(no title)
NameError | 1 year ago
As a layperson, it seems like we (patients / society) would benefit from having more doctors, i.e. opening up more residency slots and admitting more people to med school, but there's probably a lot I don't understand about the issue. Not sure if it's a lack of political willpower to do this, or if there are other reasons why the number of doctors we train is so restricted.
[1] https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/29710082/ ("PAs performed more skin biopsies per case of skin cancer diagnosed and diagnosed fewer melanomas in situ, suggesting that the diagnostic accuracy of PAs may be lower than that of dermatologists")
marxisttemp|1 year ago
Like so many of America’s issues, it’s due to lobbying based on entrenched greed.
> In 1997, the AMA lobbied Congress to restrict the number of doctors that could be trained in the United States, claiming that, "The United States is on the verge of a serious oversupply of physicians."
freedomben|1 year ago
impossiblefork|1 year ago
Here in Sweden have almost 2x as many physicians you do, and we pay them about half of what you do, so we end up paying approximately the same in salaries (the average Swedish physician is paid 131k) and I think it works out completely.
We start our training of physicians right after high school, so we push them to get an MSc in Medicine, rather than treating physicians as some kind of pseudo-PhDs, with however requiring head physicians to have an actual PhD; and this system is fine. I think it's the same way in Denmark, and given the stuff they've come up with I imagine one can't complain much about their system.
a_vanderbilt|1 year ago
w10-1|1 year ago
Biopsy stats might differ because PA's are used in large (cough private equity) practices to do a lot of checks esp. in old-folks homes, and medicare pays. Patients per week can average 120+; no doctor does that. Plus, the PA is supposed to err on the side of caution, meaning more biopsies. DR's are more willing to ignore possible risks.
That said, most anyone (Dr. or PA) who is recently trained at a good school is often better than people with 15+ years of experience.
Also, derm exam skills are not enhanced by the depth of medical education or even much by experience (by contrast to the cardio exam). It's mostly a function of pattern recognition and patient skills.
FireBeyond|1 year ago
In some places, it is possible to go from high school to ARNP within 6 years.
And while supervision requirements for PAs might vary in terms of actual oversight, ARNPs are ostensibly fully fledged independent providers.
And I'll also say that you see the same pre-hospital too. In the PNW, while there are valid criticisms that can be leveled against two of the pre-eminent paramedic programs (Harborview, and Tacoma Community), there are far, far, too many "strip mall schools" in other states that will take you from "zero to hero" in 4 or 5 months (of 6 days a week, 8 hours a day, of just class time), and dump you out on the world with just enough retained knowledge to pass your NREMT and the barest amount of ride time to meet DOT mandated minimums. It's scary, to be blunt. These people go out with no clinical experience and are now expected not just to work as a team on a 911 call, but to lead it.
TheNewsIsHere|1 year ago
When I actually got my appointment within 30 days, due to calling and advocating for myself politely, I started wondering how much ground medical dermatology has ceded to elective and cosmetic dermatology. I am concerned that dermatology is becoming centered around the personal appearance of affluent people rather than medical need.
Try requesting appointments during December or January. A little birdie told me that appointment cancellations go through the roof at some practices during those months.
NobleLie|1 year ago
https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Flexner_Report