Video: Every Case Tells a Story| Webinar: ACR/CHEST ILD Guidelines in Practice

An official publication of the ACR and the ARP serving rheumatologists and rheumatology professionals

  • Conditions
    • Axial Spondyloarthritis
    • Gout and Crystalline Arthritis
    • Myositis
    • Osteoarthritis and Bone Disorders
    • Pain Syndromes
    • Pediatric Conditions
    • Psoriatic Arthritis
    • Rheumatoid Arthritis
    • Sjögren’s Disease
    • Systemic Lupus Erythematosus
    • Systemic Sclerosis
    • Vasculitis
    • Other Rheumatic Conditions
  • FocusRheum
    • ANCA-Associated Vasculitis
    • Axial Spondyloarthritis
    • Gout
    • Psoriatic Arthritis
    • Rheumatoid Arthritis
    • Systemic Lupus Erythematosus
  • Guidance
    • Clinical Criteria/Guidelines
    • Ethics
    • Legal Updates
    • Legislation & Advocacy
    • Meeting Reports
      • ACR Convergence
      • Other ACR meetings
      • EULAR/Other
    • Research Rheum
  • Drug Updates
    • Analgesics
    • Biologics/DMARDs
  • Practice Support
    • Billing/Coding
    • EMRs
    • Facility
    • Insurance
    • QA/QI
    • Technology
    • Workforce
  • Opinion
    • Patient Perspective
    • Profiles
    • Rheuminations
      • Video
    • Speak Out Rheum
  • Career
    • ACR ExamRheum
    • Awards
    • Career Development
  • ACR
    • ACR Home
    • ACR Convergence
    • ACR Guidelines
    • Journals
      • ACR Open Rheumatology
      • Arthritis & Rheumatology
      • Arthritis Care & Research
    • From the College
    • Events/CME
    • President’s Perspective
  • Search

ACR’s Benchmark Tool Quantifies Data about Rheumatology Workforce, Clinical Practice

Joseph Flood, MD  |  Issue: April 2014  |  April 2, 2014

The primary employment setting for survey respondents was:

  • 35.7%—Academic Medical Center
  • 19.3%—Multi-Specialty Group Practice
  • 16.4%—Single Specialty Group Practice
  • 15.3%—Solo Practice
  • 5.5%—Hospital-Based Practice
  • 2.6%—Government Clinical Setting (VA)
  • 1.5%—Other Clinical Setting
  • 1.5%—Biomedical Industry
  • 1.4%—Retired
  • 0.5%—Government Non-Clinical Setting
  • 0.5%—Other Non-Clinical Setting

Because the majority of our members are in clinical practices, these data do not represent a typical cohort of our ACR constituency. You can help us accumulate more representative information, by completing the 2014 version of the Benchmark Tool when it’s launched in September.

ad goes here:advert-1
ADVERTISEMENT
SCROLL TO CONTINUE

The majority of respondents (62.6%) reported a yearly compensation in the range of $150,001–350,000. Twenty-seven percent of respondents reported a yearly compensation of less than $50,000–150,000, and 10.2% reported $350,001–500,000 plus. When more ACR members provide their income data, we will be able to use it as a resource in measuring our productivity relative to our peers.

Demand

More than half of the respondents reported working more than 50 hours per week, some as much as an incredible 81 hours or more per week! Although this may be true, it certainly doesn’t reflect the lifestyle of the “happiest subspecialty,” as rheumatology is reported to be, no matter how much we enjoy our work. During a fully scheduled workweek, more than 70% reported seeing 20 or fewer new patients. Twenty-eight percent indicated more than 20 new patient visits per week, and 1.3% of that group reported seeing an energetic 121–140 new patients in one week. Nearly 54% of the survey respondents reported 41–80 return patient visits during a typical workweek.

ad goes here:advert-2
ADVERTISEMENT
SCROLL TO CONTINUE

Do the new patient visits and work hours reported from the population who completed the survey tool mirror yours?

Clinical Practice

Ninety-four percent of rheumatologists reported their practice is dedicated to adult rheumatology. The report shows that a majority of rheumatology practices don’t provide significant primary care services.

As in the 2009 report (see pie charts), rheumatologists in private practice said nearly three-fourths of their compensation comes from direct patient care.

Of the practicing rheumatologists who participated, 62% reported they code a Level 3 (99203) new patient visit in a typical workweek, 71% reported billing Level 4 (99204) visits, and 61% reported billing a Level 5 (99205) new patient visit in a typical week. Additionally, 38% reported they bill Level 3 (99213) established patient visits in a typical week, 31% bill Level 4 (99214) visits, and 60% bill Level 5 (99215) visits in a typical workweek. This may reflect the complex array of patients managed by rheumatologists.

Page: 1 2 3 4 | Single Page
Share: 

Filed under:Billing/CodingPractice SupportPresident's PerspectiveQuality Assurance/ImprovementWorkforce Tagged with:AC&RAmerican College of Rheumatology (ACR)BillingCodingPractice ManagementrheumatologistTechnology

Related Articles

    What Do Your Patients Think About You?

    May 9, 2012

    Why your practice needs patient-satisfaction surveys

    American College of Rheumatology Benchmark Survey Now in Progress

    August 8, 2012

    This comprehensive study is being conducted to determine benchmarks for rheumatology in an era of increased numbers of uninsured and underinsured patients in the general population, increased chronic and musculoskeletal diseases, and an expanding population of aging citizens.

    The ACR Benchmark Survey Results

    June 1, 2010

    In 2009, the ACR’s Committe­e on Rheumatologic Care (CORC) began its third Economic Benchmark Survey to update information from the previous surveys conducted in 1999 and 2003.

    ACR Benchmark Survey Will Support Practice Management

    January 1, 2013

    The survey will compile information on the structure of physician supply and its relationship to demand for healthcare services, and raise awareness to issues facing rheumatology practices

  • About Us
  • Meet the Editors
  • Issue Archives
  • Contribute
  • Advertise
  • Contact Us
  • Copyright © 2025 by John Wiley & Sons, Inc. All rights reserved, including rights for text and data mining and training of artificial technologies or similar technologies. ISSN 1931-3268 (print). ISSN 1931-3209 (online).
  • DEI Statement
  • Privacy Policy
  • Terms of Use
  • Cookie Preferences