Home Field Advantage: Assessing the Geographic Trends of the Plastic Surgery Residency Match during the COVID-19 Pandemic

Students Matriculating into Integrated Plastic Surgery: Are all Medical Schools Equal?

INTRODUCTION

Becoming a craniofacial/pediatric plastic surgeon depends on completing a plastic surgery (PS) residency. As medical school curricula for PS exposure are highly inconsistent, the authors investigated whether there was an association between the presence of PS elective rotations and/or home programs in medical schools with the proportion of students matriculating into integrated PS residency.

METHODS

A list of 198 medical schools was compiled from the Association for American Medical Colleges and the American Association of Colleges of Osteopathic Medicine. Plastic surgery residency programs were identified by the American Society of Plastic Surgery and the American Council of Educators in Plastic Surgery. Plastic surgery elective rotation offerings and recent matches (2021-2022) were obtained from school websites. Mean proportions of students matriculating into PS between schools that did versus did not have PS elective rotations and/or home PS residency programs were compared.

RESULTS

One hundred fifty-nine medical schools were included. Seventy-seven of 159 (48%) had both PS elective rotations and home program(s), 63/159 (40%) offered PS elective rotations only, and 19/159 (12%) had neither. The mean proportions of students matriculating differed significantly (P<0.001) among schools without PS electives or a home program [0.09%, 95% confidence interval (CI): -0.04% to 0.21%), PS elective only (0.51%, 95% CI: 0.25%-0.77%), and both PS elective and home program(s) (1.14%, 95% CI: 0.92%-1.37%).

CONCLUSION

The presence of elective PS rotations and a home PS residency program significantly increase the chances of matriculation into integrated PS residency programs.

The Impact of Virtual Residency Interviews on the Geographic Distribution of Integrated Interventional and Diagnostic Radiology Residency Matches

PURPOSE

To characterize how the adoption of virtual residency interviews (2020-2021 cycle) has impacted the geographic distribution of radiology resident matches.

METHODS

University-based interventional (IR) and diagnostic radiology (DR) residency programs from 2017 to 2021 were identified using a national residency database (FRIEDA). Public applicant data were obtained from official residency program websites. Medical schools and residency programs were categorized by US census regions. Geographic applicant distribution before and after the initiation of virtual interviews was statistically assessed using Chi-square tests. The effect of virtual interviews on the probability of matching within the same geographic region as one's medical school was evaluated with multivariate logistic regression.

RESULTS

4358 radiology residents (88% diagnostic, 12% interventional) matched at 102 radiology programs during the study period. 71% (n = 3115 residents) had data available for analysis. 56.3% of DR and 49.3% of IR residents matched in the same geographic region as their medical school. The geographic distribution of applicants who matched at Southern IR residency programs significantly changed after implementation of virtual interviews (p < 0.0001). Virtual interviews did not increase the odds of matching in the same region as one's medical school for IR (OR 1.11, p = 0.08) or DR (OR 1.01, p = 0.58) applicants. Top-20 ranked DR programs had lower odds of in-region matches (OR 0.87, p < 0.001).

CONCLUSION

With few exceptions, shifting to virtual residency interviews did not significantly affect the geographic distribution of IR or DR residency matches. Top-ranked DR programs match more regionally diverse applicants.

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.

Improving Transparency in the Residency Application Process: Survey Study

BACKGROUND

Increasing numbers of residency applications create challenges for applicants and residency programs to assess if they are a good fit during the residency application and match process. Applicants face limited or conflicting information as they assess programs, leading to overapplying. A holistic review of residency applications is considered a gold standard for programs, but the current volumes and associated time constraints leave programs relying on numerical filters, which do not predict success in residency. Applicants could benefit from increased transparency in the residency application process.

OBJECTIVE

This study aims to determine the information applicants find most beneficial from residency programs when deciding where to apply, by type of medical school education background.

METHODS

Match 2023 applicants voluntarily completed an anonymous survey through the Twitter and Instagram social media platforms. We asked the respondents to select 3 top factors from a multiple-choice list of what information they would like from residency programs to help determine if the characteristics of their application align with program values. We examined differences in helpful factors selected by medical school backgrounds using ANOVA.

RESULTS

There were 4649 survey respondents. When responses were analyzed by United States-allopathic (US-MD), doctor of osteopathic medicine (DO), and international medical graduate (IMG) educational backgrounds, respondents chose different factors as most helpful: minimum United States Medical Licensing Examination (USMLE) or Comprehensive Osteopathic Medical Licensing Examination (COMLEX) Step 2 scores (565/3042, 18.57% US-MD; 485/3042, 15.9% DO; and 1992/3042, 65.48% IMG; P<.001), resident hometown region (281/1132, 24.82% US-MD; 189/1132, 16.7% DO; and 662/1132, 58.48% IMG; P=.02), resident medical school region (476/2179, 22% US-MD; 250/2179, 11.5% DO; and 1453/2179, 66.7% IMG; P=.002), and percent of residents or attendings underrepresented in medicine (417/1815, 22.98% US-MD; 158/1815, 8.71% DO; and 1240/1815, 68.32% IMG; P<.001).

CONCLUSIONS

When applying to residency programs, this study found that the factors that respondents consider most helpful from programs in deciding where to apply differ by educational background. Across all educational groups, respondents want transparency around standardized exam scores, geography, and the racial or ethnic backgrounds of residents and attendings.

Rapidly Increasing Number and Cost of Residency Applications in Surgery

BACKGROUND

Surgical specialties represent the most competitive residency positions to obtain, and applicants for these spots may apply to increasingly more programs in an attempt to match. We describe trends in residency applications across all surgical specialties from 2017 to 2021 application cycles.

MATERIALS AND METHODS

This review of the 2017, 2018, 2019, 2020, and 2021 surgical residency application cycles used the American Association of Medical Colleges' Electronic Residency Application Service (ERAS) databases. Data from a total of 72,171 applicants to United States surgical residencies during the study's time period were included. The 2021 ERAS fee schedule was used to calculate the cost of applications.

RESULTS

The number of applicants across the study interval remains unchanged. Trends suggest more women and underrepresented minorities in medicine are applying to surgical residencies today compared to 5 years ago. The mean number of applications per applicant increased 32.0% from 39.3 in 2017 to 51.8 in 2021, resulting in an increased application fee cost of $329 per applicant. Mean total cost for application fees alone in 2021 were $1211 per applicant. In 2021, the cost of applying to surgical residency for all applicants was over $26 million, a nearly $8 million increase from 2017.

CONCLUSIONS

There has been an increase in the number of applications per applicant in the past 5 residency application cycles. Increased applications create barriers and burdens for applicants, and residency program personnel. These rapid increases are unsustainable and require intervention, although a viable solution has yet to be elucidated.

Does Medical School Rank Impact Matching into Otolaryngology?

OBJECTIVE(S)

To describe how medical school rank may be associated with matriculation into otolaryngology residency programs.

METHODS

A list of medical students who matched into otolaryngology residencies in 2020, 2021, and 2022 was obtained from Otomatch (Otomatch.com). For each student, their medical school, U.S. News & World Report Best Medical School (Research) ranking, and region based on the U.S. Census divisions were recorded. The medical schools were divided into four Tiers according to rank: 1-40 (Tier 1), 41-80 (Tier 2), 81-124 (Tier 3), and 125-191 (Tier 4). Residency programs were also grouped by region, whether they were large (>3 residents/year) or small (<3 residents/year), and their Doximity reputation ranking: 1-31 (Tier 1), 32-61 (Tier 2), 62-91 (Tier 3), and 92-125 (Tier 4).

RESULTS

Nine hundred and ninety-five medical students were included in this study. The majority of residency matriculants were MDs (N = 988, 99.3%) who came from Tier 1 (N = 410, 41.2%) or Tier 2 (N = 313, 31.5%) medical schools. Those who attended higher-tier medical schools were more likely to match into higher-tier residency programs (p < 0.001). 57.8% (N = 237) of the applicants who attended Tier 1 medical schools matriculated into a Tier 1 residency program, whereas only 24.7% (N = 42) of the applicants from Tier 4 medical schools matriculated into a Tier 1 residency program.

CONCLUSION

Applicants who attend top-tier medical schools represent significantly more residents at top-tier otolaryngology residency programs than those from lower tier medial schools.

LEVEL OF EVIDENCE

NA Laryngoscope, 133:3353-3357, 2023.

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.

What COVID Restrictions Have Taught Us About Visiting Subinternships

BACKGROUND

Integrated plastic surgery applicants complete among the highest number of visiting audition rotations of any specialty. In the 2021 match, we observed that the elimination of audition rotations and in-person interviews drastically increased the number of applicants who matched at their home program. We sought to evaluate the effect of applicants participating in one selective visiting subinternship rotation on home program match rates.

METHODS

Top 50 plastic surgery residency programs were identified by 2021 Doximity rankings. Publicly available, online plastic surgery match spreadsheets were used to collect available information including matched applicants' medical school, the institution at which they matched, whether they matched at their home institution, and whether they had previous communication with their matched program including research year or visiting subinternship completed.

RESULTS

Fourteen percent of applicants matched at their home institution in 2022, comparable with recent prepandemic rates of 14.1% and 16.7%, versus 24.1% in 2021. The largest effect was observed among the top 25 programs. Separately, approximately 70% of applicants provided self-reported information on whether they completed a subinternship. Among the top 50 programs, 39.0% of applicants completed an audition rotation at the institution at which they eventually matched.

CONCLUSIONS

The allowance of medical students to perform only one visiting subinternship in the 2022 match cycle normalized home match rates to the prepandemic baseline, possibly driven by a large proportion of students matching at their visiting rotation institution. Perhaps from both a program and applicant standpoint, 1 away rotation may provide sufficient exposure for eventual match success.

Relationship Between Residency Match Distance From Medical School and Virtual Application, School Characteristics, and Specialty Competitiveness

INTRODUCTION

The COVID-19 pandemic has disrupted the residency match process by eliminating away rotations and changing from in-person to virtual interviews. In this study, we explore the impact of the COVID-19 pandemic on the geographic match distance of United States (US) senior medical students across all specialties.

METHODS

We collected publicly available student match data between 2018 and 2021 from US allopathic medical schools and calculated match distance between medical school and residency training using a novel metric - the "match space." Match space was codified by whether the student matched at their home institution, home state, adjacent state, same or adjacent US census division (non-adjacent state) or skipped at least one US census division. Adjusting for covariates, ordinal logistic regression correlated school and specialty characteristics with match distance pre- and post-pandemic for all specialties. We defined and ranked specialty competitiveness using predictive values from factor analysis.

RESULTS

A total of 34,672 students representing 66 medical schools from 28 states matched into 26 specialties in 50 states and Canada. Fifty-nine percent of students were from public institutions, and 27% of schools ranked in the top 40 for research. The mean percentage of in-state students by school was 60.3% (range 3-100%). Match space was lower after the pandemic (adjusted odds ratio (OR) 0.94, 95% CI 0.90-0.98; p=0.006), from schools with higher in-state percentages (OR 0.74, 95% CI 0.72-0.76), from top National Institutes of Health-funded institutions (OR 0.88, 95% CI 0.85-0.92), from the Northeast (OR 0.71, 95% CI 0.67-0.75; Midwest reference), and the West (OR 0.67, 95% 0.60-0.74). Match space was higher for students graduating from private schools (OR 1.11, 95% CI 1.05-1.19), from the South (OR 1.62, 95% CI 1.2-1.33), and matching into more competitive specialties (OR 1.08, 95% CI 1.02-1.14). The top five most competitive specialties were Plastic Surgery, Neurosurgery, Dermatology, Orthopedic Surgery, and Otolaryngology. Internal Medicine ranked eighth.

CONCLUSIONS

After the COVID-19 pandemic, students graduating from US allopathic schools matched closer to their home institution. Students attending public schools, schools with more in-state matriculants, and schools with higher research rankings also matched closer to their home institutions. Specialty competitiveness and US census region also impacted match distance. Our study adds insight into how geographic match patterns were influenced by school, specialty choice, and the pandemic.

The Student You Know: Orthopedic Surgery Home Program Match Rates and Geographic Relationships Before and After COVID-19

OBJECTIVE

In March 2020, COVID-19 was declared a pandemic by the World Health Organization. This led to the outright cancellation of away rotations and in person residency interviews for the class of 2021. This study aims to identify the geographic relationships in the orthopedic match and further explore COVID-19's effect on these geographic relationships. Furthermore, we aim to compare the home program match rates before and after COVID-19.

SETTING

Southern Illinois University School of Medicine, Department of Orthopedic Surgery (tertiary, university-based).

DESIGN AND PARTICIPANTS

Residency websites and social media sites were used to record basic residency information as well as each resident's year, matriculated medical school, and matriculated medical school geographic data. This information was used to evaluate the proportion of orthopedic residents from "home program" medical schools and evaluate the geographic relationship of matched orthopedic residents. 202 Orthopedic residencies were initially identified and 134 allopathic and nonmilitary residency programs met the inclusion criteria. In all, 3253 of the 3931 (82.7%) current U.S orthopedic residents were included in the analysis.

RESULTS

In the 4 orthopedic surgery residency classes before the pandemic (2017-2020), 21.8% of residency slots were filled by home program students. During the pandemic match cycle (2021), this number jumped to 28.2% (p < 0.0006). The increase was observed consistently across residency subgroup analysis: class size, doximity rank, and doximity research rank. Correspondingly, there was a statistically significant increase from 34.7% (2017-2020) to 39.3% (2021) (p = 0.0318) in residencies matching with same state medical students. Regional trends stayed consistent. Our study showed that residency programs matched applicants who went to same region medical schools during the 2020 to 2021 cycle at nearly the exact same rate as they did pre-pandemic (63.6%, up from 63.3%).

CONCLUSIONS

Our study demonstrates that despite widespread virtual away rotations and virtual open houses, residency programs showed an increased preference for their home program students. This trend was significant and widespread, highlighting the generalized nationwide hesitation of both residency programs and students on the virtual interview process.

The Association Between Virtual Interviewing and Geographical Distribution of Matched Residency Programs for General Surgery Applicants

OBJECTIVE

Due to the COVID-19 pandemic, the Coalition for Physician Accountability's work group on Medical Students in the class of 2021 made the recommendation in May of 2020 that the upcoming residency recruitment cycle be conducted virtually. This flexibility may have allowed applicants to apply and interview at programs with less regard to geography, knowing that travel costs of interviewing would not be a factor. Alternatively, applicants who interviewed virtually could choose to remain in a close proximity to their home institutions where they likely have a greater comfort level and familiarity with the community both personally and professionally. We examine the distribution of applicants matched at general surgery residency programs in 2021 to those in 2020 to see if there was a change in geographic variability.

DESIGN

Retrospective review of general surgery residents SETTING: United States general surgery residency programs PARTICIPANTS: 2153 PGY1 categorical general surgery residents who were interviewed virtually and PGY2 categorical general surgery residents who interviewed in-person, who also attended residency programs and medical schools located in the continental United States with publicly accessible residency websites containing necessary biographical information.

RESULTS

A total of 2153 residents were included; 1124 in their PGY1 and 1029 in their PGY2. Average distance from attended medical school to matched program (634.2 vs 662.5), percentage of matched programs within 500 miles of attended medical school (57.3 vs 55.7), average price of flight, when available, from attended medical school to matched program (222.8 vs 230.4), and percentage of attended medical schools with non-stop flight to matched program (42.9 vs 42.9) did not significantly differ between PGY1 and PGY2 residents.

CONCLUSIONS

The decision to adopt virtual interviewing practices compared to previous in-person interviews did not significantly alter the geographical distribution of students' matched programs. The distance from medical school to the matched program, flight availability, and flight pricing remained comparable between residents interviewed in-person and residents interviewed virtually.

Initiation of the Virtual Interview: A 5-Y Evaluation of General Surgery Residency Match Results

INTRODUCTION

The virtual residency application season posed numerous challenges for the 2021 residency match process. Many residency programs are exploring relationships between this novel format and the match process. The purpose of this study was to compare one of the largest general surgery residency program's applications and match data from preCOVID years to the 2021 virtual cycle.

MATERIALS AND METHODS

A retrospective review was performed of applicants to a single general surgery residency program from 2017 to 2021. The primary outcome was the number of locally matched applicants. The secondary outcomes were the total number of applications, change in applicant demographics, and variability of the geographic spread during this study period. Chi-square tests of independence, Fisher's exact tests, and negative binomial regression were performed.

RESULTS

6819 applicants were included in the study. In 2021, an increase in applications was observed. The distribution of 2021 applications was statistically different from previous years regarding gender and race (P < 0.0001). The 2021 application cycle had a greater proportion of applicants from the United States (P < 0.0001) and southern US medical schools (P = 0.008). While the 2021 cycle had significantly more interviews (P = 0.013), there were no significant differences in the demographic composition of interviewees. During the 2021 application year, all 11 matches were from southern medical schools and there was a trend to more matched female applicants compared to previous years.

CONCLUSIONS

During the 2021 COVID-19 virtual match cycle, an increase in both the number of applications and number of interviews for general surgery residency was identified. The characteristics of applicants who interviewed and matched were not different when compared to previous years. As virtual interviews may become more commonplace, it is important to assess all factors that may be involved in the dynamic residency application process.

Impact of Virtual Interviewing on Geographic Placement for Cardiology Fellowship Recruitment

Background Virtual interviewing for cardiology fellowship was instituted in the 2021 fellowship application cycle because of the COVID-19 pandemic and restricted travel. The impact on geographic patterns of fellow-training program matching is unknown. This study sought to determine if there was a difference in geographic placement of matched fellows for cardiology fellowship match after initiation of virtual interviews compared with in-person interviewing. Methods and Results All US-based accredited cardiovascular disease fellowship programs that participated in the 2019 to 2021 fellowship match cycles and had publicly available data with fellowship and residency training locations and training year were included. Each fellow was categorized based on whether their fellowship and residency programs were in the same institution, same state, same US census region, or different census region. Categories were mutually exclusive. Of 236 eligible programs, 118 (50%) programs were identified, composed of 1787 matched fellows. Compared with the previrtual cohort (n=1178 matched fellows), there was no difference in the geographic placement during the 2021 virtual cycle (n=609 matched fellows) (P=0.19), including the proportion matched at the same program (30.6% versus 31.5%), same state but different program (13% versus 13.8%), same region but different state (24.2% versus 19.7%), or different region (35% versus 33.1%). There was also no difference when stratified by program size or geographic region. Conclusions The use of virtual interviewing in the 2021 cardiology fellowship application cycle showed no significant difference in the geographic placement of matched fellows compared with in-person interviewing. Further study is needed to evaluate the impact of virtual interviewing and optimize its use in fellowship recruitment.

Virtual interviewing for graduate medical education recruitment and selection: A BEME systematic review: BEME Guide No. 80

BACKGROUND

The COVID-19 pandemic caused graduate medical education (GME) programs to pivot to virtual interviews (VIs) for recruitment and selection. This systematic review synthesizes the rapidly expanding evidence base on VIs, providing insights into preferred formats, strengths, and weaknesses.

METHODS

PubMed/MEDLINE, Scopus, ERIC, PsycINFO, MedEdPublish, and Google Scholar were searched from 1 January 2012 to 21 February 2022. Two authors independently screened titles, abstracts, full texts, performed data extraction, and assessed risk of bias using the Medical Education Research Quality Instrument. Findings were reported according to Best Evidence in Medical Education guidance.

RESULTS

One hundred ten studies were included. The majority (97%) were from North America. Fourteen were conducted before COVID-19 and 96 during the pandemic. Studies involved both medical students applying to residencies (61%) and residents applying to fellowships (39%). Surgical specialties were more represented than other specialties. Applicants preferred VI days that lasted 4-6 h, with three to five individual interviews (15-20 min each), with virtual tours and opportunities to connect with current faculty and trainees. Satisfaction with VIs was high, though both applicants and programs found VIs inferior to in-person interviews for assessing 'fit.' Confidence in ranking applicants and programs was decreased. Stakeholders universally noted significant cost and time savings with VIs, as well as equity gains and reduced carbon footprint due to eliminating travel.

CONCLUSIONS

The use of VIs for GME recruitment and selection has accelerated rapidly. The findings of this review offer early insights that can guide future practice, policy, and research.

Evaluating the Importance of Sub-Internships on the 2022 Integrated Plastic Surgery Match During Continued COVID-19 Regulations

OBJECTIVE

Following the 2021 integrated plastic surgery match, we found a significant increase in home match rates and decrease in match rate for students without a home plastic surgery program with the elimination of visiting sub-internships and the initiation of virtual interviewing. With the return of visiting sub-internships in the 2022 match cycle, we hypothesize that these rates will approach values more consistent with historical controls.

DESIGN

Program match data was obtained from posts to residency program Instagram pages and posts associated with the hashtag #PRSMatch2022. Data on visiting sub-internship matches was obtained from a publicly available Google Sheet with applicant contributors. The Chi square test was used to assess for differences.

SETTING

Medical schools and plastic surgery programs were categorized into west, midwest, south, and northeast regions.

PARTICIPANTS

Matched applicants to integrated plastic surgery residency programs.

RESULTS

In total, 192 of 194 (99%) of applicants matched to integrated plastic surgery residency positions were identified. The match rate for applicants without an affiliated plastic surgery program (31.3%) increased from 2021 (p = 0.03) and returned to a level consistent with historical controls (p = 0.38). Similarly, the home program match rate (15.1%) and match rate for applicants from Top 40 medical schools (34.2%) decreased from 2021, returning to pre-pandemic levels (p = 0.63, p = 0.12). Finally, regional match preferences remained generally consistent with historical controls, apart from a higher proportion of northeast applicants matching to programs in the northeast (72.5%, p = 0.04), and a lower proportion of west applicants matching to programs in the west (26.3%, p = 0.002).

CONCLUSIONS

The 2022 integrated plastic surgery match cycle saw a reversal of many of the changes to match rates seen in the 2021 cycle. These changes may be due to the reintroduction of visiting sub-internships following updates in COVID-19 policies.

Assessing the Impact of COVID-19 on the 2021 Orthopaedic Surgery Match Outcomes

The purpose of this study was to assess the influence of the COVID-19 pandemic on the 2021 orthopaedic surgery residency match outcomes. Because in-person away rotations and interviews were canceled during the 2020 to 2021 application cycle, we hypothesized that applicants would match at their home program at a higher rate in 2021 than in previous years.

Methods

We queried allopathic orthopaedic surgery residency websites and social media accounts for names of residents and medical school information for cohorts matching from 2017 through 2021. To assess availability of and participation in virtual away rotations, we administered a survey to Accreditation Council for Graduate Medical Education-accredited allopathic orthopaedic surgery residency programs. The primary outcome was the annual proportion of applicants matching at the program affiliated with their medical school ("home program"). Subgroup analyses were stratified by Doximity reputation ranking and availability of a virtual away rotation.

Results

We identified 2,632 residents who matched between 2017 and 2020 and 698 residents who matched in 2021. Overall home program match rate and likelihood of home matching were higher in 2021 compared with 2017 to 2020 (28% vs. 20%; odds ratio [OR] = 1.51, 95% confidence interval [CI] 1.24-1.82, p < 0.001). The increase in the home match rate at programs ranked in the top 30 (27% vs. 20%, p = 0.034) was similar to the increase at programs ranked outside the top 30 (28% vs. 20%, p < 0.001). Of the 66 (48%) programs that responded to the survey, 16 (24%) offered a virtual away rotation. Programs with a higher Doximity ranking were more likely than lower-ranked programs to offer a virtual away rotation (OR = 6.75, 95% CI 1.95-23.4, p = 0.003). Home match rates did not differ significantly between programs that offered a virtual away rotation and those that did not (26% vs. 32%, p = 0.271).

Conclusions

A higher proportion of orthopaedic surgery residency applicants matched at their home program in 2021 compared with previous years. Limitations on in-person activities due to the COVID-19 pandemic may have contributed to this rise.

Level of Evidence

N/A.

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.

Going virtual: effectiveness of virtual opportunities in engaging applicants for plastic surgery residencies

Purpose

During the COVID-19 pandemic, virtual events led by residency programs have eased deficits formed by the lack of in-person opportunities. Despite their anecdotal success, there is yet a study on their utility and value, as perceived by attendees. Therefore, we sought to investigate engagement rates of virtual opportunity posts via Instagram, equipping residency programs with recommendations for future virtual event planning.

Methods

The 40 PRS residency programs with the highest number of followers on Instagram were inspected for posts regarding virtual opportunities. The virtual opportunities were classified by type, medium, and intended audience. The number of opportunities within each classification was analyzed, along with the like/comment to follower ratios, and compared via ANOVA tests.

Results

A total of 141 virtual opportunities were evaluated, with the most events occurring in August (21.6%). The highest engagement rates occurred in May and June, with the most common virtual opportunity being meet and greets with residents (39.2%). The most prevalent medium for virtual events was Zoom, used in 84.7% of events. The intended audience was frequently medical students (80.6%), with a significant difference in engagement between audience groups (p < 0.05).

Conclusion

The pandemic has disrupted the status quo of resident recruitment. In light of these findings, residency programs should consider instilling virtual opportunities for medical students as a standard practice. Peak times to broadcast events are May or June due to higher engagement. To address attendee burnout, programs should limit events to familiar ones, such as Zoom meet and greets with residents.

Home Program Matching in Neurosurgical Residency Programs: A 7-Year Study

OBJECTIVE

To determine home program matching percentage (staying in a program affiliated with one's medical school) for each neurosurgical residency program in the United States. Secondarily, to elucidate both program-level and resident characteristics associated with home program matching.

METHODS

Demographic and bibliometric characteristics were collected for 1572 residents in US-based and Accreditation Council for Graduate Medical Education (ACGME)-accredited neurosurgery programs over the 2014 to 2020 match period using publicly available websites. Program characteristics were collected, including number of clinical faculty, top 20 Doximity research ranking, top 10 Doximity reputation ranking, top 10 U.S. News department ranking, affiliation with a U.S. News top 10 medical school, and geographic region. Programs were ranked according to home program matching percentage and associations were statistically evaluated.

RESULTS

The average home program matching percentage per residency was 18.6%. New York Presbyterian/Columbia retained the largest percentage of its own medical students with a home program matching percentage of 57.14%. From the resident frame of reference, only a higher preresidency H-index (3.7 ± 4.0 vs. 3.2 ± 3.7, p=0.033) was significantly associated with home program matching. From a program perspective, program size (standardized β=0.234, p=0.006), Doximity research (standardized β=0.206, p=0.031), Doximity reputation (standardized β=0.196, p=0.040), and U.S. News program rankings (standardized β=0.200, p=0.036) were all significantly associated with home program matching. Overall home program matching percentage remained relatively constant over the 2014-2020 time period.

CONCLUSIONS

The results of this study delineate home program matching patterns on a program-by-program level for U.S. neurosurgical residency programs.

Assessing the Impact of the COVID-19 Pandemic on Geographic Residency Placement Relative to Medical School Location

BACKGROUND

The 2020-2021 residency application cycle was altered to reduce COVID-19 transmission, with moves to all virtual interviews and no away rotations for medical students. These changes may have affected how students ranked residency programs, such as choosing programs near their medical schools.

OBJECTIVE

To determine if a larger percentage of medical students matched to residency programs in the same state as their medical schools in 2021 vs 2018-2020.

METHODS

We searched the webpages or emailed student affairs deans of the 155 Liaison Committee on Medical Education accredited MD programs to attain medical school match lists. Differences in the percentage of students matching to residency programs in the same US state as their medical schools in 2021 vs 2018-2020 were compared using chi-square tests.

RESULTS

We recorded 36 021 of 79 406 (45%) National Resident Matching Program, 759 of 1720 (44%) ophthalmology, and 586 urology MD residency matches between 2018 and 2021. The percentage of students matching to residency programs in the same state as their medical schools was 35.9% in 2021 versus 34.3% in 2018-2020 (P=.005). Students were more likely to match to programs in the same state as their medical schools in 2021 if they attended a public medical school (40.3% vs 38.5%, P=.009) or applied into specialties where ≥50% of students traditionally perform away rotations (32.2% vs 30.2%, P=.031).

CONCLUSIONS

There was a small difference in the percentage of medical students matching to residency programs in the same state as their medical schools in 2021 vs 2018-2020.

Effects of COVID-19 on Geographical Trends in the Orthopaedic Surgery Residency Match

Historically, medical students often match within the same geographic location or to an orthopaedic surgery residency program affiliated with their medical school. The objective of this investigation was to determine differences in geographic trends between orthopaedic residents matching before and during the Coronavirus-19 (COVID-19) pandemic.