Study Design. Cross-sectional study. Objective. To illustrate demographic trends among spine fellowship leaders (FLs). Summary of Background Data. No previous study in the orthopedic literature has analyzed the demographic characteristics or past surgical training of FL in an orthopedic sub-specialty. We attempt to illustrate demographic trends among spine fellowship leadership including fellowship directors (FDs) and co-fellowship directors (co-FDs). We also highlight the institutions that have trained these leaders at various levels. Methods. Our search for FDs was constructed from the 2018 to 2019 North American Spine Surgery (NASS) Fellowship Directory. Datapoints gathered included: age, sex, residency/fellowship training location, time since training completion until FD appointment, length in FD role, and personal research H-index. Results. We identified 103 FLs consisting of 67 FDs, 19 co-FDs, and another 16 individuals with a synonymous leadership title. 96.1% (99) of the leadership consisted of males while 3.9% (4) were female. The mean age was 52.9 years old and the mean h-index of the FLs was 23.8. FLs were trained in orthopedic surgery (n = 89), neurosurgery (n = 13), or combined orthopedic surgery and neurosurgery training (n = 1). The top fellowships programs producing future FLs were: Case Western Reserve University, Cleveland (n = 10), Washington University, St. Louis (n = 9), and Rothman Orthopaedic Institute, Thomas Jefferson University, Philadelphia (n = 7). Conclusion. Spine surgery fellowship directors are more likely to have graduated from certain residency and fellowship programs. This finding could be a result of the training provided by these centers or the institution's predilection to select applicants that are more likely to later seek academic leadership roles post-training. Level of Evidence: 4

Study Design: Original research, cross-sectional study. Objectives: Evaluate patient satisfaction with spine care delivered via telemedicine. Identify patient- and visit-based factors associated with increased satisfaction and visit preference. Methods: Telemedicine visits with a spine surgeon at 2 practices in the United States between March and May 2020 were eligible for inclusion in the study. Patients were sent an electronic survey recording overall satisfaction, technical or clinical issues encountered, and preference for a telemedicine versus an in-person visit. Factors associated with poor satisfaction and preference of telemedicine over an in-person visit were identified using multivariate logistic regression. Results: A total of 772 responses were collected. Overall, 87.7% of patients were satisfied with their telemedicine visit and 45% indicated a preference for a telemedicine visit over an in-person visit if given the option. Patients with technical or clinical issues were significantly less likely to achieve 5 out of 5 satisfaction scores and were significantly more likely to prefer an in-person visit. Patients who live less than 5 miles from their surgeon’s office and patients older than 60 years were also significantly more likely to prefer in-person visits. Conclusions: Spine telemedicine visits during the COVID-19 pandemic were associated with high patient satisfaction. Additionally, 45% of respondents indicated a preference for telemedicine versus an in-patient visit in the future. In light of these findings, telemedicine for spine care may be a preferable option for a subset of patients into the future.

Level III.