Results from the 2009 Pediatric Rehabilitation Practice survey of the AAPM&R Pediatric Rehabilitation/Developmental Disabilities Council

Abstract

Objective: To quantitatively describe the practices of pediatric physiatrists who are members of the Pediatric Rehabilitation/Developmental Disabilities Council of the American Academy of Physical Medicine and Rehabilitation (AAPM&R).

Design: Cross-sectional survey using the SurveyMonkey instrument.

Setting: The Pediatric Rehabilitation/Developmental Disabilities Council.

Participants: Eighty-six members of the Pediatric Rehabilitation/Developmental Disabilities Council ListServ of the Pediatric Rehabilitation/Developmental Disabilities Council of the AAPM&R and pediatric physiatrists known to the author.

Methods: The link to the survey was embedded in an e-mail message that was distributed by the author to the members of the ListServ on August 14, 2009. Four reminder e-mail messages were sent. The survey was closed on October 2, 2009. All data were extracted into STATA for analysis. Basic practice data were tabulated by raw numbers and percentages. Summary statistics were calculated for salary data, and simple t-tests and Mann-Whitney tests were used to determine if differences were statistically significant (α < 0.05) between subgroups.

Main outcome measurements: Location and style of practice, training, experience, and clinical productivity. Comparison of salary data was by experience, training, position, and gender.

Results: Women made up 71% of surveyed pediatric physiatrists. Forty percent of respondents practiced in the midwestern United States, and more than 50% practiced in academic settings. Twenty-eight percent of female respondents reported the title of medical director compared with 40% of the male respondents. Whereas 20% of responding practitioners had been in practice for more than 20 years, only 8% were full professors. Nearly 40% of respondents reported doing research, but only 8% had received federal funding for research. The average salary was $191,400. Salary differences were noted by title, experience, and academic rank. Female respondents earned, on average, 82% of what male respondents earned.

Conclusions: This survey highlights important issues, including regional variations, a potential lack of academic competitiveness, limited engagement in externally funded research, and salary inequities.