Ultrasound techs starting out at same salary as PTs????

This forum made possible through the generous support of SDN members, donors, and sponsors. Thank you.
Bad0 Fish0

Bad0 Fish0

Full Member
10+ Year Member
15+ Year Member
Joined
Aug 19, 2007
Messages
124
Reaction score
3
Just wanted to know if you all have knowledge of this, have friends who have gone this route, work with them, etc. I'm really appalled that 10-month ultrasound tech programs are producing students starting out at the exact same starting salary of DPT students. 6 years versus 10 months... same salary. They are nonprofessional technicians, so what gives?? Does anyone know why their salaries are so high?
Members don't see this ad.
 
1. Yes, I knew this. Which is why it made my top 5 list of "the best bang for your educational buck", which I posted in the thread you created about why DPT was a tough choice to make.

2. Sonographers make a sh*tload of money because of supply and demand.

dc
 
Blame your leaders for making the DPT mandatory. One of the biggest mistakes ever.
 
Members don't see this ad :)
I'm not asking why PTs aren't making more, I'm asking why these technicians are making so much.

Guess Dan answered that.
 
I also think supply and demand is most of the answer. Supply and demand fluctuates, too, so who is to say the salary will stay that high? Perhaps someone can give an opinion on that.
 
teamusaepee said:
I also think supply and demand is most of the answer. Supply and demand fluctuates, too, so who is to say the salary will stay that high? Perhaps someone can give an opinion on that.
Click to expand...

That's what I'm wondering, too. I'm thinking maybe insurance companies will endup reigning in these salaries just like they did with PT (anyone remember hearing about the "golden age" of PT? New grads were making upwards 80k). I'll be curious to see.
 
Friends-

I understand Fish's frustration with the whole setup. The money invested in DPT is not equal to the dividend paid by the investment in a sonographer's certificate.

But Taurus is right, at least from where I can see things. I used to be an administrator at a rehab clinic, and I can remember fights with new DPTs applying for our open PT positions. I'd say "Great interview - we can start you at 40K." And I would undoubtedly hear "What will the bonus for my DPT be?". Ummm...nothing (well, it was actually like 2K, but I already factored that in). It's simple business - Medicare gave us (at that point in time) around $67 for a PT eval. So if you were old and had a PT certificate, or kinda old and had a BS in PT, or not so old and had a MSPT, or brand new with a fancy DPT, Medicare paid my company the EXACT SAME AMOUNT for an eval. How can I justify, in pure dollars and cents, giving the DPT much more than any other PT for a salary? Can't do it. That's where APTA and CAPTE fu*ked up. There is no identified AND BILLABLE skill that a DPT has that a PT does not have. DPT better at reading journal articles? Yes. Billable? No.

I remember pediatricians telling me to avoid medical school like the plague, and seek a CRNA...just a better financial investment, they said. And in many cases, they're right.

As corny as it sounds, this (DPT v. PT, MD v. CRNA, etc) is where you have to choose what makes you happy. If big coin is what makes you happy, then DPT is (IMHO) not a great choice.

dc
 
40k?? Jesus! Great reason not to move to New York.

(Unless you're talking about a long time ago)
 
If you are a PT making $40K per year...move far away. I do have to agree with what's been said by Dan and Taurus. PT is a great career. That being said, I am ready to do (and make) more by going into medicine.
 
bigdan said:
I used to be an administrator at a rehab clinic, and I can remember fights with new DPTs applying for our open PT positions. I'd say "Great interview - we can start you at 40K." And I would undoubtedly hear "What will the bonus for my DPT be?". Ummm...nothing (well, it was actually like 2K, but I already factored that in). It's simple business - Medicare gave us (at that point in time) around $67 for a PT eval. So if you were old and had a PT certificate, or kinda old and had a BS in PT, or not so old and had a MSPT, or brand new with a fancy DPT, Medicare paid my company the EXACT SAME AMOUNT for an eval. How can I justify, in pure dollars and cents, giving the DPT much more than any other PT for a salary? Can't do it. That's where APTA and CAPTE fu*ked up. There is no identified AND BILLABLE skill that a DPT has that a PT does not have. DPT better at reading journal articles? Yes. Billable? No.
Click to expand...

This is a great post. He hit the nail on the head. You are reimbursed for the service you provide, not your degree level.

That's why all students should be angry about schools promoting degree inflation. It seems like every field now has a mandatory "doctorate". PharmD, DPT, DOT, PsycD, DNP, etc. Your reimbursement level and hence your salary does not change. That would require an act of Congress. If Medicare is going broke, why would Congress want to increase the budget to accomodate your "doctorate"? The only winners from this are the schools because they pocket more tuition money.
 
As far as the DPT goes any extra education is better. As a new grad I have felt more prepared, and closer to understand what PT's know with years of experience (they still know more than I). BUT I think it will be interesting to see if reimbursment changes with "direct access" from insurance companies. "IF" that ever happens and comes to fruition. Could that possibly affect salaries?? I have no clue im not a business owner or management of any sort.

Also as a profession we have to make a case to be considered worth the increase in $$$ b/c IMHO lets be honest "ambi drags" just doesnt cut it. Im not saying all PTs do that, but in my very limited experience I have seen it all too common.
 
R1krazy said:
As far as the DPT goes any extra education is better. As a new grad I have felt more prepared, and closer to understand what PT's know with years of experience (they still know more than I). BUT I think it will be interesting to see if reimbursment changes with "direct access" from insurance companies. "IF" that ever happens and comes to fruition. Could that possibly affect salaries?? I have no clue im not a business owner or management of any sort.

Also as a profession we have to make a case to be considered worth the increase in $$$ b/c IMHO lets be honest "ambi drags" just doesnt cut it. Im not saying all PTs do that, but in my very limited experience I have seen it all too common.
Click to expand...

I agree and disagree with you on this. I wholeheartedly agree with your "ambi drag" comment. This is not skilled care. My experience in hospitals led me to see how the medical profession often views PT's. Orders like "pt to bedside chair" used to make me nuts.

I don't believe the DPT's I've encountered bring more to the table than MPT's. Of course I have to acknowledge my bias - I am a MPT with an OCS. Secondly, while the APTA is jamming the vision 2020 issue down our throats, I have yet to see enough PT's willing to do what it takes to have direct access. Many simply don't want it and are satisfied with their path. Those of us who do carry their dead weight in this regard.

Then there's the small issue of getting past the chiros (read: trial lawyers) and the AMA who have a stake in not allowing PT's direct access to patients.
 
I do agree with you, maybe I should have presented my opinion clearer. Do I think I bring "more" to the table than MSPT aboslutely not, but in my experience have I brought something YES. Part of my DPT curriculum was radiology and at my first job, my boss had me explain how to read them, and why certain studies were choosen. Does that mean I brought more to the table, absolutely not, my bosses knowledge level for more skill treatments were much more finer tuned and there was an incredible amount I have to learn from him/her.

IMHO Do I hope the DPT is an effort to progress the profession yes.

"I have yet to see enough PT's willing to do what it takes to have direct access. Many simply don't want it and are satisfied with their path. Those of us who do carry their dead weight in this regard." - PT2MD sorry i dont know if i quoted that correctly.

I completely agree with you there as well. Just as some of the post I shuttered to read about trying to find a PT school to lower its standards. Why should standards be lowered? If you want more money, respect etc, it all must be earned.

So IMHO I dont think its right for many PTs to complain about their salary etc when many are not proactive to progress.

I really apologize if this offensive and yes that was a gross general statement that does not apply to all. There are many incredible PT's out there that are very progressive and impressive practitioners who deserve a lot more credit.

But to finish, the same case can be stated for any profession there will be good and there will be bad.
 
Members don't see this ad :)
I have found these posts interesting. I know that money is important and is necessary for a quality of life, however I am shocked that so many are talking about the money (and not just here, in PT or rehab, but any medical community especially surgeons). When we as healthcare practicioners focus on what we 'deserve' instead of the people, which is why I hope all of us had an interest in the healthcare field, then we are shorting those we serve.
I have seen entry level PT offers anywhere from $30,000 to $125,000. Depends on the area and need. Like anything it's location, location, location. You want to live in the nice places you are going to be offered less...supply and demand.
Another aspect to look at as a PT if you want better salaries is to take an active role in politics and advocating for ourselves in our communities, whether it is on your own or by being a part of the APTA. People still don't know a lot about PTs. As I am sure all of you know, many people still see us as technicians and/or massage therapists. We need to educate people and then prove to our cliets that we are providers that they want to see us over a chiropractor, a physician, and they want to see us before they go through all the tests and misc. crap physicians send them through. If we can create a demand and prove ourselves to clients, the healthcare community and insurance companies than we control our own destiny. Obviously I am aware that it is not as simple as I might want to make it but it is our responsibility to create or break our success. I believe that we as a profession are trying to go the right way but we are trying to do so much at the same time and not even understanding ourselves what we are asking for.
 
I'm not trying to start an argument, but I thought I would point out that most ultrasound programs are NOT merely 10 months. My sister is an Ultrasound Tech (Diagnostic Medical Sonographer), and she had to go through very extensive training consisting of an Associate degree in Radiologic Technology, then a Bachelor's degree in Medical Imaging. THEN she went on for a one year certificate program in Ultrasound. I know of very few, if any, ultrasound programs that you can do for 10 months only. The ultrasound training itself might be 10 months, but for nearly all of them, you have to have a degree in Radiologic Technology, Nursing, or some other healthcare field FIRST, and then you take the certificate program in Ultrasonography. This career interested me at one point in time, so I researched it very thoroughly. Also, the programs are very selective. It's not like they just randomly pull people off the street and train them to be ultrasound tech in a few months time. It's a very rigorous curriculum too, as is PT and most other professional programs. Just thought I'd add my 2 cents, for what it's worth.
 
Heavenly4505 said:
I'm not trying to start an argument, but I thought I would point out that most ultrasound programs are NOT merely 10 months. My sister is an Ultrasound Tech (Diagnostic Medical Sonographer), and she had to go through very extensive training consisting of an Associate degree in Radiologic Technology, then a Bachelor's degree in Medical Imaging. THEN she went on for a one year certificate program in Ultrasound. I know of very few, if any, ultrasound programs that you can do for 10 months only. The ultrasound training itself might be 10 months, but for nearly all of them, you have to have a degree in Radiologic Technology, Nursing, or some other healthcare field FIRST, and then you take the certificate program in Ultrasonography. This career interested me at one point in time, so I researched it very thoroughly. Also, the programs are very selective. It's not like they just randomly pull people off the street and train them to be ultrasound tech in a few months time. It's a very rigorous curriculum too, as is PT and most other professional programs. Just thought I'd add my 2 cents, for what it's worth.
Click to expand...
I agree with you that the programs are very selective, however there are schools where you can get a sonography (general, vascular or cardia medical imaging) certificate through a 13-month program. You must have had 60 college credits including completed prereqs such as anatomy/physiology (8 credits), biology (3 credits) etc. The point is you do not need to have any other degree in allied health field first. At least not at the school below. Checkout this link if you are in MD:
http://www.umbc.edu/trainctr/allied_health/admissions.php
 
Well, that's fine, but the program as a whole still takes longer than 10 months. Probably two years of prerequisites and then a 13-month certificate program, for a total of 3 years. I live in Indiana, not MD, but there are a few programs like that around here. After you finish your certificate program, you can reapply to the college where you took your prerequisites and they will grant you an Associate of Applied Science in Radiologic Technology (or Diagnostic Medical Sonography, if you're doing Ultrasound). The only point I was trying to make is that you generally have to have some kind of knowledge base BEFORE you enter a short-term ultrasonography certificate program. Or you have to earn a degree in Radiologic Science. Either way, the training is NOT nearly as extensive as what you have to have for PT, but here in Indiana at least, the starting salary for a PT is around $65-$75000 a year. Ultrasound starting salary is around $45-$50000 a year, so there's a pretty good gap there.
 
Things may work differently in different parts of the country.

In my city, the cardiac ultrasound institute here advertises on the radio and the TV - it's hardly selective. If you're willing to fork over the 20 grand, you're basically guaranteed a spot. The requirements are 40 college credits of your choosing - basket weaving for all they care - as long as you have a sequence of anat/phys, a basic finite math, and an introductory biology course, and a 2.5 GPA. However, my friend applied with a 2.2 and was accepted. The program accepts people with previous degrees, but no certification or degree of any sort is required.. merely 40 college credits (a year of college). The program itself is 10 months long. So this can technically be completed in one year and ten months following highschool.
 
I came across this thread this evening because I just happened to be disgruntled about the lack of respect for Sonographers and unfortunately this blog increased my frustrations.

It is sad to me that majority of the medical community portrays "ultrasound technicians" as people that are compensated well because of supply or demand or to just take a bunch of pictures of babies and let expectant parents know what gender the baby will be.

The majority of us are not "technicians". I have a B.S. in Diagnostic Medical Sonography (I went to a university for 5 years). My program is highly competitive and as a sonographer (especially in the NW) we must not only complete extensive course work in physiology, pathology, etc., but physics as well. We need to complete a physics registry in addition to another specialty to have our license. To be considered for employment, we need to be registered in additional specialties ( I have four). My point is that we probably take more examinations to practice what we do than most in the medical community.

Have you looked at an US image? It's blurry. Well, we read them and we also have to know about different pathological processes of the visceral, vascular, obstetrical, gynecological, etc. systems of the human body. The Radiologist just stamps the approval on our work. We told them what was wrong with the patient.

When I get called in at 3 AM to rule out a DVT or an ectopic pregnancy for the ER and the Resident doesn't want to get out of bed to check my case and just asks me to tell them the results, not only did I earn every penny, I probably should have asked for more.

So next time when I see an Occupational Therapist or another Physical therapist for the next repetitive stress injury to my shoulder or wrist, hopefully you will understand where I am coming from.

Thanks.
 
RDMS-

I, for one, would find your work to be difficult, and I agree that ultrasound is an extremely difficult image to interpret. I don't see you as a glorified picture taker. Some facts are worth discussion:

1) Medical sonographers can make as much or more than PTs.

2) Your education is extensive. But it's also true that someone can sit for an RDMS with either a two year certificate + one year of clinical work, or being a graduate of a medical sonography accredited program. There's one in NY that gives a certificate after one year (you must have done an allied health associates or bachelors degree as a prereq). While many do get a Bachelors degree, physicians can also sit for the RDMS exam. So while you cannot get (now) licensed as a PT in less than 6 years of education, you can get an RDMS in 3 years. I think that's better bang for your educational buck.

3) A radiologist rubber-stamping your work doesn't, in my mind, make you worth more money in as much as it makes for malpractice on the doc's part, although I do feel bad that they made you get out of bed at 3am.

dc
 
i've actually heard that it's in "bad taste" for sonographers to tell a patient anything about an US... sex of a baby or diagnosis. my sonographer friends have told me they are supposed to let the doctor tell them anything regarding their US, even if they think they know what it is.
 
Last edited:
RDMS said:
The Radiologist just stamps the approval on our work. We told them what was wrong with the patient.
Click to expand...

Uh huh. :rolleyes: And I bet you can diagnose every medical ailment out there with your transducer.

There's one thing that seems to be always be in short supply: everyone wants more respect. They're never happy with what they have.
 
How come when I asked our sonographer what the parameters of diagnostic ultrasound were, she could not tell me? I wanted to know how it was different from therapeutic US that is used in PT.
 
Ultrasound tech huh???












It was posted like a year ago and came across it tonight. I just thought I would bring this one up again. Some of the posts are pretty funny.
 
My 2 cents:
RDMS- A good US tech is worth their weight in gold. I am a radiology resident and a good tech can make or break you. Having said that, we cannot comment on something is you don't give us the images. I have scanned and agree that the lifespan/career span of an US tech is short due to repetitive stress. They earn every penny. You provide a valuable service to radiology, that is why the US techs are paid very well. Now, I and every other radiologist/resident does get out of bed to look at images. My career and license are on the line. I look at every image you/the US techs send me. It would be malpractice for me to rubber stamp what you tell me.

Everyone else- Yes, I believe there has been "degree inflation". I have a BS and 18 years of experience in rehab. No newly graduated DPT knows more than those of us with experience. You don't learn how to be a therapist, doctor or pilot in school. You learn it on the job. It is a shame that new PT's have to go into huge debt to do what I did with a BS. And no, you cannot know radiology in 1 or even 2 semesters of classes. That's why the residency is 5 years long! Also, most (90%) of radiologist sub-specialize for another year or sometimes 2. PT's cannot legally read an x-ray, CT, MRI or US. If you do and treat on what you think you see without an official read, then you will get sued. I fear direct access will open up a huge can of worms like significantly increasing malpractice costs for PT's. Time will tell though since the APTA is going gangbusters with their "vision 2020" or whatever it is called.
 
Soccer31

Thanks for the link. It doesn't shock me, but again, I fear a huge increase in lawsuits and a significant increase in malpractice costs to PT's. Right now, our malpractice is pretty low due to the fact that the patients are screened before they see us by physicians who bear the brunt of a missed diagnosis. I fear the missed fracture, ectopic pregnancy, metastatic bone cancer, etc. cases that will come down the pike and the PT getting sued for "delay in medical care"....

Also, don't forget, it will take a large outlay of capital to start a PT clinic. You not only have to worry about providing good care, but also billing, marketing, advertising, upkeep on the building, insurance costs, etc. I know people think Chiro's and physicians have a great thing, but trust me it is a huge headache. You will have to find a niche in your market and will still need to have a steady stream of referrrals from your physician base. That is all uncompensated time. Also, you will likely have to open earlier or stay open later to catch the patients before and/or after work. The days of 8-5pm, no weekends or holidays is going to be a thing of the past.

Is direct access a good thing? I don't know to be honest. But, it is a moot point anyway since it is going to happen in my opinion.
 
ericdopt said:
I fear a huge increase in lawsuits and a significant increase in malpractice costs to PT's. Right now, our malpractice is pretty low due to the fact that the patients are screened before they see us by physicians who bear the brunt of a missed diagnosis. I fear the missed fracture, ectopic pregnancy, metastatic bone cancer, etc. cases that will come down the pike and the PT getting sued for "delay in medical care"
Click to expand...

Here's a real world example of what he's talking about. If you want to play the game, then it comes with a price.

Malpractice suits against advanced practice nurses are rising in number and increasing in severity, according to malpractice insurers.

Malpractice insurers’ profitability in covering APNs has dropped, perhaps because more nurses are being sued these days.​
 
Nice link, Taurus. I assumed something like this would happen; the article is 3+ years old, and I wonder how things are now for the NPs.

dc
 
But is it going to be (direct acces) an "obligation" ? Meaning, is it goingo to be a choice that is just going to increase in popularity or a change in the carer?
 
I was a PT for several years before changing to medicine. Direct access is not going to make some huge difference in the pay structure for PTs. Just because you gain direct access doesn't mean your clinic is going to flood with patients. I think that if I was a patient with say a knee injury I would go pay my one copay to see an orthopod to tell me whether it is something serious that needs surgery vs paying a copay every time I see the PT only to possibly end up in the orhtopod's office in the end. Reimbursement is not going to increase. Pt still can't prescribe meds, order or interpret x-rays which is still a major part of many sports injuries and necessary as screening for more serious pathology. Just my 2 Cents. There has been talk of direct access since at least the early 1990s.

Skialta PGY2 general surgery
 
Exactly, patients still need the services of other health care workers, so what exctly this direct access means if it's not really...well "real" ?
 
Skialta said:
I was a PT for several years before changing to medicine. Direct access is not going to make some huge difference in the pay structure for PTs. Just because you gain direct access doesn't mean your clinic is going to flood with patients. I think that if I was a patient with say a knee injury I would go pay my one copay to see an orthopod to tell me whether it is something serious that needs surgery vs paying a copay every time I see the PT only to possibly end up in the orhtopod's office in the end. Reimbursement is not going to increase. Pt still can't prescribe meds, order or interpret x-rays which is still a major part of many sports injuries and necessary as screening for more serious pathology. Just my 2 Cents. There has been talk of direct access since at least the early 1990s.

Skialta PGY2 general surgery
Click to expand...

Right, it won't make a big difference in pay schedules but the PT will be able to determine their own destiny to a greater degree. The good ones will be busier, the poor ones will disappear or get better. I agree that PTs can't order or read imaging but disagree that it is an essential part of all sports medicine. I think that MRI's confirm what you suspect. Rather than simply blanket ordering imaging, good clinicians (MD,DO, PT, DC) do so with something in mind that they are looking to confirm or rule out, and even then, imaging is often inconclusive.

No, PTs can't prescribe meds but there are tons of OTC meds that people take everyday anyway. Naproxyn used to be the mac daddy of NSAIDs now it is OTC.

PT with direct access is NOT a threat to the primary care docs. We are team players and arguably more likely to BE team players than other MSK providers who already have direct access (read DC between the lines).
 
Skialta said:
I was a PT for several years before changing to medicine. Direct access is not going to make some huge difference in the pay structure for PTs. Just because you gain direct access doesn't mean your clinic is going to flood with patients. I think that if I was a patient with say a knee injury I would go pay my one copay to see an orthopod to tell me whether it is something serious that needs surgery vs paying a copay every time I see the PT only to possibly end up in the orhtopod's office in the end. Reimbursement is not going to increase. Pt still can't prescribe meds, order or interpret x-rays which is still a major part of many sports injuries and necessary as screening for more serious pathology. Just my 2 Cents. There has been talk of direct access since at least the early 1990s.

Skialta PGY2 general surgery
Click to expand...

I believe that if you have a very serious knee injury or something like that you would probably do better by going to see a doctor anyways. The whole point are minor injuries that the patients go see a md just to hear from then to go to a pt setting.... I believe direct access would really affect those kind of patients...
 
One thing to remember, in many instances the imaging is only useful in the sense that it tells you whether the patient needs surgery or not. As a PT once you know it is not surgical you treat the problem based on function, not so much on the path, especially when it comes to spine.

Skialta
 
I don't know much about PT but I am an ultrasound tech. Are you sure these techs are going to 10 month schools? I'm aware of 2 year programs that are strictly ultrasound however, none shorter than that. The program I went through at Boise State University required I go through a diagnostic radiology program first (one to two years of pre-reqs plus two years of x-ray). This resulted in an associates degree. Then, my ultrasound program was 12 months long and I got my Bachelors. In all, I went through 5 years of school.

Why do we make so much money? Well, ultrasound is unique compared to other imaging modalities (x-ray, CAT scan/CT, MRI, nuclear medicine, radiation therapy etc). The ultrasound tech scans a patient and takes "representative images" to show the radiologist. The ultrasound tech provides an interpretation of anatomy and pathology and the radiologist uses this information to make a formal diagnosis. In essence, the ultrasound tech carries a lot of responsibility to make sure they are not missing any pathology and when they do find pathology, they have to image it, characterize it and think like a doctor. If I see an echogenic liver and ascites, I begin thinking "Is there flow in the MPV and splenic vein? Is the ligamentum teres recannulized?" If I scan a testicle and see a mass, I begin thinking about the left renal vein and the left kidney. I look for enlarged lymph nodes. An ultrasound tech has to have an extensive knowledge of diseases in all parts of the body, which is no small feat. In addition, they have to be able to scan proficiently, and efficiently and in a manner that tells our "story" to the radiologists. Think of all the things that can go wrong in an obstetric exam. Do you know all the signs of a fetus with Down Syndrome? I do. I could go on and on.
Basically, this is a very professional job. You said it is non-professional but I'll chalk that up to your lack of knowledge about the profession. Like I said, I know nothing about PT, but I'm not going to jump to conclusions and say you aren't as deserving of the pay you receive.
 
Here is an excerpt from an email I received for those who feel salary is a primary drawback of PT. Not bad out of school.


Home Care Phsical Therapist needed

New PT Grads - Earn $80,000/year with a 10k Signon and Company Car!
Enjoy wonderful living amenities
 
These threads are absurd. I have yet to find one valuable piece of information on this site. Think I am going to deactivate my account after reading some of these posts.
 
ultrasoundtech said:
I don't know much about PT but I am an ultrasound tech. Are you sure these techs are going to 10 month schools? I'm aware of 2 year programs that are strictly ultrasound however, none shorter than that. The program I went through at Boise State University required I go through a diagnostic radiology program first (one to two years of pre-reqs plus two years of x-ray). This resulted in an associates degree. Then, my ultrasound program was 12 months long and I got my Bachelors. In all, I went through 5 years of school.

Why do we make so much money? Well, ultrasound is unique compared to other imaging modalities (x-ray, CAT scan/CT, MRI, nuclear medicine, radiation therapy etc). The ultrasound tech scans a patient and takes "representative images" to show the radiologist. The ultrasound tech provides an interpretation of anatomy and pathology and the radiologist uses this information to make a formal diagnosis. In essence, the ultrasound tech carries a lot of responsibility to make sure they are not missing any pathology and when they do find pathology, they have to image it, characterize it and think like a doctor. If I see an echogenic liver and ascites, I begin thinking "Is there flow in the MPV and splenic vein? Is the ligamentum teres recannulized?" If I scan a testicle and see a mass, I begin thinking about the left renal vein and the left kidney. I look for enlarged lymph nodes. An ultrasound tech has to have an extensive knowledge of diseases in all parts of the body, which is no small feat. In addition, they have to be able to scan proficiently, and efficiently and in a manner that tells our "story" to the radiologists. Think of all the things that can go wrong in an obstetric exam. Do you know all the signs of a fetus with Down Syndrome? I do. I could go on and on.
Basically, this is a very professional job. You said it is non-professional but I'll chalk that up to your lack of knowledge about the profession. Like I said, I know nothing about PT, but I'm not going to jump to conclusions and say you aren't as deserving of the pay you receive.
Click to expand...

I totally agree with you. Sonography technician course takes 2 long years, it's not 10 months. The reason for their high salary is that their demand is high in the market. They are needed in hospitals, physicians, medical and diagnostic laboratories, and outpatient care centers. The main reason for this sudden growth in employment in sonography is that sonography is considered to be an attractive alternative to radiological procedures. These are safer and cost effective as compared to radiology. Hence everybody prefers it. The following article gives more details on the salary of sonography technician and also about the training programs in several universities.http://www.sonographytechnician.org/salary-information-for-sonography-technicians/ Hope this site would be helpful in this discussion.
 
I hear it is hard for them to find jobs now
And that the field is saturated since the length of program is pretty quick
 
TooCool said:
I hear it is hard for them to find jobs now
And that the field is saturated since the length of program is pretty quick
Click to expand...

I've read those complaints on an Indeed.com message board.
 
Something that must be considered when looking up salaries on places like salary.com is that the figures are self-reported. The figures we see may not take into account how much is made by other fields through "on call" work. I have a friend who is a nuclear technologist and she makes approximately 80K, but her salary is about 60K and the other 20K comes from on call work.

The way I figure it then is that I can make 60K to 70K salary as a PT then do a couple of weekends a month and make quite a bit extra. not considering the on-call work can make the differences seem greater than they really are.
 
This conversation seems silly. It is like comparing apples to oranges. Just as silly as asking why an electrician makes $x and a PT makes $y. The job is different, so no real basis in comparison.
 
markelmarcel said:
Also the OP is from 2007. :p
Click to expand...
who cares when it was posted...its still a currently relevant topic.

and although the jobs are different, theyre still both healthcare positions and both reimbursed by the same 3rd party payers. someone mentioned the demand is huge for ultra sound techs....pretty sure theyve been saying the exact same thing for PTs. also, PTA's make enormous amounts of money compared to PTs (i.e. they dont make a whole lot less than PTs).

so the point is....PTs are underpaid...period. our leaders are doing a terrible job in getting us the reimbursement money we deserve. the fact that healthcare is so far from a free market is disturbing and annoying. salesmen who sell computer software make hundreds of thousands a year. (how valuable is the product, really?) PTs deliver a far, far more valuable product (a return to a pain free lifestyle/ability to perform ADLs, etc). people would pay whatever the charge is for that product, if they had to.

i know that was a lot of rambling, but theres just something not right about this whole picture.
 
Ive been hearing PTs get paid 30% more than PTAs. Thats a pretty big gap, to me at least
 
TooCool said:
Ive been hearing PTs get paid 30% more than PTAs. Thats a pretty big gap, to me at least
Click to expand...
PTs go to school for 7 years

PTAs have an associates degree.

Compare the cost education (loan payments) vs salary, PTAs are probably taking home the same amount of money each month.
 
MuscleHead said:
who cares when it was posted...its still a currently relevant topic.

and although the jobs are different, theyre still both healthcare positions and both reimbursed by the same 3rd party payers. someone mentioned the demand is huge for ultra sound techs....pretty sure theyve been saying the exact same thing for PTs. also, PTA's make enormous amounts of money compared to PTs (i.e. they dont make a whole lot less than PTs).

so the point is....PTs are underpaid...period. our leaders are doing a terrible job in getting us the reimbursement money we deserve. the fact that healthcare is so far from a free market is disturbing and annoying. salesmen who sell computer software make hundreds of thousands a year. (how valuable is the product, really?) PTs deliver a far, far more valuable product (a return to a pain free lifestyle/ability to perform ADLs, etc). people would pay whatever the charge is for that product, if they had to.

i know that was a lot of rambling, but theres just something not right about this whole picture.
Click to expand...


According to the Bureau of Labor Statistics the average and median amounts of money a PTA makes is just under $50,000.00 (http://www.bls.gov/oes/current/oes312021.htm).

As for PT's the average and median amounts are around $78,000.00 and 76,000.00 respectively (http://www.bls.gov/oes/current/oes291123.htm).

On average PT's make 56% more than PTA's. Granted you are right the difference should be much grater (PT's are definitely underpaid), but it is a very significant difference.
 
Last edited:
MuscleHead said:
PTs go to school for 7 years

PTAs have an associates degree.

Compare the cost education (loan payments) vs salary, PTAs are probably taking home the same amount of money each month.
Click to expand...


Athletic Trainers have at least a 4-year degree (with most having Masters+).

PTAs have an associates degree.

PTAs typically make about $5k more than athletic trainers.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Next unread thread

Similar threads

K
California PTs: Question about hourly pay?
Replies
1
Views
1K
vm26
vm26
T
Re-starting on probation
Replies
9
Views
2K
mightychondria999
M
P
SDN Article: What I Wish I Knew Before Starting PT School
Replies
0
Views
1K
Priya Patel
P
P
PT Salary Caps-out?
Replies
12
Views
6K
Galain
G
S
High PT salaries you have seen?
Replies
5
Views
3K
Smash Atoms
Smash Atoms
Top