Hacker Newsnew | past | comments | ask | show | jobs | submitlogin

I really don’t understand how the average resident could be a cost center for a hospital. At least over the course of their 4-6+ years.

There are some hospitals you will go to (big names!) where you will never actually see an attending physician most of the time. Your entire care team are residents.

How a hospital can’t turn a profit off $60k/yr “junior doctors” doing all the actual work is beyond me. I’m sure there are costs I am not considering, but my immediate gut reaction is that it’s nearly all creative accounting to pretend residents cost more than they bring in - to keep that sweet government subsidy coming in as well as limiting the number of slots.

Some programs of course this makes sense, but on the whole it doesn’t seem to pass a smell test to me.




I've always wondered the same.

For the math to work, the fully qualified attending would have to be ~10x more efficient than the residents ($600k salary vs $60k salary - very rough, obv).

The current state seems to be "a single attending is more efficient practicing solo than the same attending overseeing five residents"


Some of this is an internal accounting problem. The net income (or loss) from operating a residency program depends on how you allocate associated revenues and fixed costs to it. But empirically the fact that teaching hospitals aren't all rushing to expand their residency programs indicates that they probably aren't profitable.

The value of residents varies a lot by experience and specialty. Like a 1st-year neurosurgery resident might be worse than useless and a huge burden to everyone around them. Whereas a 3rd-year family medicine resident can do a lot with minimal supervision.




Consider applying for YC's Fall 2025 batch! Applications are open till Aug 4

Guidelines | FAQ | Lists | API | Security | Legal | Apply to YC | Contact

Search: