTRO/ACRO needs to make sure they say "Be sure to see a board certified radiation oncologist" and not an NP with an occasional TV visit. That is NOT the way our profession needs to go.
rural waiver back in the day meant that freestanding or hospital could be general supervision
 
Funny.

Your proposal takes away full-time jobs and kneecaps independent locums.

I am glad you clarified what you meant by 55% margins. The locums agencies cover travel, malpractice, and housing/daily stipends before their operating margin. You are not accounting for that, so you are not arguing in good faith. What will be your margin and what will you pay your remote doctor employees, specifically?

So you save the hospital a few grand on locums (either agency or direct) 5 days a week on-site with a scheme for remote supervision, that savings goes where exactly? Who are you really helping here?

I guess you are the saint, single handedly keeping the CAHs' lights on.
 
  • Like
Reactions: 1 users
When # shows up, the margins get compressed. My rate is 2800 a day plus expenses. Expenses are pass thru. Agency tries to get 3200-3500 if they can. More for short notice/emergent situations obviously. But they can and do sometimes get even more. Hell, I've charged 4500 a day for emergent babysitting to a place I did not want to go back to..

The days of 55% margins are GONE. Someone like me will find their way there. What this really is.. is a way to circumvent the time honored rulez that say a radonc, in a hospital setting, needs to be generally available. Lets throw in a NP, a television, offer a slightly lower cost to the hospital and.. find a sucker Radonc who will work for a few shekels... WHILE OFFLOADING THE RISK TO THE RADONC WITHOUT THE PAY.

And will your medmal cover this when **** hits the fan. Good luck guinea pigs.

Im Outta Here GIF
 
I agree some clinics are running substandard equipment. I interviewed at one, but don't be surprised at the number of true beams in the boonies. The docs staffing these locations can be quite smart. I have met them.. They just don't have a choice to go somewhere better due to geographic restrictions or they have some other reason for being there.
Hopefully I'm one of them. I totally support rural truebeams staffed by thoughtful docs. However, that's not the whole story. Many of the setups are using machines that should be in landfills bc they have the CON and setup to essentially print money while hiding behind a "serving a need" banner.
 
  • Like
Reactions: 1 user
We are hosed.

JJ is probably responding to a real problem on a national healthcare level and working within the domain that he is familiar with. Yes, this solution does not help present or future radoncs. JJ should own this. The narrative that radoncs are overpaid is alive and well.

Locums docs (and travel nurses and travel RTTs) are horrendous value for community hospitals. This issue alone has contributed to solvency issues for multiple community places.

Now, we know that radonc typically makes money for the hospital and that we are not pulling down medonc locums rates (not close), but it doesn't matter. If you can sell value (whatever the eff that is, value does include living in a community, commitment to patients and face to face time, but those are not easily commoditized in markets (yes capitalism)) you will have buyers.

Community hospitals will do stroke care remotely.

Our problem is of course compounded (majorly) by consolidation and in particular, academic medicine losing track of its mission (which is not to provide care for everyone). Not only does being a "private practice" doc no longer mean what it used to, being an academic doc definitely doesn't mean the same. Largely, both will be employed community docs, with the smaller your institution, the greater the value you provide.

Eventually, the best we can hope for is this:


I know, not a popular take, but you can only let consolidation go so far before you are better off giving block grants to small regions.
 
  • Like
  • Love
Reactions: 6 users
When # shows up, the margins get compressed. My rate is 2800 a day plus expenses. Expenses are pass thru. Agency tries to get 3200-3500 if they can. More for short notice/emergent situations obviously. But they can and do sometimes get even more. Hell, I've charged 4500 a day for emergent babysitting to a place I did not want to go back to..

The days of 55% margins are GONE. Someone like me will find their way there. What this really is.. is a way to circumvent the time honored rulez that say a radonc, in a hospital setting, needs to be generally available. Lets throw in a NP, a television, offer a slightly lower cost to the hospital and.. find a sucker Radonc who will work for a few shekels... WHILE OFFLOADING THE RISK TO THE RADONC WITHOUT THE PAY.

And will your medmal cover this when **** hits the fan. Good luck guinea pigs.

Im Outta Here GIF

I do have to agree with this aspect. I personally would not take on that risk myself, and I get personal satisfaction out of face to face patient interactions. This is one of my favorite parts of covering these rural clinics. When I had an NP, she was doing a lot independently, but that was after weeks/months of 1:1 training. I wouldn't be comfortable supervising a stranger with that much responsibility.

I suspect the oversupply problem will make it easy for companies like this to succeed though. The average rad onc is relatively slow and there are a lot of underpaid junior academics.
 
  • Like
Reactions: 1 users
rural waiver back in the day meant that freestanding or hospital could be general supervision
Thats what I thought. Freestanding centers would HAPPILY have one day a week at 5 centers if Medicare didn't require Direct Supervision for them. Meanwhile, HOPPS rural centers benefit from General Sup by allowing folks to work one place, live another.

The exploit the latter to "one day a week and use an NP" ... smells like BO to me.

As the man says:
Bold Strategy Cotton GIF by MOODMAN
 
I don't need another raodnc to "peer review" my routine work
HELL yes.

Mehrlicht (keyboard warrior)--- Do you realize how many people today are treating without a doc or any (maybe a retired ER doc) ---the 5 day a week with a locum at $3800 (55% margin to the locum company) a day no longer works and should have bever worked. But linacs had 65% margins so.......
It's unusual. The rural hospital I worked at briefly absolutely refused to even let the med onc put their name as supervising. Does it happen somewhere? I'm sure. Does it make it the right solution? No.

And guy, whether I doxx myself to you or not doesn't change the validity of my comments, it just gives you ammo to go after me on a personal level, which benefits me how exactly?
 
  • Like
Reactions: 3 users
Members don't see this ad :)
God dammit I wish I had done ortho. This whole situation is just absurd. Completely FUBAR. Can't imagine anyone choosing to train in this now.
 
I'd even take medonc. 10 minutes ago my CEO asked me "you sure you can't retrain lol" after telling me he's offering 2# to our medonc candidate.. And confirming what I told him previously about 5k a day AND UP for medonc locums...I bet the agencies are charging 7500-9500..
 
  • Like
Reactions: 1 user
I'd even take medonc. 10 minutes ago my CEO asked me "you sure you can't retrain lol" after telling me he's offering 2# to our medonc candidate.. And confirming what I told him previously about 5k a day AND UP for medonc locums...I bet the agencies are charging 7500-9500..
There are many community admins out there who wish their radoncs could do some medonc. Training programs should consider this.
 
  • Like
Reactions: 5 users
I'd even take medonc. 10 minutes ago my CEO asked me "you sure you can't retrain lol" after telling me he's offering 2# to our medonc candidate.. And confirming what I told him previously about 5k a day AND UP for medonc locums...I bet the agencies are charging 7500-9500..

How are they able to offer that much when there is no way that the clinical volume will justify the pay?

This has been a barrier to recruiting in my network.
 
How are they able to offer that much when there is no way that the clinical volume will justify the pay?

This has been a barrier to recruiting in my network.
Clinical volume justifying pay? What is the calculation? The total revenue the doc bring into the hospital through diagnostic orders, chemo, biosimilars and IO doesn't justify the pay?

Medonc never pay for themselves with pro-fees.

Maybe you have legal counsel utilizing Stark arguments and salary surveys to determine "fair market value"?

When in reality, if you are in the boonies, "fair market value" is what you need to pay to not have a locums as long as it costs less than a locums.
 
Last edited:
  • Like
Reactions: 2 users
How are they able to offer that much when there is no way that the clinical volume will justify the pay?

This has been a barrier to recruiting in my network.
The alternative is shutting the cancer center down. They don't have a choice.
That pendulum will swing the other way, eventually.

For now, I don't understand why any med onc is working W2 in rural communities on MGMA payscales (less than rad onc) when they can make over 5k/day as locums (double rad onc).
 
  • Like
Reactions: 3 users
The alternative is shutting the cancer center down. They don't have a choice.
That pendulum will swing the other way, eventually.

For now, I don't understand why any med onc is working W2 in rural communities on MGMA payscales (less than rad onc) when they can make over 5k/day as locums (double rad onc).
Killing community cancer care.

My biggest anxiety isn't JJ or ROCR or even big regional academic consolidation monsters A,B or C.

It's not being able to staff the cancer center reasonably with medonc, and the cost locums are having on our system.

edit: JJ should be focusing on remote staffing for medonc!!!!!
 
  • Like
Reactions: 3 users
The alternative is shutting the cancer center down. They don't have a choice.
That pendulum will swing the other way, eventually.

For now, I don't understand why any med onc is working W2 in rural communities on MGMA payscales (less than rad onc) when they can make over 5k/day as locums (double rad onc).

I get all those things, and that is exactly the challenge. They would rather locums because it pays better.

I was under the impression that a hospital cannot pay an employed doctor whatever they want. It doesnt have to match exactly, but if you are paid at 99 percentile in MGMA and you have 5th percentile volume, that would be an issue.

I am not a lawyer and have only read a little, but it seemed like the Medicare revisions in 2021 to FMV definitions makes this a problem for my network. I dont know if its a state thing, or thats just how our lawyers interpret the law, or what... not sure.
 
  • Like
Reactions: 2 users
I get all those things, and that is exactly the challenge. They would rather locums because it pays better.

I was under the impression that a hospital cannot pay an employed doctor whatever they want. It doesnt have to match exactly, but if you are paid at 99 percentile in MGMA and you have 5th percentile volume, that would be an issue.

I am not a lawyer and have only read a little, but it seemed like the Medicare revisions in 2021 to FMV definitions makes this a problem for my network. I dont know if its a state thing, or thats just how our lawyers interpret the law, or what... not sure.
They interpret it in the way that is most financially advantageous for themselves.

So it goes.
 
  • Like
Reactions: 3 users
edit: JJ should be focusing on remote staffing for medonc!!!!!

I think this is the way. Radonc is too complex, too many moving parts. But prescribing chemo?

Only concern might be finding competent NP's that the Medonc can trust. They don't grow on trees. Ours is leaving, couldn't handle it.. maybe getting a younger grad who is hungry to learn NP onc would be the ideal.. then deploy them across the country with a centralized Tele-Med Onc.

(Commercial fades in with pleasant music)..

IVRVU - your solution to solving your Medical Oncology needs. Here at IVRVU we know you can't find a Medonc, and god forbid you try to hire locums. Your costs will be obscene. What is a frustrated CEO to do? Thats where IVRVU comes in. We provide highly trained friendly NP Oncs at a fraction of the cost, and provide centralized remote Medoncs to do teleconsults and manage your NP. Now you can have all of the advantageous of a real cancer center, without the high cost. For more information dial 1-800-69IVRVUS or simply smash your head against the wall until you hear the phone ringing. We'll be there for you. IVRVU. Every RVU counts.

(Scene fade)
 
  • Haha
  • Love
Reactions: 2 users
I mean, there's technically no reason we can't dabble in MedOnc.

If you're already doing ADT, why not daro? Radiopharm - why not Rituxan?

It's not like Xeloda or Temodar is more complicated than dose painting with VMAT.

Granted, I'm solo in the middle of nowhere and there's a lot of times where if I don't do something, it won't get done, which is a lot different than a metro area with 7000 docs.
 
  • Like
Reactions: 1 users
Are you ever prescribing Xeloda or Temodar?

I have not.

I did Lupron a couple times, but this hospital we lose money on it.

ET could be done, too, but that would really annoy our oncology friends.
 
Are you ever prescribing Xeloda or Temodar?

I have not.

I did Lupron a couple times, but this hospital we lose money on it.

ET could be done, too, but that would really annoy our oncology friends.

Anybody using relugolix?
 
I think this is the way. Radonc is too complex, too many moving parts. But prescribing chemo?

Only concern might be finding competent NP's that the Medonc can trust. They don't grow on trees. Ours is leaving, couldn't handle it.. maybe getting a younger grad who is hungry to learn NP onc would be the ideal.. then deploy them across the country with a centralized Tele-Med Onc.

(Commercial fades in with pleasant music)..

IVRVU - your solution to solving your Medical Oncology needs. Here at IVRVU we know you can't find a Medonc, and god forbid you try to hire locums. Your costs will be obscene. What is a frustrated CEO to do? Thats where IVRVU comes in. We provide highly trained friendly NP Oncs at a fraction of the cost, and provide centralized remote Medoncs to do teleconsults and manage your NP. Now you can have all of the advantageous of a real cancer center, without the high cost. For more information dial 1-800-69IVRVUS or simply smash your head against the wall until you hear the phone ringing. We'll be there for you. IVRVU. Every RVU counts.

(Scene fade)
Yaaassss. Maybe JJ can PM us (as in the whole SDN crew). We'll do some recruiting and go into business. NPs are hard to find, but there are a lot more of them that went to regular rural high schools, grew up in small towns, graduated from state colleges and are willing to live away from major metros than there are medoncs like this at this point.
 
  • Like
Reactions: 1 user
I am for some. I've primarily used it on younger, motivated patients that would prefer the downsides of a pill for the hypothetical, preliminary data-supported upsides like faster T recovery and less cardiac risk.
Seems to be slowly displacing injectable ADT. Academic centers I’ve spoken to have already switched to it.

I mean you have to take that pill everyday. Whatever
 
Anybody using relugolix?
Recommending for most with high-risk, just a matter of whether their insurance will cover.

Tons of Rad Oncs doing their own Relugolix/Lupron.

Rad Oncs could TOTALLY do Abi/Enza as Urologists are already administering.

The Temodar/Xeloda would be tough b/c it's still 'cytotoxic chemo'. And yes, we'd be totally fine to manage Temodar/Xeloda/Weekly cis for gyn at or H&N at the physician level. But we'd need a change in staffing support to manage all the fluids, infusin reaction, chemo teaching for IV stuff, etc.
 
  • Like
Reactions: 2 users
But we'd need a change in staffing support to manage all the fluids, infusin reaction, chemo teaching for IV stuff, etc.

Most RadOnc nurses (if you can even get one) are barely capable of doing anything more than taking vitals so that would be a paradigm shift

Good nursing can make or break a job
 
  • Like
Reactions: 6 users
Most RadOnc nurses (if you can even get one) are barely capable of doing anything more than taking vitals so that would be a paradigm shift

Good nursing can make or break a job
1.5/4 places were like that.

But first job and last job, the nurses are my savior and I will keep her here until we both die in a midwestern frost.
 
I mean, there's technically no reason we can't dabble in MedOnc.

If you're already doing ADT, why not daro? Radiopharm - why not Rituxan?

It's not like Xeloda or Temodar is more complicated than dose painting with VMAT.

Granted, I'm solo in the middle of nowhere and there's a lot of times where if I don't do something, it won't get done, which is a lot different than a metro area with 7000 docs.
once or twice in my career, I have written for xeloda and temodar just to get somethin done (medonc out of town) etc
 
We are hosed.

JJ is probably responding to a real problem on a national healthcare level and working within the domain that he is familiar with. Yes, this solution does not help present or future radoncs. JJ should own this. The narrative that radoncs are overpaid is alive and well.

Locums docs (and travel nurses and travel RTTs) are horrendous value for community hospitals. This issue alone has contributed to solvency issues for multiple community places.

Now, we know that radonc typically makes money for the hospital and that we are not pulling down medonc locums rates (not close), but it doesn't matter. If you can sell value (whatever the eff that is, value does include living in a community, commitment to patients and face to face time, but those are not easily commoditized in markets (yes capitalism)) you will have buyers.

Community hospitals will do stroke care remotely.

Our problem is of course compounded (majorly) by consolidation and in particular, academic medicine losing track of its mission (which is not to provide care for everyone). Not only does being a "private practice" doc no longer mean what it used to, being an academic doc definitely doesn't mean the same. Largely, both will be employed community docs, with the smaller your institution, the greater the value you provide.

Eventually, the best we can hope for is this:


I know, not a popular take, but you can only let consolidation go so far before you are better off giving block grants to small regions.
It is inevitable someone would attempt this, and I would rather it is JJ than someone else as he is willing to engage. Its not like if he drops this, it would remain untested. The bad guys are those who created the oversupply.
 
  • Like
Reactions: 3 users
I guess the thing is this definition of General Supervision and "Provider" = MD/DO, NP, PA has been in place for a long time. Nobody has tried to exploit it. Medicare NCD simply requires someone with those credentials be available. LCD's for certain things, like IMRT, say for Novitas/TX require a BC radonc 2/5 days a week. Novitas made that "Deal" to try and appease TxOncology who wanted to continue to rely on their Medoncs.

What will private payors require (I know, you're laughing)? Will they capitulate in exchange for lower payout (80% of MD charges I think NP gets)? Maybe, greed is good right..

Perhaps they need to say "no way, we want a radonc there at least most of the time" but who are we kidding..

for the almighty dollar.. they will probably give this up like the prom queen at homecoming.
 
  • Like
Reactions: 2 users
Bingo.

I didn't ask for him to respond. I just simply posted the suspicious "job" ad and got a passive-aggressive PM.

The notion that he is doing this out of service to rural patients, a good fight against the system when/if he was previously arguing for supervision to the extreme is absurd on its face. I would guess he is extremely envious of the RT staff who successfully brought qui tam suits in the past. That's not a profitable grift anymore so here we are.
This statement not necessary, adds no value - I would guess he is extremely envious of the RT staff who successfully brought qui tam suits in the past. That's not a profitable grift anymore so here we are.

I just refuse to tap out and roll over to "the system", especially in these areas. they are tapped out because of us, but maybe we can change it.
Overlooking that and answering the question: I trained under Deborah Churchill and Carl Bogardus...so preservation of the integrity of the profession and physicians. I completely understand, which is why it remains the priority.
We have always said direct supervision. Then OPPS moved to General, which is fine. The MPFS should be the same, unfortunately these tighter constraints have led to closures or alternative operations. IGRT and is not diagnostic and should not fall under Direct Supervision.
With direct supervision (General) being the standard, we see a gap when it comes to recruitment (not just for RO). It can't be just about $$$ as many of these centers are not bringing in enough to front a 2-million-dollar staffing bill among physics, therapists, dosi, and physician.

So minus, PPS going away, increasing MPFS rates, leveling rates, or adding rural incentives, there has to be an alternative that at a minimum maintains quality (Bridge increases with software and peer review) while keeping the service line open.

3 times I have offered to send and invite and am happy to discuss. It is not perfect for sure, but it does protect the core fundamentals. This is not designed for SRS, Brachy,

Small surveys but we are trying to gather the data.
Current APP models are not standardized and increase potential for issues,
1690400334998.png
1690400374148.png
1690400457319.png
1690400499401.png
but....
1690400239017.png
 
I would very much enjoy remote supervision one day a week, but also understand the friendly fire that would occur if the laws helped me out there

That's a big future factor as to if I stay at my rural job for 10 years or 20 years. I would be fine with a decent medonc NP/PA "covering" that one day I'm not here and I would check films remotely and still be available (ie not on a plane or beach).
My patients are numerous, complex, and require physical presence - this is not somewhere that could be managed well with one day of in-person and 4 days remote. People just wouldn't show up.
 
  • Like
Reactions: 1 users
Adds no value?

The irony.

You are offering a solution nobody needs other than providing the hospital a cheaper way to bill without technically breaking the law.

You don't care about direct supervision anymore because now you can make money by facilitating remote general. And for what it's worth I have no issue remote 1-2 days per week if you are not doing SBRT or managing a high patient load. I think 3 days a week on site is a fair bare minimum with consistent coverage by the same MD with a vested interest in the quality of the care and the patients. Those of us who have worked solo and have gone away on vacation for only 7-10 days know what a giant mess it is to clean up when you get back. You are talking about being there once every 7 days, maybe, staffed by people who don't really care to begin with since it's not their community and are just trying to make a few extra bucks on the side of their full time job where their attention is focused. That does not portend to quality care.

Sirspamalot is providing his rural hospital quality on-site care flying in/out. You are going to go to his hospital and offer to staff it for cheaper with midlevels and remote MD coverage looking to "supplement" their full-time income, putting people like him (and formerly me) out of work. What value does that add?
 
Last edited by a moderator:
Adds no value?

The irony.

You are offering a solution nobody needs other than providing the hospital a cheaper way to bill without technically breaking the law.

You don't care about direct supervision anymore because now you can make money by facilitating remote general. And for what it's worth I have no issue remote 1-2 days per week if you are not doing SBRT or managing a high patient load.

Sirspamalot is providing his rural hospital quality on-site care flying in/out. You are going to go to his hospital and offer to staff it for cheaper with midlevels and remote MD coverage looking to "supplement" their full-time income, putting people like him (and formerly me) out of work. What value does that add?

You can pry my job from my cold dead hands... it ain't gonna happen. My patient population is complex, my peers rely on me, and the hospital won't save much after all the "fees and markups" ie saving 100k a year won't justify the risk and loss of collegiality they currently have.

Offer my services for half the cost? My current clinically trained CEO wouldn't go for it, but someone else might. A top pencil pusher at my hospital nationwide system for a money losing entity? Yeah, I bet they'd sniff it out and ask a lot of questions, then allow the policies at each hospital to loosen up. All about them benjamins.

It won't happen overnight as hospital policies would have to change. And patients and referring docs won't like it.
 
  • Like
Reactions: 1 users
"Do you have difficulty recruiting Radiation Oncologist?:
"Are APPs, NPs, or advanced care practitioners delivery care in your practice/department?"

Small survey, and with typos! Is this the quality we will see?
Also, an advanced care practitioner -- if that's not an MD, then what is the MD? An ultramega practitioner?
 
I guess the thing is this definition of General Supervision and "Provider" = MD/DO, NP, PA has been in place for a long time. Nobody has tried to exploit it. Medicare NCD simply requires someone with those credentials be available. LCD's for certain things, like IMRT, say for Novitas/TX require a BC radonc 2/5 days a week. Novitas made that "Deal" to try and appease TxOncology who wanted to continue to rely on their Medoncs.

What will private payors require (I know, you're laughing)? Will they capitulate in exchange for lower payout (80% of MD charges I think NP gets)? Maybe, greed is good right..

Perhaps they need to say "no way, we want a radonc there at least most of the time" but who are we kidding..

for the almighty dollar.. they will probably give this up like the prom queen at homecoming.
an NCD and LCD is not authoritative as they do not go through a formal comment period. The LCD L 36711 you refer to for Novitas actually was in line with CMS.
There are still sites that don't have a med onc to bill under.
1690403343224.png
 
Personally I find Bridge Oncology intriguing. I have no affiliation.

I would rather enjoy working 2 days on-site at 2 rural sites, with 20-25 patients combined, and then be able to live wherever I want during the other 5 days of the week.

Is this better or worse than the overstaffed PPS exempt academic site?

Arguably it’s better since it’s much more efficient for everyone involved, with less travel for patients, and less cost to payors. Of course you’re not doing brachytherapy or SRS at a CON place.

Is this better or worse than the fully MD-staffed 4-5 days a week rural site?

Arguably it’s better, and here’s why. We’re talking tiny rural towns, 10-25k people. They’re not getting a @sirspamalot, they’re getting a locums poo poo platter of retired possibly senile IMG physicians, or they’re getting someone full time who isn’t very good and is planning on leaving soon anyways.

As for absolutely wrecking the job market, imho we need something to wake up academic programs. Chairpersons believe there’s excess slack with these rural jobs, let Bridge Oncology show them they can’t rely on that crutch. We’ve enshrined proton pps exempt academic motherships because of this false belief that big city radiation is better than small town radiation. Keeping bread and butter cases in the community, in small town America, I’d argue that’s a good thing and if it causes some pain to academic programs, that’s the icing on the cake.
 
Personally I find Bridge Oncology intriguing. I have no affiliation.

I would rather enjoy working 2 days on-site at 2 rural sites, with 20-25 patients combined, and then be able to live wherever I want during the other 5 days of the week.

Is this better or worse than the overstaffed PPS exempt academic site?

Arguably it’s better since it’s much more efficient for everyone involved, with less travel for patients, and less cost to payors. Of course you’re not doing brachytherapy or SRS at a CON place.

Is this better or worse than the fully MD-staffed 4-5 days a week rural site?

Arguably it’s better, and here’s why. We’re talking tiny rural towns, 10-25k people. They’re not getting a @sirspamalot, they’re getting a locums poo poo platter of retired possibly senile IMG physicians, or they’re getting someone full time who isn’t very good and is planning on leaving soon anyways.

As for absolutely wrecking the job market, imho we need something to wake up academic programs. Chairpersons believe there’s excess slack with these rural jobs, let Bridge Oncology show them they can’t rely on that crutch. We’ve enshrined proton pps exempt academic motherships because of this false belief that big city radiation is better than small town radiation. Keeping bread and butter cases in the community, in small town America, I’d argue that’s a good thing and if it causes some pain to academic programs, that’s the icing on the cake.
I think the delusion level of everyone but actual practicing pp rural radoncs on how this will work is pretty impressive.

Would you like a Cookie?


 
  • Like
  • Haha
  • Dislike
Reactions: 3 users
Delusional or not, let’s revisit this in 5 years, see what the market decides it wants.
 
  • Like
Reactions: 1 user
Why don't the 10k towns just shut down? If you don't have enough patients to support a cancer center, maybe you shouldn't have one.
 
  • Like
Reactions: 1 users
I would rather enjoy working 2 days on-site at 2 rural sites, with 20-25 patients combined, and then be able to live wherever I want during the other 5 days of the week.

Sure. As long as you're fine with the middleman taking a fat cut out of the PC billed in your name.
You can't take good care of patients on site once a week. I cover 2 sites twice a week right now and even that's not sufficient with other docs there on other days. I think you need 3 days minimum same doc. That's why I've offered to do it as a temporary measure for local sites on my off day in case they literally have no other option (they always find somebody). But this is not a bridge. Bridge to what? You're talking about a perm solution. Patients deserve better.

But hey, the academic guys are SURE they are better at treating bone mets than we are and we are incapable of contouring head and neck or GI cases, so sure I'm sure they will be more than happy to spend their "academic days" doing remote work and smelling their own farts for an extra $100k/year. Yes, they will be happy to partner with Bridge and believe they are increasing quality. Makes me sad.
 
  • Like
Reactions: 1 users
Top