The Return on Investment of Orthopaedic Fellowship Training: A Ten-year Update

Mead, Matthew; Atkinson, Theresa; Srivastava, Ajay; Walter, Norman

doi:10.5435/jaaos-d-19-00276

Cited by 32 publications

(16 citation statements)

References 12 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…Recent studies suggest that more than 90% of graduating orthopaedic surgery residents complete at least 1 year of additional training and that 68% of open positions require fellowship training. 1 , 2 , 3 The San Francisco (SF) Match has facilitated the Orthopaedic Sports Medicine Fellowship Match annually since 2008. In 2019, there were 219 positions across 93 programs accredited by the American Orthopaedic Society for Sports Medicine and Arthroscopy Association of North America.…”

mentioning

confidence: 99%

Orthopaedic Sports Medicine Fellowship Websites: Information Considered Most Important to Fellowship Applicants

McEvoy

Brown

Miskimin

et al. 2021

Arthroscopy, Sports Medicine, and Rehabilitation

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

The purpose of this study was to determine which components of sports medicine fellowships are most important to applicants when reviewing fellowship websites during the application process. Methods: An anonymous survey was distributed to 492 fellowship applicants from the 2017-2018 and 2018-2019 cycles. The survey included questions about the importance of including components of fellow education, recruitment, and experience on program websites. The weighted average of responses determined each component's rank, with 5 being "very important" and 1 being "not at all important." Responses were analyzed by application cycle, current position, and sex using the Wilcoxon rank-sum test. Results: Sixty-five applicants participated in the survey and completed the demographics section, resulting in a 13.2% response rate. According to participants, the most important components to include on fellowship websites were exposure to advanced operative sports medicine techniques (weighted average, 4.62), complexity of cases performed (4.52), and number of cases performed (4.50). Analysis demonstrated statistically significant differences in opinion between application cycles for flexibility for conducting a remote interview (P ¼ .0074), jobs obtained by previous fellows (P ¼ .019), national rank of department (P ¼ .021), program's geographic location (P ¼ .026), protected academic time (P ¼ .038), current positions for criteria for fellows' performance evaluations (P ¼ .028), program's geographic location (P ¼ .0097), and protected academic time (P ¼ .0079). There were statistically significant differences in opinion between current positions regarding flexibility for conducting a remote interview (P ¼ .0026), jobs obtained by previous fellows (P ¼ .012), and national rank of department (P ¼ .0013). Conclusions: Orthopaedic sports medicine fellowship applicants believe that it is most important to include information about the volume and complexity of fellows' cases and their day-to-day commitments on program websites. Clinical Relevance: This information would enable applicants to identify programs that will support professional development and allow program directors to communicate expectations.

show abstract

mentioning

confidence: 99%

Orthopaedic Sports Medicine Fellowship Websites: Information Considered Most Important to Fellowship Applicants

McEvoy

Brown

Miskimin

et al. 2021

Arthroscopy, Sports Medicine, and Rehabilitation

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…Correcting this trend may lead to more women pursuing orthopedics out of medical school. A number of studies have shown that women are more likely than men to indicate having a role model or mentor positively influences their pursuit of orthopedic surgery [6,7,[14][15][16][17][18]. On the other hand in January 2020, Bi et al found that 3/153 (2.0%) chairs and 18/161 (11.2%) of PDs were women in all residency programs, while our study found that 5/126 (4.0%) of chairs and 16/138 (11.6%) of PDs with an academic position were women as of March 2022 [4].…”

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Trends in Medical Training and Leadership at Academic Orthopedic Programs

Elkadi¹,

Donaldson²,

Krisanda³

et al. 2022

Cureus

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Introduction: When deciding on which programs to rank or fellowships to enter, medical students and residents may assess the program's prestige and specialty training opportunities. This report aimed to analyze the demographics of orthopedic department chairs and program directors (PDs), focusing on the prestige of their orthopedic training and medical school. Secondary data included fellowship, higher-level education, sex, professorship, years of practice, and total published research.Methods: We used U.S. News and Doximity to rank 192 medical schools and 200 orthopedic residency programs based on prestige rankings, respectively. We searched for the department chair, vice-chair, and PD via program websites, Council of Orthopaedic Residency Directors (CORD), Orthopedic Residency Information Network (ORIN), personal websites, LinkedIn, and Doximity. Subsequently, we searched for each individual's demographic information, education and research history, employment history, and medical school attended.Results: We gathered data on 268 orthopedic surgeons with leadership positions at academic hospitals. Of the 268, 115 were department chairs, 15 were vice-chairs, 126 were PDs, 11 were both the chair and PD, and one was vice-chair and PD. Of the 268 physicians, 244 physicians were male (91.0%), while 22 were female (9.0%). The average residency reputation ranking overall was 59.7 ± 5.7. More specifically, for chairs, the average was 57.0 ± 8.3 (p < 0.005), and for PDs, the average was 63.6 ± 8.0 (p <0.005). There was no significant difference between chairs and PDs (p = 0.26).Conclusion: Orthopedic leaders were found to have trained at more prestigious programs. This trend could be explained by increased research opportunities at more prestigious programs or programs attempting to increase their own reputation. 9.0% of the leaders identify as female, which is comparable to the 6.5% of practicing female orthopedic surgeons. However, this further demonstrates a need for gender equity in orthopedic surgery. Assessing trends in the training of orthopedic surgeons with leadership positions will allow a better understanding of what programs look for in the hiring process.

show abstract

“…Easy online accessibility, content, and accreditation status of programs can influence objective parameters for candidates to investigate the program, thus potentially affecting their decision to apply and compose their rank list [16][17][18][19]. The selective application process may help decrease interview costs for the applicant as well as for the program [20][21][22][23][24]. Reputed programs (in terms of region, number of positions, accreditation, and affiliation with top medical school/residency program/hospital) may or may not be affected by online information availability.…”

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Match for Orthopedic Fellowship Programs in the United States: Online Accessibility, Content, and Accreditation Comparison Between Subspecialties and Review of Alternative Resources

Jain¹,

Chinnakkannu²,

Patel³

2021

Cureus

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Background: Orthopedic surgery is considered among the highly competitive medical specialties to get in as a career in the United States. San Francisco Match (SF Match) is the matching service for orthopedic subspecialty fellowship programs, and the internet is the main source for applicants to obtain program information in the modern era. We aimed to determine and compare the accessibility, content, and accreditation details of the various orthopedic fellowship programs available at the Match website and alternative online resources. Methods: We studied eight subspecialties (Adult Reconstruction, Musculoskeletal Oncology, Foot and Ankle, Pediatric Orthopedics, Shoulder and Elbow, Orthopedic Spine Surgery, Sports Medicine, and Trauma) in a cross-sectional design during August/September 2019 for programs starting in July/August 2021. We registered the available baseline information at the SF Match site under various categories. We tried to reach the program-specific webpage through SF Match hyperlink and categorized our results into successful (direct and indirect) links and unsuccessful links with subcategorization. We also analyzed the information available at sponsoring society, FREIDA (Fellowship and Residency Electronic Interactive Database), and ACGME (Accreditation Council for Graduate Medical Education) websites. Result: We analyzed 465 programs (874 positions) available through the SF Match website. A standardized program description was available for >80% of the programs in each subspecialty. The availability of a successful link for the program-specific webpage ranges from 35% (Pediatric Orthopedics) to 77% (Sports Medicine). Indirect links were almost twice as common as direct links. The success rates through the sponsoring society webpages vary from 3% (Shoulder and Elbow) to 53% (Pediatric Orthopedics). Failure rates after trying both (the Match and Society links) range from 10% (Musculoskeletal Oncology) to 34% (Shoulder and Elbow). FREIDA provides comprehensive information but is limited to accredited programs. ACGME accreditation rate varied from 14.6% (Foot and Ankle) to 98.9% (Sports Medicine). Conclusion: The selection of a subspecialty fellowship program is crucial for most applicants. There are plenty of resources for the orthopedic fellowship programs' online presence after two decades since the first orthopedic fellowship match inception. Match website is the primary resource for the applicants. All parties could be benefited if both the programs and the sponsoring societies offer adequate online information to the Match, leading to ideal fellow-program matches and improved educational experiences. Our study may stand as a reference for future comparison possibly due to post-COVID evolution in the Match process. We recommend that consistent availability of direct functional program website links, point-based program description, and filter/comparison options may further improve online accessibility and quality of the content of the Match website.

show abstract

The Return on Investment of Orthopaedic Fellowship Training: A Ten-year Update

Cited by 32 publications

References 12 publications

Orthopaedic Sports Medicine Fellowship Websites: Information Considered Most Important to Fellowship Applicants

Orthopaedic Sports Medicine Fellowship Websites: Information Considered Most Important to Fellowship Applicants

Trends in Medical Training and Leadership at Academic Orthopedic Programs

Match for Orthopedic Fellowship Programs in the United States: Online Accessibility, Content, and Accreditation Comparison Between Subspecialties and Review of Alternative Resources

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About