Selected Teaching Hospitals Research Articles

Pharmacist salaries and hiring practices in teaching hospitals

A survey of selected teaching hospitals was conducted in early 1990 to determine salary ranges for pharmacist positions, salaries at which pharmacists were typically hired for these positions, differences in salary between clinical practitioner and managerial positions, and geographic differences in these salaries. Surveys were mailed to 50 members of the University Hospital Consortium (UHC) and 50 other university-affiliated and non-university-affiliated hospitals believed to be comparable to the investigators' hospital. Hospital capacity and census data, numbers of pharmacist and support staff positions, qualifications preferred and required for those positions, and salary information were requested. Data from 22 UHC hospitals and 23 non-UHC hospitals were evaluated. Relative to average daily census, UHC hospitals indicated higher pharmacist staffing levels and non-UHC hospitals reported higher support staff levels. More non-UHC hospitals than UHC hospitals (69.2% versus 43.5%) used an integrated model for delivery of clinical and distributive services. Nationally, the reported annual salaries were as follows: staff pharmacist, $34,881 to $47,906; clinical pharmacist, $37,768 to $51,564; clinical specialist, $38,905 to $55,282; supervisor, $39,905 to $54,416; assistant director, $43,554 to $58,758. Overall, typical hire rates (THRs) exceeded mean minimum salaries by about 10%. The percentages by which THRs exceeded mean minimum salaries were greatest in the West for staff pharmacist, clinical pharmacist, and clinical specialist positions and greatest in the Midwest for supervisor and assistant director positions. THRs for supervisors and assistant directors exceeded those for clinical specialists. Respondents' preferences varied regarding advanced education and training, and their actual requirements did not match their stated preferences.(ABSTRACT TRUNCATED AT 250 WORDS)

Announcement of Committee to Consider Innovative Changes in Neurosurgical Residency Training Programs

R ECENTLY the American Board of Neurological Surgery received the following communication from the American Surgical Association relating to training programs: American Surgical Association recognizes the need for a basic and broad graduate education for all surgical specialists which embraces a thorough education in patient care, operative technique, and the medical and clinical science required for a comprehension of the problems common to all fields of surgery. The Association further recognizes the need for the surgical staff of selected teaching hospitals to have the opportunity to experiment with different methods of providing such experiences. It therefore recommends that the surgical boards and their respective residency review committees provide with appropriate surveillance the opportunity for selected teaching hospitals to conduct experiments in graduate surgical education without adhering to the customary requirements of the boards and residency review committees. In accordance with these recommendations, the American Board of Neurological Surgery has indicated an interest in considering innovations in training programs which may fall outside the customary Board requirements. The Board has appointed the following Committee to receive and review proposed innovations in individual training programs and to submit these to the Board for appropriate action: James G. Galbraith, M.D., Chairman William E. Hunt, M.D. Arthur A. Ward, Jr., M.D.