Medical Imaging, start 50k, leading to SIX FIGURES? Nursing v Rad/Sonography

[GilbertDaddy]

I have a friend going to school out of state for her "medical imaging" degree. I explained that I know a little bit about the radiology and ultrasonography careers having done some research, but she said the medical imaging degree covers a more broad spectrum rather than those specifically.

It's a "two year" degree (as much as nursing is, as I assume you still need pre-reqs there too), but because I hear so much radio/daytime tv ad coverage, I'm understandably skeptical.

Salary.com and dozens of other sites puts the median income for "medical imaging" professionals (I still think you eventually go into either US or Radiology, no?) seems to be about mid-50's. But the key that my friend keeps mentioning is specialization.

I understand that as you specialize and gain certifications, your pay will go up.. but does it double? It just seems like this is so laced with FUD (bad data) and that many are getting confused.

Personally, from the research I've done, I think that even if you want to go into these fields, you should do it with a nursing degree so that you have the added flexibility. From what I understand it's fairly easy for an RN to specialize and learn what the tech's are learning.

So has anyone's travels down the nursing school/employment path, brought them close to someone who would know for sure what these magical certifications are for these giant paychecks? I'm not doubting 50's or even low 60's.. but beyond that, I just can't believe that someone out of school for less than 5 years would be earning 75k+ as a tech in sonography or radiology?

I know there's a radiology nursing subforum, so excuse me for posting here - it just seemed more related to general nursing

I appreciate any feedback, I've heard a lot of stories from other folks who's girlfriends or boyfriends are going to school for this, but they seem as in the dark as I am. I imagine it's not until you're actually in the industry that you learn about the true steps in order to make a commanding salary like the one mentioned. Just sounds a tad crazy that a tech could someday make as much as a CRNA :trout:

[mcubed45]

I would be very skeptical. Technically, they don't have to pay that much b/c the job isn't really in demand...nowhere near like nursing or radiology.

Think about it...most of them work for an OB-GYN ..so how many positions can there possibly be available?

actually ultrasound is used for a lot more than just OB imaging. in our xray dept i'd say US comes right after general xray in terms of patient volume. that's more than CT, MRI, and NM. ok well actually if you count mammography then US comes after general xray and mammo. most people are only familiar with OB ultrasounds and don't realize what a wide variety of purposes they're used for.

[Sebastiansmom09]

"yes but radioloGIST refers to an MD with a specialization in interpreting diagnostic images. radiology TECHs are the people that take the x-rays. they have no training in reading/diagnosis whatsoever. they are only trained to determine the QUALITY of the image and ensure the radiologist will be able read it."

Inregards to the above quoted excerpt, Rad Tech's (as they are known by the layperson) are trained in pathology and reading of radiographic films and imaging. As a matter of fact, there is a whole course in the second semester of Radiologic Technology that is dedicated to pathology only. I mean as you stated Radiographers are only trained in getting quality films (not true), however if they are going to take a quality film they need to know what we are looking for and how to get that quality film, taking into consideration how large or small the pt is and how much kVp and Ma to use (most newer machines are automated now so they; the radiographer's, don't have to do that too much) and if they are filiming soft tissue versus bone. I've said all of that to say that radiographers are not just trained to take a "good picture" if you will, but that the 2 year associates degree in radiography is a VERY intense program.

I think this was originally about the salaries of radiographers or imaging specialists. I am not familiar with the term imaging specialist but I can say, radiographers do make a comparable starting salary to what starting ADN's make. I do also know that with ALL of the specialization going on,that there is such a need for registered radiographers that there are a million and one hospital based certificate programs out there it's sad. I say it's sad simply because I know if I had to have a chest xray or any other type of xray I would be concerned about over exposure to radiation (since the body has no way of getting rid of radiation it just accumulates). There's my opinion. I only know this stuff because I went to school for radiography a few years ago.

[Crux1024]

I've heard this before as well. Do you know what the time/money needs are to get to that point? I wonder if it's a matter of a 2 week training certification or if it's another couple years of school...

For those that already have an Associates or higher, theyre is usually a Diploma course, about a year long, that you can take and be eligible for the ARDMS certification exam. Your associates (and higher) degree should usually cover the prereq's except for maybe physics, which most courses require you to take before starting.

:monkeydance:

[zena231]

The starting pay at our hospital for those with specialized training in CT/MR/NucMed is right at the same for starting nurses around $21 /hr. Imaging techs that I know started out in regular diagnostic/xray areas and then would start cross training in the other specialty areas such as CT/MR. Nuc Med techs have a separate degree or at least at my community college did and their program was harder(had certain higher level courses in things such as biology) than the regular rad tech degree.

[justme1972]

Thanks for clarifying that for me :) And it's "him"

Oops! Sorry...a thousand pardons

:)

[justme1972]

Another thing to consider, and I just thought of this...I know that you can either have an Associate or a Bachelor degree to be a Rad-Tech, and I am wondering if the upper-income scale reflects the more advanced degree.

I am comparing this to a close friend of mine that originally had an Associate degree in Respiratory Therapy (Certified) and then she went back to get her Bachelor degree to become "Registered".

Three years after graduating, she is now the Director of the department and pulling down right around $95K per year. Her supervisor is a physician, but she is over every RT in the hospital, as they report directly to her.

Just throwing that out there.

[jollyjenny]

http://www.bls.gov/oco/ocos105.htm

http://www.sdms.org/career/career.asp :

what are the salaries for sonographers?

in addition to excellent career opportunities, salaries for sonographers are competitive with or higher than other professionals with similar levels of education. according to the sdms salary and benefits survey report (released march, 2005), the median salary for sonographers is $61,984. this income includes: 1) hourly salary, 2) overtime and, 3) on-call pay. the typical hourly pay rate is $29, and the number of overtime hours worked per week by sonographers is 3. the typical on-call pay rate is $3.00 per hour, and the call-in rate of pay is $42 per hour. note: the sdms salary and benefits survey report is available for free to all sdms members.

http://www.asecho.org/help/sonographersfaq.php :

[color=#0099ff]q: can you give me information on sonographer salaries?

a: the median salary for sonographers in the united states in 2004 was reported to be $50,000- $80,000 (depending on geographic location). the field is also seeing an increase in signing bonuses. many employers are also offering tuition assistance and loan forgiveness to graduating students in exchange for employment agreements with those students. beyond the financial rewards, there are many other attractions of this dynamic field. flexibility and mobility are key benefits of this career. so are hands-on patient interactions and opportunities to work with leading-edge technologies. sonographers also have the opportunity to specialize --- to migrate to the area of ultrasound that most intrigues them. sonographers can work with all stages of life- fetal, children, adults and the elderly. opportunities to cross-train, to advance into supervisory or management roles, and to teach or do research are also within reach in this exciting field.

[bousue]

kiyatylese ...I agree with you. I have a friend who was once a HUC here (unit secretary) who went thru the sonographer program and now makes very near if not over $100,000/year. She is a contract sonographer and owns the company -something very easy to do once you are certified and specialized..and contrary to popular opinion...specialization doesn't take that long.

vamedic4

It was a long day today!

Hi, would you mind telling me where this might be? Which part of the US? I would be interested in looking into this.

[bousue]

Another thing to consider, and I just thought of this...I know that you can either have an Associate or a Bachelor degree to be a Rad-Tech, and I am wondering if the upper-income scale reflects the more advanced degree.

I am comparing this to a close friend of mine that originally had an Associate degree in Respiratory Therapy (Certified) and then she went back to get her Bachelor degree to become "Registered".

Three years after graduating, she is now the Director of the department and pulling down right around $95K per year. Her supervisor is a physician, but she is over every RT in the hospital, as they report directly to her.

Just throwing that out there.

Hi, would you mind telling me which part of the US this might be iN?

[wabrams]

Usually when you hear about a tech making 100K+ a year, they usually are in cardiac sonography and have also specialized in vascular or PEDS. One of those specializations or both jack their hourly rates through the roof.

[ZippyGBR, BSN, RN]

actually ultrasound is used for a lot more than just OB imaging. in our xray dept i'd say US comes right after general xray in terms of patient volume. that's more than CT, MRI, and NM. ok well actually if you count mammography then US comes after general xray and mammo. most people are only familiar with OB ultrasounds and don't realize what a wide variety of purposes they're used for.

it's definitely the preferred modality for finding limb VTEs and should be the preferred modality for quite a few general surgical, vascular surgery and renal/ urology things as well as quite a lot of guided biopsies etc ... certainly it is in rightpondia but we have radiation protection legislation with teeth which means if USS is going to provide adequate information then the radiologists won't authorise a CT with's it's high doses of radiation...

working patterns can have an impact on earnings ... particularly if the out of hours cover for CT /MRI etc is provided by on call staff

here in right pondia we have reporting radiographers and radiogrpaher advanced practitioners but have the advantage of radiogrpahers being registered health professionals in their own right rather than it being a technician role (in fact they are briging in a technician role 'assistant practitioner' role for some plain film stuff )

[omiart]

Wow, I am just really appalled at the ignorance that is spewing from some of the RNs on this thread. Apparently, some people here find it o.k. to assert things about radiography (and in a condescending manner I might add!) when they are really just based on assumptions. Don't be afraid to zip it if you don't know. No good can come of perpetrating false knowledge (except perhaps boosting your ego =P).

First, the point about rad techs not having any training in reading X-rays and diagnosing pathology is false. We are trained to recognize quite a list of pathologies and not just fractures. Of course, we aren't the ones responsible for making an official diagnosis and we are not allowed to discuss our findings with the patient. But a majority of the time, we know what the patient has after we've seen the X-ray.

Secondly, believe it or not, it is possible and not uncommon for rad techs (at least in Toronto) to make over 100k a year. The conditions are that you work at a non-unionized hospital and that you work an additional, casual job. It's not easy but it's doable and many people do it. This is especially true for young rad techs if they haven't settled down yet and still have the energy. If you're young and in radiography you're in a good position to make quite a bit of money.

But to be fair, Toronto has relatively high wages compared to other cities in Canada. Both RNs and Rad Techs (without specialization) start with $27 at unionized hospitals. If you are at a non-unionized hospital, compensation is much higher.

I'm not trying to make it seem like being a rad tech is super awesome I just want to enlighten some of you who seem to be in the dark about the field . There are definite cons to the profession and I personally hate it. But I find some of the things said about radiography insulting and ignorant. RNs, please don't lecture others about a profession that you're not actually involved in.

Thanks.