The Landscape of Pain Medicine for Women Physicians: A Perspective
Authors: Rajput Kanishka 
Published: January 2025

BACKGROUND: The gender bias in academic anesthesiology is well known. Women are not only a minority in the field but also underrepresented in leadership positions. Reported reasons for this underrepresentation include barriers to career advancement, lack of mentorship, and differences in compensation, among others. Interventional pain, a competitive procedural subspecialty of anesthesiology, sees the trickle-down effects of this disparity. According to a report from the ACGME that sorted medical subspecialties by number of female trainees, pain medicine ranked in the bottom quartile across all disciplines from 2008-2016.

OBJECTIVES: To better understand the landscape for women physicians in the field of pain medicine, we undertook this investigation to review the knowledge about the topic and what questions remain unanswered.

STUDY DESIGN: This study is a review of the current literature and aims to summarize and describe the landscape of pain medicine for women physicians.

SETTING: All literature review and manuscript preparation took place at the Yale University School of Medicine.

METHODS: We performed a comprehensive search using the PubMed, Scopus, and Cochrane databases for the combined terms “gender disparity,” “pain medicine,” and “anesthesiology,” limiting our search to the year 2000 onward for the most recent literature on the topic. Our initial search retrieved 38 articles. All relevant articles pertaining to this perspective piece were collated. The available literature is discussed below.

RESULTS: Women are underrepresented in interventional pain. The grim scarcity of female pain physicians is unlikely to improve soon, since while the number of Accreditation Council for Graduate Medical Education pain fellowship programs continues to grow, women trainees comprise only between 22-25% of all pain medicine fellows. Additionally, although studies have compared the numbers of male interventional pain faculty to their female counterparts in academic hospitals and shown the ratio to range from 71.84-82% to 18-28.52%, respectively, no studies have truly explored the landscape for women physicians in private practice. Patients prefer and have better experiences with physicians who are racially and ethnically like themselves. In fact, the preference for and the lack of female clinicians have been associated with delayed pursuit of care and adverse health outcomes. The consequences of the burnout and attrition caused by the gender disparity, especially in a field like pain medicine, cannot be understate.

LIMITATIONS: The review might not have been comprehensive, and relevant studies might not have been included.

CONCLUSION: While the gender disparity in academia is well documented for both anesthesiology and pain medicine, the reasons for this disparity have not been fully explored. Moreover, it is also unknown whether the minority of female physicians who select pain medicine as a subspecialty gravitate toward an academic or a private-practice path. To address the existing gender disparity, it is necessary to explore the landscape of interventional pain medicine in both academic and private practices and understand pain physicians’ beliefs and sentiments regarding their subspecialty.

KEY WORDS: Anesthesiology, pain medicine, interventional pain medicine, gender disparity, gender bias, women physicians, academic medicine, private practice