I was wondering if any of the readers here have insight regarding the validity and general applicability of MGMA data. My experience has been that hospital administrators treat it as infallible. That immediately raises a red flag in my book. I have never had access to the entire data set. I have only been told what the median work RVU value is (I'm not even sure if it's for the region or nationally). Does anyone know if there is uniformity in the data submitted? Is there a way to find out if other practices in the data set are similar to your own? I once asked how many dermatologists were represented in the survey, and was told it was around 300. There are about 10,000 practicing dermatologists in the U.S. Thus, if I was told correctly, the MGMA data only represents around 3% of practicing dermatologists. Would this be correct? If so, not a very representative sample.
I am a practicing dermatologist in the rural Midwest, employed by a small hospital with relative geographic isolation (no other derm for 1 hour). It is very difficult to recruit here. We also have favorable treatment by commercial insurers. Am I getting lumped into a group with employed derms at Kaiser in SoCal with 300 picture perfect days a year? Even if I'm being compared to employed derms in urban/suburban practices in the upper midwest, I'm not sure it's an honest reflection of my market value.
Thank you in advance for any replies!
I am a practicing dermatologist in the rural Midwest, employed by a small hospital with relative geographic isolation (no other derm for 1 hour). It is very difficult to recruit here. We also have favorable treatment by commercial insurers. Am I getting lumped into a group with employed derms at Kaiser in SoCal with 300 picture perfect days a year? Even if I'm being compared to employed derms in urban/suburban practices in the upper midwest, I'm not sure it's an honest reflection of my market value.
Thank you in advance for any replies!
Comment