A 5-Year Analysis of the Integrated Plastic Surgery Residency Match: The Most Competitive Specialty?

Update on the Selection Criteria of Plastic Surgery Residents: A Survey of Program Directors and Associate Program Directors

BACKGROUND

Plastic and reconstructive surgery (PRS) is recognized as a highly competitive specialty. Since the first assessment of resident selection criteria in 2007, PRS residency programs have adopted holistic review processes and adapted to changes such as a decline in medical schools participating in the Alpha Omega Alpha Honor Medical Society as well as the recent transition to pass/fail grading for the United States Medical Licensing Examination (USMLE) step 1 examination (Schultz et al. Plast Reconstr Surg Glob Open . 2020;8:e2892; Tadisina et al. Plast Reconstr Surg . 2017;139:330e-331e). This study was devised to evaluate current PRS residency criteria in light of these changes.

METHODS

An anonymous, 12-item, electronic survey was generated and distributed using Alchemer. An email was sent to 171 program directors (PDs) and associate program directors (APDs) of PRS residency programs. Survey questions were developed to collect data regarding respondent demographics and their desired criteria when assessing residency applicants. Complete responses were collected and analyzed with summary statistics and multivariate logistic regression using RStudio (version 1.3.109).

RESULTS

In total, 44 (25.7% response rate) of the 171 PDs and APDs completed the survey. Of the 16 programs (36.4%) with a USMLE cutoff score, 7 (43.8%) reported a range of 230 to 239 and 6 (37.5%) reported a range of 240 to 249. Without a score for step 1, the majority (48.8%) of respondents believe that step 2 scores will replace step 1 scores in terms of assessment criteria, and the content of recommendation letters was selected as the criterion with the greatest increase in weight (66.7%). In addition, 27.3% of programs require a step 2 score at the time of interview. The top 3 academic criteria in order of decreasing importance were the content of recommendation letters, clinical grades, and letter writers, whereas the top 3 nonacademic criteria were subinternship performance, maturity, and interview performance.

CONCLUSIONS

Plastic and reconstructive surgery remains a highly competitive specialty for residency applicants. Our findings suggest that Alpha Omega Alpha membership remains diminished in importance, whereas USMLE cutoff scores have increased. With recent changes in the step 1 grading system, PDs and APDs will rely more heavily on step 2 scores and the content of recommendation letters.

Doctors of Osteopathic Medicine as Plastic Surgery Residents: Demographics, Credentials, and Pathways to Residency

OBJECTIVE

Doctors of Osteopathic Medicine (DOs) are sparsely represented within plastic and reconstructive surgery (PRS) and recent changes including the elimination of step 1 scoring have further disadvantaged DO applicants. The demographics, degrees, and scholarly output of DO PRS trainees were compared to that of Doctors of Medicine (MDs) to identify areas of focus which could be used to increase competitiveness of DO applications.

DESIGN

A cross-sectional study was created, including ACGME-accredited PRS program trainees during the 2020 to 2021 academic year. DO and MD trainee demographics and scholarly accomplishments were compared using t-test and chi-squared analysis.

SETTING

Web-based publicly available information was collected for subjects.

PARTICIPANTS

A total of 1092 PRS MD and DO trainees were identified. DOs made up only 2.7% (n = 30) and MDs made up 97.3% (n = 1062).

RESULTS

More DOs trained in independent programs (63.3%) than integrated (36.7%) compared to MDs (88.2% v. 11.8%, p < 0.001) and more DOs trained at lower ranked PRS programs (60.0% of DOs and 18.1% of MDs trained at Q4 programs, p < 0.001). DOs had fewer publications (median, IQR: 1, [0-2]) compared to MDs (3, [1-8]), fewer citations (0, [0-6]) vs. (10, [1-56]) and lower H-index (1, [0-1]) vs. (1, [1-3]).

CONCLUSION

DO candidates should consider research years in the field of PRS and optimize clinical experience opportunities to increase the competitiveness of their PRS applications. Special attention should be paid to providing networking and research opportunities to DOs who lack home institutions.

Independent Plastic Surgery Match Regional Trends Comparing In-person and Virtual Interview Cycles

Background

There is a trend toward matching in a different region than previous training for the independent plastic surgery match cycles from 2019 to 2021, which differs from the trend to match within the same region for integrated plastic surgery programs. Notably, residency interviews transitioned from in-person to virtual in 2020 due to the coronavirus pandemic. Therefore, we compared in-person versus virtual interview match trends from 2019 to 2023.

Methods

Zip codes and regions of each successfully matched plastic surgery applicant's medical school, residency, and plastic surgery program were gathered from publicly available data for the 2019 and 2020 in-person interview cycles and 2021, 2022, and 2023 virtual interview cycles.

Results

Although regions did not differ significantly in the proportions of positions each year (P = 0.85), there was a trend toward fewer positions in each region from 2019 to 2022. Overall, applicants were more likely to match in a different region as their medical school or residency during virtual compared with in-person interviews (P = 0.002 and P = 0.04). Applicants matched to programs further from their medical school zip code in virtual interview years (P = 0.02). There was no significant difference in distance between surgical residencies and plastic surgery residencies between the two time periods (P = 0.51).

Conclusions

Trends toward matching into a different region than prior training after the switch to virtual interviews could be attributed to applicant accessibility to interview broadly. However, this could also be due to the decreased number of independent residency positions over the years, requiring applicants to move regions and travel further from where they began their training.

Clinical Research Fellowship Fosters Mentorship, Teamwork, and Productivity: Our 11-Year Experience With a Craniofacial Research Fellowship

INTRODUCTION

This study describes the development and explores the academic impact of a cleft and craniofacial research fellowship.

MATERIALS AND METHODS

Research and career outcomes from 3 cleft and craniofacial surgeons, 14 clinical fellows, and 25 research fellows between 2010 and 2023 were examined. Academic productivity was measured by the number of peer-reviewed publications indexed in PubMed and podium presentations at national/international meetings. Residency match statistics were recorded for eligible research fellows.

RESULTS

Over this 14-year period (11 with research fellows), the team produced 500 publications in 96 peer-reviewed journals, with 153 (31%) in Plastic and Reconstructive Surgery, 117 (23%) in the Journal of Craniofacial Surgery, and 32 (6%) in The Cleft Palate-Craniofacial Journal. Yearly publications increased from 15.3±7.6 per year (before fellowship) to 23.0±5.3 (with 1 fellow) to 38.3±12.9 (2 fellows) to 81.0±5.7 (3 fellows; P<0.001). There was a strong annual linear growth in publications since the beginning the research fellowship position (r=0.88, P<0.001). All (100%) clinical research fellows developed strong relationships with senior surgeons, and all who applied to plastic surgery residency matched a significantly higher success rate than the national average (P<0.05).

CONCLUSION

Implementing a structured cleft and craniofacial clinical research fellowship was associated with a broad impact across all cleft and craniofacial team members, as reflected by increased academic output and high match rates among fellows. The fellowship also strengthens the talent pipeline into plastic surgery by fostering meaningful mentor/mentee relationships and provides a model that can be adopted in both surgical and nonsurgical fields.

Socioeconomic Disparities in Research Participation: Bias in Plastic Surgery Residency Match

Background

Integrated plastic surgery residency applicants have increased at a rate disproportionate to available positions. Research productivity has become a surrogate marker for competitiveness, and many applicants pursue it to distinguish themselves. To date, no study has investigated socioeconomic disparities in extended research experience (ERE) participation.

Methods

A 35-question cross-sectional survey was distributed to applicants to United States-based integrated plastic surgery residency programs during the 2019-2022 application cycles. Summary tables, student t test, and chi-square tests were used for statistical analysis.

Results

A total of 161 responses (response rate: 20.9%) were recorded. Fifty-nine (40.7%) respondents participated in an ERE. The most common reason for ERE participation was strengthening one's application. The most common reason against participation was avoiding delays in career progression. A greater percentage of respondents from Northeastern medical schools participated in EREs (P = 0.019). There were no significant differences in debt burden between those who did or did not participate in an ERE. A greater percentage of applicants whose parents had advanced degrees participated in EREs (P = 0.053).

Conclusions

There may be geographic and socioeconomic biases present in access to ERE for students interested in plastic surgery. The growing popularity of EREs may have unintended consequences for applicant diversity. As most plastic surgeons ultimately practice in nonacademic settings, applicants and plastic surgeons may consider the financial hardships and possible socioeconomic disparities in research opportunities before participating in or recommending them.

Identifying Barriers Faced by Applicants without a Home Residency Program when Matching into Plastic Surgery

Background  Applying into plastic surgery (PS) is competitive. Lacking a home residency program (HRP) is another barrier. Our goal is to characterize challenges faced by PS applicants without HRPs and identify solutions. Methods  Surveys were designed for current integrated PS residents and applicants in the 2022 Match without HRPs. Surveys were distributed electronically. Only U.S. allopathic graduate responses were included. Results  Of 182 individuals surveyed, 74 responded (39%, 33 residents, 41 applicants). Sixty-six percent reported feeling disadvantaged due to lack of an HRP. Seventy-six percent of applicants successfully matched. Of these, 48% felt they required academic time off (research year) versus 10% of unmatched applicants. Ninety-seven percent of matched applicants identified a mentor versus 40% of unmatched applicants ( p  < 0.05). Matched applicants identified mentors through research (29%) and cold calling/emailing (25%). Matched versus unmatched applicants utilized the following resources: senior students (74 vs. 10%, p  < 0.05) and social media (52 vs. 10%, p  < 0.05). Among residents, 16 had PS divisions (48%). Thirty-six percent with divisions felt they had opportunities to explore PS, compared with 12% without divisions. Residents without divisions felt disadvantaged in finding research (94 vs. 65%, p  < 0.05), delayed in deciding on PS (50 vs. 28%), and obtaining mentors (44 vs. 35%) and letters of recommendation (31 vs. 24%). Conclusion  PS residents and applicants without HRPs reported feeling disadvantaged when matching. The data suggest that access to departments or divisions assists in matching. We identified that external outreach and research were successful strategies to obtain mentorship. To increase awareness for unaffiliated applicants, we should increase networking opportunities during local, regional, and national meetings.

Deconstructing the Excellent Plastic Surgeon: A Survey of Key Attributes

Background

Most plastic surgeons practice in nonacademic settings, leaving a small subset of academic plastic surgeons with the responsibility of selecting the future generation of plastic surgeons without representation from a majority of our field. This raises questions as to whether the academic attributes valued during residency selection are valid predictive markers of who will become an excellent plastic surgeon. A survey was conducted of both academic and nonacademic plastic surgeons, as well as trainees, to determine what traits are considered most essential to being an excellent plastic surgeon.

Methods

An electronic survey was distributed before the American Council of Academic Plastic Surgeons 10th Annual Winter Meeting. Demographics and information regarding the respondents' training and academic status were collected. Respondents were asked to select five traits that they considered most important to be an excellent plastic surgeon from a list of 20 preselected traits. Chi-square and Fisher exact tests were used to perform subgroup analyses.

Results

A total of 187 responses were received from meeting attendees, representing an 89.0% response rate. Overall, the five values endorsed as most important for a plastic surgeon were being technically sound (53%), collaborative (48%), ethical (44%), compassionate (37%), and emotionally intelligent (33%). However, the emphasis placed on these different attributes differed significantly amongst different demographic groups.

Conclusion

It is important that we use methods such as holistic review when evaluating plastic surgery applicants to ensure our selection process is congruent with the traits we value.

Strength in Numbers: A SWOT Analysis of Plastic Surgery

Background

Plastic surgeons comprise the minority of practicing surgeons, with an even smaller minority practicing in an academic setting. As the practice of medicine and the systems in which we operate continue to evolve, it is essential that plastic surgeons have a say in the changing landscape. This study conducted a strengths, weaknesses, opportunities, and threats (SWOT) analysis of plastic surgery to identify unifying strengths and common threats.

Methods

An electronic survey was distributed to American Council of Academic Plastic Surgeons' Winter Meeting attendees on three separate occasions preceding the meeting. Respondents were asked to provide demographic information and to identify the top three strengths, weaknesses, opportunities, and threats (SWOT analysis) for the specialty. Subgroup analyses were performed based on demographic characteristics.

Results

A total of 187 responses were received from meeting attendees, representing an 89.0% response rate. Most respondents were non-Hispanic (78.6%), White (66.8%), women (59.5%), and faculty/independent physicians (65.8%). The most identified strength in plastic surgery was our problem-solving abilities (62.0%). The most identified weakness was poor public perception of plastic surgery (54.0%). The most identified opportunity was demonstration of value to health systems (67.9%), and the most identified threat was scope of practice creep by other specialties (78.1%). The SWOT analysis identified lack of surgeon diversity as a key weakness, improvement of surgeon diversity as a key opportunity, and lack of diversity among plastic surgeons as a key threat to the specialty.

Conclusion

Only through a diverse but united front can we effectively use our strengths to face our threats and employ opportunities to overcome our weaknesses.

A SWOT Analysis of Hot Topics in Plastic Surgery Resident Education: Consensus From the ACAPS 10th Annual Winter Meeting

Background

With the aim of facilitating a critical self-reflection on how to align plastic surgery education with making excellent plastic surgeons, a rotating small-group session followed by live interactive audience polling was used to perform a SWOT (strengths, weaknesses, opportunities, and threats) analysis at the 10th Annual American Council of Academic Plastic Surgeons Winter Meeting.

Methods

The final day of the conference included a 3-hour session of rotating small groups followed by live interactive audience polls discussing the following six relevant educational topics: the Plastic Surgery Common Application and resident selection, aesthetic surgery education, leadership development and business education, embedded fellowships and focused training, mentorship, and faculty retention.

Results

A total of 60 individuals participated in the activity. A SWOT analysis was successfully performed for each educational topic, and a minimum of four opportunities were identified per topic to help guide future endeavors. Examples of opportunities include releasing recommendations for the implementation of holistic review; developing formal guidelines for aesthetic surgery education in residency via collaboration between ACAPS, American Society of Plastic Surgeons, and The Aesthetic Society; creating extended focused elective rotations; integrating business education into formal curricula for all training levels; enforcing transparency regarding position expectations and offerings including salary, call schedule, and current challenges; and more.

Conclusion

The results of this study will help guide future initiatives by the ACAPS to improve resident education and academic retention.

Having Social Media among Integrated Plastic Surgery Applicants: Is It Needed to Match?

Background

Little information exists on the perceptions of integrated plastic and reconstructive surgery (PRS) residency applicants on the need for having social media (SoMe) during the application process.

Methods

A cross-sectional survey study was conducted during the 2022 match cycle to assess integrated PRS residency applicants' perceptions on the role of SoMe during the match. Univariate and multivariate analyses were performed on variables of interest. Qualitative analysis was conducted on free-form responses.

Results

Seventy-nine surveys were completed (response rate: 24%). The majority of respondents were educated in the United States (92%). Instagram was the most commonly used SoMe platform (92%). Of those surveyed, 18% thought that SoMe was beneficial to the application process. Twenty-nine percent of respondents agreed that a SoMe presence increases one's chances of matching into PRS residency (41% disagreed and 30% responded neutrally). Forty-four percent endorsed stress about maintaining a SoMe presence in PRS. Having mentors who recommended maintaining a SoMe presence was associated with the belief that SoMe increases one's chances of matching [odds ratio (OR) 8.1, 95% confidence interval (CI) 1.1-40.4, P = 0.011] and stress about maintaining a SoMe presence (OR 6.3, 95% CI 1.2-33.3, P = 0.030). Applicants who did research years had lower odds of experiencing stress (OR 0.16, 95% CI 0.04-0.70, P = 0.015).

Conclusions

The growing role of SoMe in the residency selection process may be exacerbating applicants' stress and anxiety. PRS programs may consider establishing clear policies for how SoMe will be used in evaluating candidates.

A Systematic Review of the State of Preclinical Mentorship Programs in Plastic and Reconstructive Surgery

Background

Plastic and reconstructive surgery is consistently one of the most competitive medical specialties in the match. The recent United States Medical Licensing Examination score reporting switch to pass-fail led to a change in metrics by which applicants are evaluated by plastic surgery programs. Applicant research productivity and the demand for plastic surgery mentorship will continue to rise. Given the competitive nature of the residency match and shift in metrics emphasis after the change in STEP 1 scoring, early exposure to plastic surgery and mentoring relationships are paramount to applicant success. However, most medical students are not exposed to plastic surgery until they begin clinical rotations.

Methods

A literature review of plastic surgery mentorship programs available during preclinical years was conducted to identify preclinical mentorship opportunities in plastic surgery. Sixty-eight references were identified, but only two studies met the inclusion criteria of addressing mentorship programs in preclinical years.

Results

Examination of the included studies indicated that preclinical medical students achieve self-identified goals and generate longitudinal benefits in plastic surgery by participating in early and focused mentorship programs.

Conclusions

The limited number of studies in this review highlights a lack of available, studied preclinical mentorship programs in plastic surgery and reveals a knowledge gap concerning the creation of successful preclinical mentorship programs. Early exposure to plastic surgery, combined with the development of structured preclinical mentorship programs, can potentially replicate successful outcomes seen in other surgical subspecialties' mentorship programs while addressing the lack of formalized mentorship opportunities for preclinical students in plastic surgery.

Defining Predictors of Future Academic Productivity in Plastic Surgery Residency

Background

Research is a valued component of applications to plastic surgery residency. No prior studies have explored factors associated with increased resident research productivity. This study aims to compare the academic productivity levels of plastic surgery residency graduates based on their pre- and postresidency experiences.

Methods

Residents graduating in 2019 and 2020 were identified from integrated programs. Metrics collected included the number of publications in medical school and residency. Descriptive statistics were completed along with linear regressions to evaluate the impact of these on academic productivity.

Results

A total of 221 residents from the classes of 2019 and 2020 were included. Most residents completed fellowship (75.9%) although less than half went on to academic practice (42.3%). Approximately one in five residents obtained secondary degrees (17.4%). Subjects averaged 3.15 (N = 208, SD = 4.51) publications while in medical school and 8.1 publications during residency (N = 209, SD = 10.0). For h-index calculated at the end of residency, having dedicated medical school research time was the only statistically significant factor (coefficient = 2.96, P = 0.002).

Conclusions

Plastic surgery residents published more often as first authors and overall during residency than medical school, indicating increased research involvement and leadership. The present study builds upon prior studies by confirming the importance of dedicated medical school research time and its lasting impact. Understanding the associations of academic factors with increased research productivity in residency is relevant for both applicants and programs evaluating residency candidates.

Assessing Trends in Supply and Demand for Pediatric Surgery Training

OBJECTIVE

This study assessed the supply and demand for Pediatric Surgery training in the U.S. from 2008 to 2022. We hypothesized that in the Pediatric Surgery Match: match rates would increase over time; U.S. MD Graduates would have higher match rates than non-U.S. MD Graduates; and fewer applicants would match at one of their top fellowship choices.

DESIGN

This was a retrospective cohort study of Pediatric Surgery Match applicants (2008-2022). Cochran-Armitage tests elucidated temporal trends and chi square tests compared outcomes by applicant archetype.

SETTING

Accreditation Council for Graduate Medical Education (ACGME)-accredited Pediatric Surgery training programs in the United States and non-ACGME-accredited programs in Canada.

PARTICIPANTS

A total of 1,133 applicants for Pediatric Surgery training.

RESULTS

From 2008 to 2012, growth in the annual number of fellowship positions (34-43, 27% increase) exceeded growth in number of applicants (62-69, 11% increase) (p < 0.001). Over the study period, the applicant-to-training ratio peaked at 2.1 to 2.2 in 2017 to 2018 and decreased to 1.4 to 1.6 in 2021 to 2022. The annual match rate for U.S. MD Graduates increased from 60% to 68% (p < 0.05), but decreased from 40% to 22% (p < 0.05) for non-U.S. MD Graduates. In 2022, there was a 3.1-fold difference in match rates between U.S. MD and non-U.S. MD Graduates (68% vs 22%, p < 0.001). The percentage of applicants that matched at their first choice (25%-20%, p < 0.001), second choice (11%-4%, p < 0.001), and third choice (7%-4%, p < 0.001) fellowships decreased over the study period. The percentage of applicants that matched at their fourth choice to least desirable fellowship increased from 23% to 33% (p < 0.001).

CONCLUSIONS

The demand for Pediatric Surgery training peaked in 2017 to 2018 and has decreased since. However, the Pediatric Surgery Match remains competitive especially for non-U.S. MD Graduates. More research is needed to understand barriers to matching into Pediatric Surgery for non-U.S. MD Graduates.

Prevalence of International Medical Graduates in Integrated Plastic Surgery Programs

International medical graduates (IMGs) are physicians who did not attend medical school in the USA or Canada. IMGs comprise nearly one-quarter of the physician workforce and play a vital role in health care. Here, we aimed to identify the prevalence of IMGs in integrated programs and evaluate factors that influence their success in the residency match.

Methods

The annual match reports from 2010 to 2020 were retrieved and summarized. Electronic surveys for program directors and program coordinators were distributed to US integrated plastic surgery programs. Each program's website was appraised for information regarding the eligibility of IMGs. Websites were also used to identify the number of IMG residents.

Results

The number of applicants who matched into integrated programs ranged from 69 to 180 per year, of which US applicants comprised 61-165. US IMGs filled one to three positions per year, whereas non-US IMGs filled two to seven. Although 48% of programs have matched non-citizen IMGs and 79% have not encountered difficulties during the visa process, 67% of coordinators reported that the onboarding process is more challenging for IMGs. There are no IMGs in 52% of programs, and most institutions offer information on their website regarding visa sponsorship.

Conclusion

IMGs make up less than 10% of filled positions per cycle. Although most programs accept IMGs, a small number matriculate. This may be explained by the competitiveness of integrated programs and the volume of IMG applications. Further research is needed to identify contributing factors of low IMG representation in plastic surgery programs.

Changing Faces: Factors Associated with the Intention to Pursue Plastic Surgery and Practice in Underserved Areas

Improving the number of plastic and reconstructive surgeons who provide care to patients in underserved communities is critical to achieving health equity. We aimed to identify factors associated with graduating medical students' intentions to pursue plastic surgery and practice in underserved areas.

Methods

De-identified data for US medical school graduates were obtained from the Association of American Medical Colleges for students who matriculated in academic years 2007-2008 and 2011-2012. Data collected included self-reported demographic and future practice intentions. Multivariate analysis was conducted to determine indicators of students' interest in plastic surgery, and their intention to practice in underserved areas.

Results

Of the 57,307 graduating US medical students in our cohort who completed the Graduation Questionnaire, 532 (0.9%) reported an intention to pursue plastic surgery. Hispanic [adjusted odds ratio (aOR): 1.45; 95% confidence interval (95% CI), 1.07-1.98] and multiracial (aOR: 1.59; 95% CI, 1.03-2.45) students were more likely to pursue plastic surgery compared with other surgical specialties. Among students interested in plastic surgery, compared with non-Hispanic White students, Black (aOR: 6.15; 95% CI, 1.96-19.26) students were more likely to report intention to practice in underserved areas. Students with community-engagement experiences were more likely to report intention to practice in underserved areas.

Conclusions

Diversity among medical trainees pursuing plastic and reconstructive surgery is critical for maintaining and expanding plastic surgery services rendered in underserved areas. These findings suggest that student demographics and experiences with community-engagement experiences are positive indicators of practicing in underserved communities.

Workplace Bias Affecting Applicants to Independent Plastic Surgery Residencies

Background

This study explores factors that encourage residents to apply to independent plastic surgery residencies to gain insight into whether they faced bias as a result of this decision.

Methods

Resident applicants who applied to two academic independent plastic surgery residencies in 2021 and 2022 were emailed a survey consisting of 25 questions. Responses were collected anonymously and analyzed. Descriptive statistics were performed, and subgroup analyses were conducted with Fisher exact and Pearson χ2 testing.

Results

Thirty-nine complete responses were included for analysis (response rate 22.7%). Participants were asked what encouraged them to go into plastic surgery during residency. The most common reasons were scrubbing in on plastic surgery cases and interactions with plastic surgery faculty/residents, with each reason cited by 30 respondents (76.8%). Further, 20.5% of residents agreed or strongly agreed that they felt unsupported by their program director in their decision to apply into plastic surgery. Likewise, 64.1% of respondents agreed or strongly agreed to having experienced demeaning comments or jokes by faculty about their choice of plastic surgery. Consequently, 17.9% agreed or strongly agreed that they developed stress or anxiety due to how co-residents and/or faculty treated them regarding their decision to pursue plastic surgery.

Conclusions

General surgery residents planning to apply to independent plastic surgery residency may experience workplace biases related to their career decision. An important opportunity exists to support independent applicants and to provide mentorship.

Perceptual Barriers to Becoming a Plastic Surgeon among Underrepresented Medical Students

Background

The field of plastic surgery has experienced difficulty increasing diversity among trainees, despite significant efforts. Barriers to recruitment of underrepresented in medicine (URM) students are poorly understood. This study assesses URM students' exposure to plastic surgery, access to mentors and research opportunities, and the importance of diversity in the field.

Methods

A survey was designed and distributed to members of the Student National Medical Association over 3 months. Survey data were collected using Qualtrics and descriptive statistics, and logistical regressions were performed using SAS.

Results

Of the 136 respondents, 75.0% identified as Black (n = 102/136), and 57.4% (n = 66/115) reported a plastic surgery program at their home institution. Of the total respondents, 97.7% (n = 127/130) were concerned about racial representation in plastic surgery, and 44.9% (n = 53/114) would be more likely to apply if there were better URM representation. Most respondents disagreed that there was local (73.4%, n = 58/79) or national (79.2%, n = 57/72) interest in URM recruitment. Students whose plastic surgery programs had outreach initiatives were more likely to have attending (OR 11.7, P < 0.05) or resident mentors (OR 3.0 P < 0.05) and access to research opportunities (OR 4.3, P < 0.05).

Conclusions

URM students feel there is an evident lack of interest in recruiting URM applicants in plastic surgery. Programs with outreach initiatives are more likely to provide URM students access to mentorship and research opportunities, allowing students to make informed decisions about pursuing plastic surgery.

The Utility of the Plastic Surgery Standardized Letter of Recommendation Form in Predicting Residency Match Outcomes

BACKGROUND

Letters of recommendation play an important role in resident selection. While plastic surgery's Standardized Letter of Recommendation (SLOR) form most commonly serves as an adjunct to narrative letters, the SLOR provides objective data in the review process and could eventually replace narrative letters. The utility of the SLOR in predicting Match outcomes has not been studied.

METHODS

Applicant data from 225 first-time residency applicants in 2020-21 were collected. Logistic regression modeling was used to predict Match outcomes. This model was validated using 100 randomly selected applicants from 2019-20.

RESULTS

Rank placement (SLOR Question 6) was the most important factor when predicting Match outcomes (p<0.0001). All other SLOR questions were not predictive and subject to notable score inflation. No SLOR score differences were noted based on race; female applicants were rated higher in two of ten domains (p<0.05).

CONCLUSIONS

One question on the plastic surgery SLOR was highly predictive of an applicant matching. However, the remaining SLOR questions had little utility and were subject to gross score inflation. Further work should be done to optimize the utility of the SLOR in differentiating applicants. This has important implications in ensuring the selection of professional, competent residents according to the aims of the Accreditation Council of Graduate Medical Education.

Prevalence of Prohibited Questions during Plastic Surgery Residency Interviews

Despite rules set forth by the National Resident Matching Program and American Association of Medical Colleges (AAMC), prohibited questions during the residency interview process are well documented. This study describes the prevalence of these encounters by surveying residency applicants to integrated plastic and reconstructive surgery (PRS) programs for the 2022 match cycle.

Methods

An anonymous 16-question REDCap survey was distributed to 2022 cycle applicants of a single PRS program. The applicants were queried about demographic information, interview experience, and questions deemed illegal by the AAMC/NRMP guidelines.

Results

One hundred survey responses were attained for a 33.1% response rate. The majority of respondents were aged 26-30 (76%), women (53%), and white (53%); 33% received 15+ interviews for the application cycle. Seventy-eight percent of respondents reported being asked a prohibited question during at least one interview, with the most common "illegal" question categories being number/ranking of interviews (42%), marital status (33%), career balance (25%), and race/ethnicity (22%). Only 25.6% of applicants considered the subject matter inappropriate, whereas 42.3% were unsure. Although no applicant took action to report the potentially illegal scenarios, 30% said that their experiences influenced their rank list.

Conclusions

Our survey study revealed that prohibited interview questions in PRS residency interviews are common. Permissible lines of questioning and discussion between programs and applicants during residency interviews have been defined by AAMC. Institutions should provide guidance and training to all participants. Applicants should be made aware of and empowered to utilize available anonymous reporting tools.

Recent Trends and Future Directions for the Integrated Plastic Surgery Match

The integrated plastic surgery residency match has risen to be the most competitive specialty in the 2022 match. This reality has prompted medical students to reach a high level of personal achievements, including pursuing research fellowships to boost research productivity. The competitive nature of this specialty has highlighted several barriers for applicants, such as those from groups underrepresented in surgery, of lower socioeconomic backgrounds, or without a home program. In recent years, there have been several changes to the match that stand to attenuate disparities among applicants, such as the transition to virtual interviews and the shift of the United States Medical Licensing Examination Step 1 score to pass-fail. The introduction of the Plastic Surgery Common Application and standardized letters of recommendation has altered the application process for the plastic surgery match. Given these recent trends, evaluating the current landscape and looking toward future directions for the integrated plastic surgery match becomes necessary. Understanding these changes will not only benefit medical students by giving them a transparent look into the match process but also provide a framework for other specialties to follow to increase accessibility to their specific specialty.

Objective Residency Applicant Assessment Using a Linear Rank Model

OBJECTIVES

Residency applicant assessment is imperfect, with little objectivity built into the process, which, unfortunately, impacts recruitment diversity. Linear rank modeling (LRM) is an algorithm that standardizes applicant assessment to model expert judgment. Over the last 5 years, we have used LRM to assist with screening and ranking integrated plastic surgery (PRS) residency applicants. This study's primary objective was to determine if LRM scores are predictive of match success and, secondarily, to compare LRM scores between gender and self-identified race categories.

DESIGN

Data was collected on applicant demographics, traditional application metrics, global intuition rank, and match success. LRM scores were calculated for screened and interviewed applicants, and scores were compared by demographic groups. Univariate logistic regression was used to evaluate the association of LRM scores and traditional application metrics with match success.

SETTING

University of Wisconsin, Division of Plastic and Reconstructive Surgery. Academic institution.

PARTICIPANTS

Six hundred seventeen candidates who applied to a single institution over 4 application cycles (2019-2022).

RESULTS

Using area under the curve modeling, LRM score was the most predictive indicator for match success. With every one-point increase in LRM score, there was an 11% and 8.3% increase in the likelihood of screened and interviewed applicant match success (p < 0.001). An algorithm was developed to estimate the probability of match success based on LRM score. No significant differences in LRM scores were appreciated for interviewed applicant gender or self-identified race groups.

CONCLUSIONS

LRM score is the most predictive indicator of match success for PRS applicants and can be used to estimate an applicant's probability of successfully matching into an integrated PRS residency. Furthermore, it provides a holistic evaluation of the applicant that can streamline the application process and improve recruitment diversity. In the future, this model could be applied to assist in the match process for other specialties.

The West Coast Plastic Surgery Mentorship Program: Successes, Failures, and Future Growth

BACKGROUND

Students who are underrepresented in medicine experience limited access to mentorship throughout medical school and when applying to plastic surgery residency. This study describes the creation, growth, and results of the multi-institutional West Coast Plastic Surgery Mentorship Program (WCPSMP), specifically reflecting on barriers to implementation and room for future improvement.

METHODS

Students were eligible to apply to the plastic surgery mentorship program if they were first-, second-, or third-year medical students in a US medical school interested in plastic surgery. Preference was given to students who are (1) underrepresented-in-medicine racial/ethnic minorities; (2) first generation, low income; (3) lesbian, gay, bisexual, transgender, queer; and/or (4) without a home integrated plastic surgery program. Preprogram and postprogram surveys were analyzed.

RESULTS

The 2021-2022 cycle of the WCPSMP included 30 resident mentors and 30 resident mentees, with a 1:1 mentor-to-mentee relationship. The second annual Mentor-Mentee Day was hosted on June 25, 2022, in San Diego, California, with attendance from 18 mentees. There was a 63% response rate in the presurvey and postsurvey. Most students endorsed gaining didactic skills, technical skills, and networking, but only a few gained research opportunities.

CONCLUSION

The WCPSMP is a promising venue to offer underrepresented medical students valuable resident mentorship, as well as acquire surgical knowledge and skills. Further development of the program includes implementing a curriculum for residents on how to be an effective mentor and offering more research opportunities.

Trends in Integrated Plastic Surgery Applicant, Resident, and Junior Attending Research Productivity

INTRODUCTION

Research productivity is critical for matching into integrated plastic surgery residency. This study will identify how pre and intraresidency research productivity correlate with resident/junior attending productivity.

MATERIALS AND METHODS

Retrospective review from 2006 to 2015 issues of the American Board of Plastic Surgery's Annual Newsletter to Diplomates was performed to identify newly board certified plastic surgeons. Only surgeons from US medical schools matching directly into integrated programs were included. Residency type/length, graduation year from medical school, and publication counts were recorded for each surgeon. Publications were categorized as preresidency, intraresidency, and junior attending (6 y post residency/fellowship training).

RESULTS

Six hundred fifty-five integrated plastic surgery graduates were analyzed. The median number of total publications (preresidency, intraresidency, and junior attending) was 4 (interquartile range [IQR], 1 to 10). Linear regression revealed negligible correlation between preresidency and junior attending publications (r = 0.019, P = 0.002). Total publications and increasing graduation y had a significant correlation of 0.89 (P < 0.001). Graduates of fellowships had significantly increased median total publications compared to those without fellowships (7 IQR, 3 to 18 versus 3 IQR, 1 to 7, respectively, P < 0.001). Dedicated research years during residency were associated with significant (P < 0.001) increases in median total and junior attending publications. Total publications ranged from 3 (IQR, 1 to 6) to 8 (IQR, 7 to 18) for those who completed 5- and 8-y residencies, respectively.

CONCLUSIONS

Increased preresidency research productivity is not strongly associated with increased junior attending productivity in integrated plastic surgery. Better markers are completing dedicated research years in residency or fellowship after residency.

The Role of Dedicated Research Training in Promoting Academic Success in Plastic Surgery: Analysis of 949 Faculty Career Outcomes

This study aimed to analyze the association between completion of research training and career success in American plastic surgery faculty to aid trainees in their decisions to perform research fellowships.

Methods

A cross-sectional analysis of attending academic plastic surgeons in the United States was conducted. Outcomes were compared between faculty who completed research training (research fellowship, PhD, or MPH) and those who did not. Outcomes included promotion to full professor and/or department chair, h-index, and attainment of National Institutes of Health funding. Outcomes were analyzed using chi-squared tests, t tests, and multivariable regressions.

Results

A total of 949 plastic surgery faculty members were included, and of those, 185 (19.5%) completed dedicated research training, including 13.7% (n = 130) who completed a research fellowship. Surgeons who completed dedicated research training were significantly more likely to achieve full professorship (31.4% versus 24.1%, P = 0.01), obtain National Institutes of Health funding (18.4% versus 6.5%, P < 0.001), and have a higher mean h-index (15.6 versus 11.6, P < 0.001). Dedicated research fellowships were independently predictive of achieving full professorship (OR = 2.12, P = 0.002), increased h-index (β = 4.86, P < 0.001), and attainment of National Institutes of Health funding (OR = 5.06, P = 0.01). Completion of dedicated research training did not predict an increased likelihood of becoming department chair.

Conclusion

The performance of dedicated research training was predictive of improved markers of career success in plastic surgery and should be considered beneficial in both the short and long term.

Rating the Rater: A Technique for Minimizing Leniency Bias in Residency Applications

Each program in the highly competitive match for a surgical residency needs a way to review applicants effectively. Often this task is undertaken by individual faculty members, reviewing an applicant's file and assigning a score. Despite being asked to rate on a standardized scale, our program found that ratings of the same applicants varied dramatically, with certain faculty consistently scoring higher or lower than others. This is termed leniency bias, or the Hawk-Dove effect, and can affect who is invited to interview depending on which faculty are assigned to review an applicant's file.

Methods

A technique to minimize leniency bias was developed and applied to this year's 222 applicants for our plastic surgery residency. The effect of the technique was evaluated by comparing variance between ratings of the same applicants by different faculty before and after our technique.

Results

The median variance of ratings of the same applicants reduced from 0.68 before correction to 0.18 after correction, demonstrating better agreement between raters of the applicants' scores after our technique had been applied. This year, applying our technique affected whether or not 16 applicants (36% of interviewees) were invited for interview, including one applicant who matched to our program but who otherwise would not have been offered an interview.

Conclusions

We present a simple but effective technique to minimize the leniency bias between raters of residency applicants. Our experience with this technique is presented together with instructions and Excel formulae for other programs to use.

Evolution of a Plastic Surgery Summer Research Program: Lessons Learned from Programmatic Evaluation and Quality Enhancement

Early surgical exposure and research fellowships can influence medical students' specialty choice, increase academic productivity, and impact residency match. However, to our knowledge, there is no published guidance on the programmatic evaluation and quality enhancement necessary for the sustainability of formal plastic surgery summer research programs for first year medical students. We present seven years (2013-2020) of institutional experience in an effort to inform program development at other institutions.

Methods

From 2013 to 2016, a sole basic science research arm existed. In 2017, a clinical research arm was introduced, with several supplemental activities, including surgical skills curriculum. A formalized selection process was instituted in 2014. Participant feedback was analyzed annually. Long-term outcomes included continued research commitment, productivity, and residency match.

Results

The applicant pool reached 96 applicants in 2019, with 85% from outside institutions. Acceptance rate reached 7% in 2020. With adherence to a scoring rubric for applicant evaluation, good to excellent interrater reliability was achieved (intraclass correlation coefficient = 0.75). Long-term outcomes showed that on average per year, 28% of participants continued involvement in departmental research and 29% returned for dedicated research. Upon finishing medical school, participants had a mean of 7 ± 4 peer-reviewed publications. In total, 62% of participants matched into a surgical residency program, with 54% in integrated plastic surgery.

Conclusions

A research program designed for first year medical students interested in plastic surgery can achieve academic goals. Students are provided with mentorship, networking opportunities, and tools for self-guided learning and career development.

COVID-19 and the Integrated Plastic Surgery Match: An Update on Match Trends by Applicant Location

COVID-19 significantly impacted the residency match process. Away rotations and in-person interviews were canceled in 2021, resulting in a geographic shift in integrated plastic surgery match results. Although several of these limitations were lifted during the 2022 cycle, the resulting geographic outcomes have yet to be described. This study aims to determine whether the changes seen during the previous cycle persisted despite loosened restrictions.