Women in interventional cardiology much more likely to leave practice than men
Female interventional cardiologists are much more likely to leave practice than men, according to new findings published in JAMA Cardiology.[1] In addition, the authors noted, women in interventional cardiology are more likely to walk away than women in general cardiology, general gastroenterology or interventional gastroenterology.
“Women remain underrepresented in interventional cardiology, comprising only 5% of practicing interventionalists,” wrote lead author Sarah Kathrine Gualano, MD, an interventional cardiologist with the University of Michigan, and colleagues. “Women in training pursue interventional cardiology fellowships less often. Less well described are women’s career paths within interventional cardiology and how this compares with other procedural fields.”
Gualano et al. tracked Medicare fee-for-service (FFS) data from 2013 to 2020 to identify and track active specialists in a variety of specialties. For the sake of this study, specialists were defined as being active in a given year if they cared for 10 or more Medicare FFS beneficiaries.
Overall, the group identified 8,488 interventional cardiologists, 22,880 general cardiologists, nearly 3,416 interventional gastroenterologists and 12,725 general gastroenterologists who were active from 2013 to 2020. Women made up 4.1% of physicians in interventional cardiology, lower than the total in general cardiology (17.6%), interventional gastroenterology (6.4%) or general gastroenterology (19.8%).
In addition, the annual probability of interventional cardiologists becoming inactive was 21.1% among women and 14.9% among men. In general cardiology, women also were more likely to become inactive than men, but the probabilities were much closer: 13.3% for women and 12.1% for men.
In both interventional and general gastroenterology, on the other hand, men and women were just as likely to become inactive.
“This suggests the structure or culture of practice specific to interventional cardiology differentially impacts women,” the authors wrote. “Structural factors, including lack of job flexibility and unpredictable hours, have been previously described to influence gender equity in interventional cardiology. Less well described are cultural effects of gender stereotypes in interventional cardiology, including the lack-of-fit phenomena or perception of women in a male-dominated field, discrimination and harassment.”
Gualano and colleagues emphasized that learning more about what drives women away from interventional cardiology—in addition to learning why so many women never consider it in the first place—could help program directors and other leaders work toward improving the discrepancy.
“Future studies using primary data collection, including interviews with trainees and cardiologists, could enhance understanding of the female interventional cardiologist lifecycle,” the authors concluded.
Read the full analysis in JAMA Cardiology.
Michael has more than 16 years of experience as a professional writer and editor. He has written at length about cardiology, radiology, artificial intelligence and other key healthcare topics.