Results of the 2012-2013 Association of Residents in Radiation Oncology (ARRO) Job Search and Career Planning Survey of Graduating Residents in the United States

Quantitative Medical Physics National Job Data Distribution Analysis

PURPOSE

The purpose of this study was to investigate the contemporary distribution of medical physics (MP) employment opportunities across the United States.

METHODS AND MATERIALS

An annual record (2018-2019) of advertised full-time MP jobs was created using publicly available information from the American Association of Physicists in Medicine and Indeed websites. Listed jobs were categorized based on position name, work experience, job function, and geographic region. To account for regional population differences, a preponderance of employment opportunities per 10 million people was computed. Using Commission on Accreditation of Medical Physics Education Programs residency accreditation data, the nationwide locations of the MP training centers and the number of residency positions per annum were identified. A chi-square goodness-of-fit test was used for statistical analysis.

RESULTS

A total of 441 unique MP jobs were identified nationwide per annum (2018-2019). The highest percentage of MP jobs was reported from the South region (33.6%), and the lowest (17.2%) was from the West. Analysis revealed that 148 jobs (33.6%) were academic and 293 (66.4%) were nonacademic. The South had the most academic jobs overall (31.8%), whereas the West had the fewest (13.5%). Regionally, the highest percentage of academic jobs (46.9%) was reported from the Northeast, whereas the West had the lowest percentage (26.3%). The analysis of academic versus nonacademic job comparison by regions showed statistically significant differences (P = .0133). The Midwest and the West regions, respectively, showed the highest (18.2) and lowest (10.24) number of jobs per unit population, measured in 10 million.

CONCLUSIONS

To our knowledge, this is one of the first national quantitative job data analyses of MP job distributions. This study revealed the level of demand for qualified candidates in 2018 to 2019, showing an imbalance between academic and nonacademic positions across the regions of the United States. Moreover, the geographic distribution of job listings deviated significantly from expectation given the relative population of each region.

Regional Influence of Radiation Oncology Residency Training on Job Securement over Two Time Periods

Purpose Recent reports have noted conflicting predictions regarding the future of the radiation oncology job market. Residents and practicing radiation oncologists (ROs) report perceptions of an increasingly saturated market. An important factor contributing to the job landscape is the potential geographic maldistribution of ROs in the United States. Given the importance of the evolving job market and appropriate supply and demand for future ROs, this study investigated whether residency training region influences employment region and whether "portability" of residency training has changed over time from 2003-2015. Methods Radiation oncology residency graduates were identified from Association of Residents in Radiation Oncology (ARRO) directories from 2003-2012. This information was cross-referenced with the American Society of Radiation Oncology directory to determine current employment location. The region of residency training and employment were categorized into four regions per the US Census Bureau: Northeast (NE), South (S), Midwest (MW), and West (W). The change in "portability" of residency training over time was determined from the results of an anonymous internet-based survey which provided information on year of graduation and location of first job. "Portability" was defined as the rate at which a trainee in one region could find employment in another region. From the survey, two cohorts were identified: early (graduated from 2003-2006) and late (graduated from 2012-2015). Results Current employment location was available for 817/1168 (70%) residents identified in the ARRO directories from 2003-2012. The percentages of residents who trained in the NE, S, MW, and W were 29%, 28%, 27%, and 15%, respectively. The percentages of residents with current employment in the NE, S, MW, and W were 20%, 34%, 22%, and 24%, respectively. Residents were more likely to remain employed in the region in which they trained (p < 0.05), with 58% having current employment in the region of their training. Residency graduation year and location of first job (in the United States) were available for 139/198 (70%) survey respondents. Portability of residency training did not significantly change from 2003-2012 with 49% of the early cohort securing their first job in the region in which they trained compared to 57% of the late cohort (p = 0.39). Conclusions This study suggests that recent residents are not moving to different geographic regions at an increased rate than previous and that residents are more likely to find employment in the region in which they trained.

Choosing a career in oncology: results of a nationwide cross-sectional study

BACKGROUND

Little information is currently available concerning young medical students desire to pursue a career in oncology, or their career expectations.

METHODS

This project is a cross-sectional epidemiological study. A voluntary and anonymous questionnaire was distributed to all young oncologists studying in France between the 2nd of October 2013 and the 23rd of February 2014.

RESULTS

The overall response rate was 75.6%. A total of 505 young oncologists completed the questionnaire. The main determining factors in the decision to practice oncology were the cross-sectional nature of the field (70.8%), the depth and variety of human relations (56.3%) and the multi-disciplinary field of work (50.2%). Most residents would like to complete a rotation outside of their assigned region (59.2%) or abroad (70.2%) in order to acquire additional expertise (67.7%). In addition, most interns would like to undertake a fellowship involving care, teaching and research in order to hone their skills (85.7%) and forge a career in public hospitals (46.4%). Career prospects mainly involve salaried positions in public hospitals. Many young oncologists are concerned about their professional future, due to the shortage of openings (40.8%), the workload (52.8%) and the lack of work-life balance (33.4%).

CONCLUSIONS

This investigation provides a comprehensive profile of the reasons young oncologists chose to pursue a career in oncology, and their career prospects.

Domestic Job Shortage or Job Maldistribution? A Geographic Analysis of the Current Radiation Oncology Job Market

PURPOSE

To examine whether permanent radiation oncologist (RO) employment opportunities vary based on geography.

METHODS AND MATERIALS

A database of full-time RO jobs was created by use of American Society for Radiation Oncology (ASTRO) Career Center website posts between March 28, 2016, and March 31, 2017. Jobs were first classified by region based on US Census Bureau data. Jobs were further categorized as academic or nonacademic depending on the employer. The prevalence of job openings per 10 million population was calculated to account for regional population differences. The χ² test was implemented to compare position type across regions. The number and locations of graduating RO during our study period was calculated using National Resident Matching Program data. The χ² goodness-of-fit test was then used to compare a set of observed proportions of jobs with a corresponding set of hypothesized proportions of jobs based on the proportions of graduates per region.

RESULTS

A total of 211 unique jobs were recorded. The highest and lowest percentages of jobs were seen in the South (31.8%) and Northeast (18.5%), respectively. Of the total jobs, 82 (38.9%) were academic; the South had the highest percentage of overall academic jobs (35.4%), while the West had the lowest (14.6%). Regionally, the Northeast had the highest percentage of academic jobs (56.4%), while the West had the lowest (26.7%). A statistically significant difference was noted between regional academic and nonacademic job availability (P=.021). After we accounted for unit population, the Midwest had the highest number of total jobs per 10 million (9.0) while the South had the lowest (5.9). A significant difference was also observed in the proportion of RO graduates versus actual jobs per region (P=.003), with a surplus of trainees seen in the Northeast.

CONCLUSIONS

This study presents a quantitative analysis of the RO job market. We found a disproportionately small number of opportunities compared with graduates trained in the Northeast, as well as a significant regional imbalance of academic versus nonacademic jobs. Long-term monitoring is required to confirm these results.

Faculty of Radiation Oncology 2014 workforce census

Introduction

This paper reports the key findings of the Faculty of Radiation Oncology 2014 workforce census and compares the results with earlier surveys.

Methods

The census was conducted in mid‐2014 with distribution to all radiation oncologists, educational affiliates and trainees listed on the college database. There were six email reminders and responses were anonymous. The overall response rate was 76.1%.

Results

The age range of fellows was 32–96 (mean = 49 years, median = 47 years). The majority of the radiation oncologists were male (n = 263, 63%). The minority of radiation oncologists were of Asian descent (n = 43, 13.4%). Radiation oncologists graduated from medical school on average 23 years ago (median = 22 years). A minority of fellows (n = 66, 20%) held another postgraduate qualification. Most radiation oncologists worked, on average, at two practices (median = 2, range 1–7). Practising radiation oncologists worked predominantly in the public sector (n = 131, 49%), but many worked in both the public and private sectors (n = 94, 37%), and a minority worked in the private sector only (n = 38, 14%). The largest proportion of the workforce was from New South Wales accounting for 29% of radiation oncologists. Radiation oncologists worked an average of 43 h/week (median = 43 h, range 6–80). Radiation oncologists who worked in the private sector worked less hours than their public sector or public/private sector colleagues. (38.3 vs. 42.9 vs. 44.3 h, P = 0.042). Victorians worked the fewest average hours per week at 38 h and West Australians the most at 46 h/week. Radiation oncologists averaged 48 min for each new case, 17 min per follow up and 11 min for a treatment review. Radiation oncologists averaged 246 new patients per year (median = 250, range = 20–600) with men (average = 268), Western Australians (average = 354) and those in private practice seeing more (average = 275). Most radiation oncologists considered themselves as specialists (n = 151, 60%), but nearly all those from South Australia were generalists (n = 15, 94%) as were three‐quarters of those from private practice. A minority of radiation oncologist respondents (10%) intended to retire within 5 years with a further 16% within 10 years.There was a stabilisation of trainee numbers in Australia and New Zealand with no increase compared with 2010 (142 in 2014 vs. 143 in 2010). The most common age bracket for trainees remained 31–35 years. One‐third of trainees were of Asian descent and nearly half held other degrees. The majority of trainees were satisfied with their career, but 30% were not entirely satisfied. Nearly half of trainee respondents would have reconsidered their choice of specialty had they known about the possible oversupply in the workforce with 12.4% undecided about continuing their career in radiation oncology. There were still 16% of trainees with no protected time during the working week, and a further 21% with only 1 h. Only one trainee respondent preferred to work in private practice, and job availability remained a concern for 89% of respondents.

Conclusions

The radiation oncologist workforce numbers have increased at a much slower rate, and unemployment remained low. Many parameters remained similar to the 2010 survey. However, there has been a decrease in the average number of new patients seen per year, working hours and also a slight decrease in the time spent per new patient. The trainee numbers have stabilised, but job availability remained a concern. A significant proportion of trainees were not satisfied with their career.

Results of the 2014 Survey of the Association of Directors of Radiation Oncology Programs (ADROP)

BACKGROUND

In 2014, the Association of Directors of Radiation Oncology Programs (ADROP) conducted an in-depth survey of program directors along several axes. We report the results of this survey and compare the major findings with those of the 2007 ADROP survey.

METHODS AND MATERIALS

The survey was written and approved by ADROP leadership in 2012, announced online through broadcasts throughout 2013 and early 2014, and closed in mid-2014. The results based on question groups related to (1) hours spent in activities, (2) budget and nonprogram resources, (3) physics/biology didactics, (4) mock exams/didactics/research, (5) electives, (6) students, and (7) resources/challenges were tabulated. Descriptive comparisons with the 2007 survey were performed.

RESULTS

There was 26% participation (23/88 programs). Major areas of time commitment were faculty and site organization, maintenance, and corrections (70 hours/year) and didactics/conferences and rounds (200 hours/year). The median program director protected time was 23% (range 0%-50%). All responding programs (100%) had biology and physics courses and assigned directors, but only approximately 20% of respondents had a threshold grade in these courses for graduation. Major resources desired were templates of goals/objectives by disease site, competency evaluations by level, journal club repository, and software for contouring, oral examination preparation, grant writing, publication writing, oral presentation, and effective teaching. Major activity challenges were Accreditation Council for Graduate Medical Education external review and time commitment.

CONCLUSIONS

Overall, the 2014 results are similar to those of the 2007 survey. The average time commitment remains considerably higher than the 10% minimum required in the current ACGME program requirements. The survey results may guide ADROP membership in centralizing some of the identified resources needed.