RESUMEN

BACKGROUND: The United States is increasingly diverse and there are many benefits to an equally diverse physician workforce. Despite this, the percentage of under-represented minorities in orthopaedic surgery has remained stagnant. The purpose of this study was to describe the characteristics underrepresented minorities pursuing orthopaedic surgery value most when evaluating residency programs. METHODS: The contact information of current underrepresented minority orthopaedic surgery residents were obtained through professional society databases, residency program coordinators and residency program websites. Individuals were sent a survey through which they evaluated the importance of a variety of program characteristics. RESULTS: The most influential program characteristics were resident happiness and camaraderie, program reputation, geographic location, and relationships between residents and attendings. The least influential characteristics were sub-internship scholarship opportunities for minorities, program affiliation with diversity organizations, word of mouth from others, number of fellows, and centralized training sites. CONCLUSIONS: There is a need to diversify the field of orthopaedic surgery, which begins by selecting more diverse trainees. This study demonstrates that underrepresented applicants are most influenced by many of the same characteristics as their well-represented peers. However, diversity-related factors still play an important role in the decision-making process. Many residents highlighted the impact microaggressions and mistreatment played in their residency experience, emphasizing the need for residency programs to focus not only on recruitment, but also on the successes and retention of their residents. Only once this is done will the field of orthopaedic surgery find sustained improvement in its diversification efforts.

Asunto(s)

RESUMEN

BACKGROUND: We sought to evaluate the unique benefits and challenges the virtual recruitment and interviewing platform had on general surgery residency applicants. METHODS: Applicants who interviewed for a categorical position at our institution during the 2021 and 2022 Match season were contacted to participate in the anonymous online survey focused on applicant behavior related to the virtual interview format. Data were analyzed using chi-square and paired t-tests. RESULTS: A response rate of 56.7 â€‹% (n â€‹= â€‹135) was achieved. Applicants accepted a median of 17 (IQR 13-20) interviews in 2021 and 15 (IQR 11-19) interviews in 2022. More than half (54 â€‹%) of applicants indicated they applied to more programs, and 53 â€‹% accepted more interviews, because of the virtual format. The greatest advantages of the virtual interviews as cited by applicants were saving money (96.3 â€‹%), saving time (49.6 â€‹%), and avoiding travel risks (43.7 â€‹%). The top limitations of virtual interviews were less exposure to current residents and faculty (61.5 â€‹%), to the city or location of the program (58.5 â€‹%), and difficultly comparing programs (57.8 â€‹%). The 2022 Match cycle included use of the supplemental application; however, 85 â€‹% of applicants did not feel that the supplemental improved their overall application. Some applicants (20 â€‹%) who "signaled" programs did not receive an interview offer from any of the programs they signaled. CONCLUSION: The transition to virtual interviews saved applicants time and money but limited their exposure. Future efforts to maintain virtual interviews will need to be balanced against the intangible benefit of human interaction and observing a program's culture.

RESUMEN

BACKGROUND: In recent years, mounting challenges for applicants and programs in resident recruitment have catapulted this topic into a top priority in medical education. These challenges span all aspects of recruitment-from the time an applicant applies until the time of the Match-and have widespread implications on cost, applicant stress, compromise of value alignment, and holistic review, and equity. In 2021-2022, the Association of Program Directors in Surgery (APDS) set forth recommendations to guide processes for General Surgery residency recruitment. OBJECTIVES: This work summarizes the APDS 2021-2022 resident recruitment process recommendations, along with their justification and program end-of-cycle program feedback and compliance. This work also outlines the impact of these data on the subsequent 2022-2023 recommendations. METHODS: After a comprehensive review of the available literature and data about resident recruitment, the APDS Task Force proposed recommendations to guide 2021-2022 General Surgery resident recruitment. Following cycle completion, programs participating in the categorical General Surgery Match were surveyed for feedback and compliance. RESULTS: About 122 of the 342 programs (35.7%) participating in the 2022 categorical General Surgery Match responded. Based on available data in advance of the cycle, recommendations around firm application and interview numbers could not be made. About 62% of programs participated in the first round interview offer period with 86% of programs limiting offers to the number of slots available; 95% conducted virtual-only interviews. Programs responded they would consider or strongly consider the following components in future cycles: holistic review (90%), transparency around firm requirements (88%), de-emphasis of standardized test scores (54%), participation in the ERAS Supplemental application (58%), single first round interview release period (69%), interview offers limited to the number of available slots (93%), 48-hour minimum interview offer response time (98%), operationalization of applicant expectations (88%), and virtual interviews (80%). There was variability in terms of the feedback regarding the timing of the single first round offer period as well as support for a voluntary, live site visit for applicants following program rank list certification. CONCLUSIONS: The majority of programs would consider implementing similar recommendations in 2022-2023. The greatest variability around compliance revolved around single interview release and the format of interviews. Future innovation is contingent upon the ongoing collection of data as well as unification of data sources involved in the recruitment process.

Asunto(s)

RESUMEN

INTRODUCTION: The COVID-19 pandemic led to many changes in healthcare including graduate medical education (GME). Residency and fellowship programs halted in-person recruitment and pivoted to virtual models. Residency selection and recruitment were practices ripe for redesign, as they relied on in-person interviewing as the major point of contact prior to match list creation. In this commentary, we review the state of virtual interviewing and propose a future state where virtual interactions are commonplace and integrated into a comprehensive recruitment process. DISCUSSION: Virtual recruitment has led to a reduction of expenses, improved time efficiency for all parties and a reduced carbon footprint. Residency match outcomes have not changed substantially with the advent of virtual interviewing. Hybrid approaches, including virtual and in-person options have significant drawbacks and pitfalls which may limit adoption. Given the upheaval in GME recruitment caused by the pandemic, and the limitations of current methods for candidate assessment and interactions with programs, further innovation is needed to achieve an optimal state for all stakeholders. Multiple technology innovations are on the horizon which may improve the ability to interact virtually. Adoption of new technology along with expanding the timeline for residency recruitment may further optimize the process for both applicants and programs. CONCLUSIONS: The GME community was able to adopt technology for the recruitment interview rapidly due to the pandemic. As more opportunities for technology-based interactions grow, the opportunity exists to reimagine recruitment beyond the interview. While resources are constrained, some of the efficiencies gained by adopting virtual interviewing can be leveraged to expand the interactions between programs and applicants. Incorporation of in-person interaction may still be needed. Models will need to be developed to build upon the best characteristics of the virtual and in-person environments to optimize GME recruitment.KEY MESSAGES:Virtual communication methods have substantially changed residency recruitment during the COVID -19 pandemic.COVID -19 related changes in residency recruitment, including wide adoption of virtual methods, should be maintained and strengthened.Efforts should be made to advance the gains in residency recruitment strategy during the pandemic by use of technologies that expand virtual interactions beyond the interview.

Asunto(s)

RESUMEN

OBJECTIVE: The COVID-19 pandemic has created numerous unique challenges for the recruitment of prospective trainees. Cancellation of visiting electives and in-person interviews created challenges for programs to showcase elements that have been shown to influence applicants' program selection, including geographical considerations and program collegiality. Novel strategies have been recommended and employed to facilitate candidate recruitment, but it is unclear how influential such strategies are on candidates' program ranking. It is also unclear what factors influence program selection among CCFP(EM) candidates. We sought to evaluate the impact of novel recruitment strategies on applicants' ranking of the University of Ottawa CCFP(EM) program and determine factors which were most influential in applicants' first-choice program selection. METHODS: An online survey was distributed to all candidates (n = 127) who applied to the University of Ottawa CCFP(EM) program. The survey instrument included 33 items. Respondents were asked to rate on a 3-point scale how influential specific recruitment strategies were on their ranking of our program and the influence of different training factors on their selection of first-choice program. RESULTS: The survey response rate was 27% (34/127). Recruitment strategies rated as most positively influential included virtual one-on-one meetings with program directors (100%), virtual Q&A sessions (77.8%), virtual communication with chief residents (73.3%), and a mailed personalized recruitment package (72.2%). The top factors influencing applicants' first-choice program selection included: collegiality between faculty and residents (96.4%); level of responsibility given to residents (96.4%); support within the program (96.4%); and procedural opportunities within the program (96.3%). CONCLUSION: Facilitating virtual personal interaction with program leadership is highly influential in how CCFP(EM) candidates rank programs. CCFP(EM) candidates value characteristics of a training program over the geographical location and available amenities. Program leaders should consider these findings when recruiting prospective candidates.

RéSUMé: OBJECTIF: La pandémie de COVID-19 a créé de nombreux défis uniques pour le recrutement de stagiaires potentiels. L'annulation des stages optionnels et des entrevues en personne a créé des difficultés pour les programmes de présenter des éléments qui se sont avérés influer sur la sélection des programmes des candidats, y compris les considérations géographiques et la collégialité du programme. De nouvelles stratégies ont été recommandées et utilisées pour faciliter le recrutement des candidats, mais on ne sait pas dans quelle mesure ces stratégies influent sur le classement des programmes des candidats. On ne sait pas non plus quels facteurs influencent la sélection des programmes parmi les candidats au CCFP(EM). Nous avons cherché à évaluer l'impact de nouvelles stratégies de recrutement sur le classement des candidats du programme CCFP(EM) de l'Université d'Ottawa et à déterminer les facteurs qui ont eu le plus d'influence sur la sélection du programme de premier choix des candidats. MéTHODES: Un sondage en ligne a été distribué à tous les candidats (n = 127) qui ont postulé au programme CCFP(EM) de l'Université d'Ottawa. L'instrument d'enquête comprenait 43 points. Les répondants devaient évaluer sur une échelle de 3 points l'influence de stratégies de recrutement spécifiques sur leur classement de notre programme et l'influence de différents facteurs de formation sur leur choix du programme de premier choix. RéSULTATS: Le taux de réponse au sondage était de 27% (34/127). Les stratégies de recrutement jugées les plus influentes sont les réunions virtuelles en tête-à-tête avec les directeurs de programme (100%), les séances virtuelles de questions-réponses (77,8%), la communication virtuelle avec les chefs résidents (73,3%) et l'envoi par courrier d'un dossier de recrutement personnalisé (72,2%). Les principaux facteurs influençant le choix du programme de premier choix des candidats comprenaient: la collégialité entre le corps professoral et les résidents (96,4%); le niveau de responsabilité donné aux résidents (96,4%); le soutien au sein du programme (96,4%); et les possibilités de procédures au sein du programme (96,3%). CONCLUSION: Faciliter l'interaction virtuelle personnelle avec le leadership du programme a une grande influence sur la façon dont les candidats du CCFP(EM) classent les programmes. Les candidats CCFP(EM) valorisent les caractéristiques d'un programme de formation plutôt que à l'emplacement géographique et les commodités disponibles. Les chefs de programme devraient tenir compte de ces constatations lorsqu'ils recrutent des candidats éventuels.

Asunto(s)

RESUMEN

BACKGROUND: Family Medicine residencies are navigating recruitment in a changing environment. The consolidation of accreditation for allopathic and osteopathic programs, the high volume of applicants, and the forthcoming transition of the United States Medical Licensing Exam (USMLE) Step 1 to pass/fail reporting all contribute. This retrospective cohort study evaluated which components of a student's academic history best predict readiness for residency. METHODS: In 2020, we analyzed applicant data and initial residency data for program graduates at a single residency program between 2013 and 2020. This included undergraduate education characteristics, medical school academic performance, medical school academic problems (including professionalism), STEP exams, location of medical school, and assessments during the first 6 months of residency. Of 110 matriculating residents, assessment data was available for 97 (88%). RESULTS: Pre-matriculation USMLE data had a positive correlation with initial American Board of Family Medicine (ABFM) in-training exams. Pre-matriculation exam data did not have a positive correlation with resident assessment across any of the six Accreditation Council for Graduate Medical Education (ACGME) competency domains. A defined cohort of residents with a history of academic struggles during medical school or failure on a USMLE exam performed statistically similarly to residents with no such history on assessments across the six ACGME competency domains. CONCLUSIONS: Applicants with a history of academic problems perform similarly in the clinical environment to those without. While a positive correlation between pre-matriculation exams and the ABFM in-training exam was found, this did not extend to clinical assessments across the ACGME competency domains.

Asunto(s)

RESUMEN

RATIONALE AND OBJECTIVES: The purpose of this study is to analyze the significance of specific factors in choosing radiology as a specialty compared to switching to/from a different specialty as reported in the Graduation Questionnaire (GQ) and Matriculating Student Questionnaire (MSQ) data provided by Association of American Medical Colleges. METHOD AND MATERIALS: The study cohort included students who completed both the MSQ and GQ questionnaires in the span of 3-5 years. The cohort was divided into three groups-"Committed" (students who chose radiology in both the first and final year of medical school), "Switched Away" (students who chose radiology on the MSQ but later switched to a different specialty, and "Switched-To" (students who chose radiology on GQ after initially selecting an alternate specialty on the MSQ). RESULTS: Of 1965 students who chose radiology between the years 2013 and 2016, 281 were Committed, 625 Switched-Away, and 1059 Switched-To. There were significant differences among the groups for salary, length of residency, and work-life balance factors. In the Switched-Away group, more students were influenced by length of residency (18% vs. 5%, p < 0.001) and fewer were influenced by salary (21% vs. 30%, p=0.004) or work-life balance (54% vs. 66%, p = 0.001) when compared to the Committed group. The Switched-To group did not significantly differ from the Committed group (all p > 0.05) for length of residency (6% vs. 5%), salary (30% vs. 30%) and work-life balance (69% vs. 66%). CONCLUSION: The data provide insight into factors that influence medical students to initially commit to, switch away from, and switch to radiology during medical school. Understanding these dynamics can inform mentors to guide medical students who are interested in a radiology career.

Asunto(s)

RESUMEN

The novel coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) has had a major impact on the education of trainees in the radiology environment. The precipitous drop in patient volumes and sequestering of faculty and trainees to maintain social distancing affects experiential learning. The shift of nearly all teaching settings to a virtual environment has been challenging but may also allow more interaction during teaching sessions than traditional readout sessions or didactic lectures. Faculty development is key in ensuring competence and confidence in this new environment. Recruitment of trainees using a virtual platform will require communication of opportunities as well as the culture of the department and institution as well as the community. Delay of the board examinations has caused angst as well as disruption of the timing of clinical rotations but may ultimately result in a shift of how the examinations are administered. The exceptional disruption of the COVID-19 pandemic allows us to reconsider how the educational aspects of imaging can emerge as improved in the years to come.

Asunto(s)

RESUMEN

This article was migrated. The article was marked as recommended. Social media use across the health professions has significantly expanded in recent years. Specific attention has been paid to both the value of social media use in graduate medical education with residency program twitter accounts. More recently, social media has been examined for its role in supporting the rapid expansion of information exchange and connection across digital and virtual platforms during the COVID-19 pandemic. With the ongoing response to the pandemic, the 2020-2021 residency application cycle is anticipated to be a completely virtual interview process. Here, we draw from our collective experiences managing, maturing, and maximizing social media accounts for residency programs and GME to provide practical tips for using social media for the upcoming virtual interview season.

RESUMEN

BACKGROUND: The role of the internet continues to expand, particularly in the realm of graduate medical education. Residency program directors commonly use websites to share information with applicants. As social media (SM) use grows, the role of residency-based SM accounts in recruiting prospective residents remains unclear. OBJECTIVE: We sought to delineate which SM platforms prospective anesthesia residents have accounts and which platforms they use to research anesthesia residency programs. METHODS: Following the results of the National Residency Match Program (NRMP) in March 2018, we anonymously surveyed anesthesiology resident candidates from all three Mayo Clinic residency sites and inquired about which SM platforms candidates maintain a profile, which they used to evaluate residencies, and to what degree the content influenced their decision. RESULTS: A total of 219 surveys were distributed that resulted in 89 responses (40.6%, 89/219). Most respondents have a Facebook account (94.4%, 84/89) while Doximity was the most commonly used SM platform to research programs (86.5%, 77/89). Most respondents (52.8%, 47/89) felt the presence of a residency-based SM account had an impact on their evaluation of prospective programs. Most respondents (50.5%, 45/89) used an internet search to research programs, while a large percentage (42.7%, 38/89) used a combination of internet search engines and SM platforms. CONCLUSIONS: While an internet search was the most commonly used technique to research programs, many applicants also used SM platforms. Doximity was the most commonly SM platform, however, more applicants have Facebook accounts, suggesting programs can use this platform to reach prospective applicants.

RESUMEN

RATIONALE AND OBJECTIVES: The Association of Program Directors in Radiology regularly surveys its members regarding issues of importance to support radiology residency programs and their directors. MATERIALS AND METHODS: This is an observational cross-sectional study using two Web-based surveys posed to the Association of Program Directors in Radiology membership in the fall of 2014 (49 items) and the spring of 2015 (46 items) on the subjects of importance to the members, including the Accreditation Council on Graduate Medical Education Milestones, the Non-Interpretative Skills Curriculum, the American Board of Radiology Core Examination, the effect of the new resident testing and program accreditation paradigms on training outcomes, the 2015 Residency Match, the Interventional Radiology/Diagnostic Radiology (IR/DR) Residency, and Program Director (PD)/Program Coordinator resources. RESULTS: Responses were collected electronically, results were tallied using SurveyMonkey software, and qualitative responses were tabulated or summarized as comments. Findings were reported during the 63rd annual meeting of the Association of University Radiologists. The maximal response rate was 33% in the fall of 2014 and 36% in the spring of 2015. CONCLUSIONS: PDs believed that the radiology Milestones, now largely implemented, did not affect overall resident evaluation, was not reflective of resident experience, and actually made evaluation of residents more difficult. PDs also felt that although the American Board of Radiology oral examination had been a better test for clinical practice preparedness, their new residents knew at least as much as before. There was little evidence of recall reemergence. The radiology training community saw a drop in residency applicant quality as demonstrated by the United States Medical Licensing Examination scores and clinical rotation grades. Because the new IR/DR Residency positions were to be funded at the expense of the traditional DR positions, the majority of PDs expected a negative effect of the impending IR/DR match on their DR recruitment. PDs were in favor of a unified clinical radiology curriculum similar to the Radiological Society of North America online physics modules.

Asunto(s)

RESUMEN

Annual resident recruitment is a complex undertaking that requires many departmental resources of faculty time and effort and in many cases financial investment for meals and lodging. The applicants represent the future of the profession as well as the providers of patient care in the respective training programs. Although we understand the importance of this process, as we become more and more distracted by financial, administrative, and academic duties, the demands of recruitment have not decreased and continue annually. In an attempt to find the best practices for the improvement in our methods of recruitment, a review of the literature on the employment interviews with a specific eye to pathology residency relevant information was conducted. This article reviews some of the factors proven to be important to the applicants as well as an examination of the structure of the interview and the postinterview applicant evaluation process.

RESUMEN

STUDY OBJECTIVE: To re-evaluate factors responsible for selecting a career in anesthesiology and for selecting an anesthesiology training program. The perceptions of anesthesiology residents about employment opportunities and future job security were also re-examined. Novel data on the impact of duty hour restrictions on residency training were obtained. DESIGN: Survey instrument. SETTING: Academic medical center. SUBJECTS: 63 residents enrolled in the anesthesiology residency at Mayo Clinic in Rochester, MN (clinical base year and clinical anesthesia years 1-3) during the 2010-11 academic year. All responses were anonymous. MEASUREMENTS: Current study data were compared to data from two similar studies published by the authors (1995-96 and 2000-01) using an f-exact test. A P-value ≤ 0.05 was considered significant. MAIN RESULTS: 55 of 63 (87%) residents responded to the survey. The most frequently cited reasons for selecting a career in anesthesiology were: anesthesiology is a "hands-on" specialty (49%), critical care medicine is included in the scope of training/practice (33%), anesthesiology provides opportunities to perform invasive procedures (31%), and the work is immediately gratifying (31%). When current data were compared with data from the 1995-96 survey, respondents reported significant decreases in interest in physiology/pharmacology (42% vs 21%; P = 0.03), opportunities to conduct research (13% vs 2%; P = 0.05) and opportunities to train in pain medicine (13% vs 0%; P = 0.01) as reasons for selecting anesthesiology. When current data were compared with data from the 2000-2001 survey, respondents reported a significant increase in critical care medicine (7% vs 33%, P = 0.01), significant decreases in time off (36% vs 11%; P = 0.01) and work time mostly devoted to patient care (20% vs 2%; P = 0.01) as factors in selecting anesthesiology as a career. Nearly all (94%) respondents reported a high level of satisfaction with their specialty choice and would choose anesthesiology again if currently graduating medical school. When current data were compared with those from the 2000-2001 survey, a significant increase in respondents who anticipated difficulty securing employment (0% vs 14%; P = 0.01) was noted. However, anticipation of difficulty in securing employment remained significantly lower than what was reported on the 1995-96 survey (54% vs 14%; P = 0.01). Thirty-eight percent of residents reported that implementation of duty hour restrictions had a positive impact on resident education, and 43% of residents reported that duty hour restrictions improved their quality of life. However, most respondents (69%) did not support further duty hour restrictions, and many (43%) expected to work longer hours after graduation. CONCLUSIONS: Residents in this study remain highly satisfied with anesthesiology as a career choice and with their training program. However, a resurgence of concern about employment after program completion and about future job security is apparent. The impact of critical care medicine training has significantly increased as a factor in selecting anesthesiology as a career, and the impact of training in pain medicine has significantly decreased. Although work hour restrictions were viewed as having a positive impact on training and well-being by 48% of residents, a majority of respondents in this study (76%) disagreed with further duty hour restrictions.

Asunto(s)