Orthopaedic Surgery Faculty: An Evaluation of Gender and Racial Diversity Compared with Other Specialties

Sex Diversity in the Emerging United States Arthroplasty Workforce Is Limited

BACKGROUND

Sex diversity remains limited in the United States arthroplasty workforce. This study evaluates fellowship program characteristics associated with increased sex diversity in US-based fellowship programs and the pipeline of women trainees before arthroplasty fellowship.

METHODS

Demographic data from 233,981 allopathic medical school graduates, 11,364 orthopaedic surgery residents, and 1,501 arthroplasty fellows were analyzed. Women trainee representation was calculated among allopathic medical students, orthopaedic surgery residents, and arthroplasty fellows (2012 to 2022). Fellowship program characteristics associated with increased sex diversity among arthroplasty fellows were evaluated with Chi-square tests.

RESULTS

Female representation in arthroplasty fellowship training (5.9%) was less than that in orthopaedic surgery residency (15.1%) and allopathic medical school (47.6%) training (P < 0.001). Sex diversity in arthroplasty fellowship training increased over the study period (2.4 to 9.9%, P < 0.001). The presence of women faculty, geographic region, accreditation status, annual number of fellows, and total number of faculty were not associated with increased sex diversity of arthroplasty fellows (P > 0.05).

CONCLUSIONS

Sex diversity in arthroplasty fellowship training has improved over the past decade. Yet, women trainees remain under-represented relative to the trainee pipeline. Increased efforts to recruit female medical students and orthopaedic residents may help promote workforce diversity in arthroplasty.

Orthopaedic Foot and Ankle Surgery Leadership Trends: A Cross-Sectional Study of Fellowship Directors and Division Chiefs

BACKGROUND

In orthopaedic surgery departments, foot and ankle fellowship directors are tasked to create a robust clinical curriculum for trainees, while division chiefs manage the division's delivery of patient care. The primary aim of this study was to describe characteristics of foot and ankle surgery fellowship directors and division chiefs in an effort to recognize trends or disparities in leadership traits.

METHODS

The American Orthopaedic Foot and Ankle Society (AOFAS) fellowship directory for 2021 to 2022 was reviewed for AOFAS-recognized fellowship programs in the United States. Between March 2021 and June 2021, 48 fellowship directors and 23 publicly recognized division chiefs were administered an electronic survey to collect demographic, educational, and professional data. Univariate and bivariate statistical analyses were performed.

RESULTS

A total of 42 of the 48 (87.5%) fellowship directors and 18 of the 23 (78.3%) division chiefs responded to the questionnaire. Of the 48 fellowship directors, 45 (93.8%) were male, 43 (89.6%) identified as Caucasian, their average age at leadership appointment was 42.6 ± 7.5 (range, 32-70) years, and the average time between fellowship graduation and leadership appointment was 9.9 ± 7.8 (range, 0-36) years. Of the 23 chiefs, 22 (95.7%) were male, 20 (87.0%) identified as Caucasians, their average age at leadership appointment was 41.7 ± 7.8 (range, 32-53) years, and the average time between fellowship graduation and leadership appointment was 9.8 ± 6.8 (range, 2-21) years. The average H-index for the chiefs was greater than that of the fellowship directors (18.4 vs 13.4, P = .0373) when controlling for years of training.

CONCLUSION

The majority of current leaders identify as middle-age Caucasian males, demonstrate high research productivity, and have attended a select number of the same residency and fellowship training programs. By demonstrating the lack of diversity within foot and ankle surgery leadership, this study serves as a call to action for making inclusivity a priority.Levels of Evidence: Level IV: Cross-sectional study.

The inclusion of sex and gender in research methodology, funding, and publication: A systematic review

IMPORTANCE

Gender inequity in access to and outcomes of orthopedic care demands research that properly analyses data based on sex and gender. Orthopedic surgeons have an obligation to mitigate gender inequity in the provision of care by addressing the sex and gender bias in orthopedic research methodology, grant funding, and publication demonstrated by this review. This study aimed to review the literature on known gender inequities in orthopedic care, as well as sex and gender bias in orthopedic research methodology, funding, and publication; and to then to outline mitigating strategies.

METHODS

A systematic review was performed according to Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses (PRISMA) guidelines for articles published in English between 2000 and 2024. The databases searched included MEDLINE, PubMed, EMBASE, Scopus and Cochrane, and Scopus.

RESULTS

A total of 70 studies were identified that met inclusion criteria. Women often have poorer access to care and poorer outcomes than men for many common orthopedic procedures. Sex-specific analysis reached a maximum of 34% for combined basic science, translational and clinical research in major orthopedic journals. Women were less likely than men to be study participants. Orthopedic outcome measures do not adequately account for the epidemiological factors that predominantly affect women including pregnancy and care of the (often extended) family or differences in factors such as pain and return to work or sport. The probability of sex-related reporting was higher in papers with women as first and authors last, often in journals with lower impact factors. Women orthopedic researchers received only 55.2% of the funding of men orthopedic researchers. While women's first authorship increased statistically significantly from 1995 to 2020 (6.70%-15.37%, P ​< ​0.001) manuscripts submitted by women were less likely to be published, and those with a woman first author demonstrated a lower citation rate. Mitigating strategies to address biases in research methodology and publication include adopting evidence-based Gender Specific Analysis (GSA) methods into the orthopedic research process, considering GSA as a prerequisite for research grants and manuscript publication, increasing the diversity of orthopedic editorial boards, and supporting the careers of women in the orthopedic academic community through a more gender equitable environment and career-long mentorship and sponsorship.

CONCLUSION AND RELEVANCE

There are well-documented gender inequities in orthopedic care. Addressing the identified sex and gender bias in orthopedic research methodology, funding, and publication is a public health imperative. Mitigating strategies include education and the integration of sex and gender analysis in each step of the research to publication pathway, and increasing women in academic orthopedics through mentorship, sponsorship, and more inclusive department culture and policies.

LEVEL OF EVIDENCE

IV.

Sex Diversity and Equity Among Fellows of the American Orthopaedic Association

BACKGROUND

We hypothesized that women are underrepresented among fellows of the American Orthopaedic Association (AOA) relative to their prevalence among faculty at departments of orthopaedic surgery.

METHODS

Clinical faculty at departments of orthopaedic surgery that are affiliated with residency training programs were analyzed for AOA membership. Participation-to-prevalence ratios (PPRs) were calculated for men and women with AOA membership relative to their prevalence among orthopaedic surgeon faculty. A PPR of <0.8 or >1.2 indicated under- or overrepresentation, respectively. PPR values between 0.8 and 1.2 indicated equivalent representation. Sex disparities in AOA membership were explored by academic rank and orthopaedic subspecialty.

RESULTS

There were 4,310 orthopaedic surgery faculty, and 998 (23.2%) had AOA membership. Overall, women formed the minority of members in the AOA study cohort (11.4%), but they had equivalent representation relative to their prevalence among faculty (10.0%, PPR = 1.14, p = 0.210). In the AOA study cohort, women were the minority at each academic rank, including assistant professor (20.2% versus 79.8%, p < 0.001), associate professor (16.8% versus 83.2%, p < 0.001), and full professor (7.0% versus 93.0%, p < 0.001). However, women had greater representation in the AOA study cohort at each academic rank than would be expected based on their prevalence among faculty, including the assistant (PPR = 1.45), associate (PPR = 1.56), and full (PPR = 1.27) professor levels. Similarly, in the AOA study cohort, women were the minority in each orthopaedic subspecialty, but were only underrepresented in pediatric orthopaedics (PPR = 0.74). Women had greater representation in the AOA study cohort than would be expected by their prevalence among faculty in hand surgery (PPR = 1.51) and orthopaedic sports medicine (PPR = 1.33). In contrast, men had equivalent representation in each orthopaedic subspecialty.

CONCLUSIONS

Women form a minority group in the AOA, but they exhibit greater representation in the AOA than would be expected based on their prevalence among faculty at each academic rank, and they have greater representation than men, who exhibit equivalent representation across all academic ranks. Collectively, these results disproved our hypothesis, and suggest that women are participating in the AOA at rates that are greater than their prevalence among faculty.

CLINICAL RELEVANCE

Equitable participation of women in orthopaedic surgery is necessary to promote diversity and inclusion in the specialty. The AOA may be an important catalyst for future positive diversity and inclusion efforts within orthopaedic surgery.

Assessing the Experiences of Sexual and Gender Minority Applicants to Orthopaedic Surgery Residency

Introduction

The rate of sexual and gender minority (SGM) orthopaedic surgeons is far less than in other specialties, and the field has, in part, had significant difficulty attracting SGM applicants. To provide a more welcoming environment, identifying where applicants experience discrimination along medical training must be of paramount concern. Our objective was to understand the challenges faced by SGM medical students applying into orthopaedic surgery.

Methods

An anonymous survey was sent to applicants of a single orthopaedic residency program in 2023, soliciting demographics, exposure to lesbian, gay, bisexual, transgender, and/or queer (LGBTQ) mentors, and experiences with discrimination. Data were stratified by sexual orientation, and univariate analysis was conducted using chi-squared tests. Afterward, logistic regressions adjusted for gender, age, and race were performed.

Results

The overall response rate was 15.4% (n = 136/881). Fifteen percent (n = 20/135) identified as LGBTQ. Sixty-one percent of LGBTQ-identifying applicants experienced slurs and/or hurtful comments during orthopaedic rotations and research experiences, compared with 28% of their heterosexual peers (p < 0.001). In adjusted logistic regression models, LGBTQ respondents were 3.8 times more likely to report experiencing a hostile environment during training (p = 0.04) and 4.9 times more likely to have reported facing discrimination (p = 0.04) compared with heterosexual participants. Approximately 58% of respondents reported never having interacted with an LGBTQ-identifying orthopaedic attending, with only 5% reporting frequent interaction.

Conclusion

LGBTQ-identifying orthopaedic surgery applicants experience barriers related to their sexual identity, including derogatory comments, hostile clinical environments, and lack of LGBTQ mentorship. These findings highlight challenges inherent to the residency application process that may disproportionately affect persons from sexual minority groups. The recognition of such challenges can help to optimize the establishment of informed policies regarding mistreatment and practices regarding diversity and inclusion.

Revolutionising Faculty Development and Continuing Medical Education Through AI-Generated Videos

Producing high-quality and engaging educational videos for continuing medical education (CME) is traditionally time-consuming and costly. Generative AI tools have shown promise in creating synthetic videos that mimic traditional lecture videos. We conducted a comparative analysis of four AI video generation platforms HeyGen, Synthesia, Colossyan, and HourOne using the Kano model. Our analysis revealed that HeyGen met most of our requirements. We created two videos and collected feedback from 25 learners. The feedback indicated that the videos were of good quality, engaging, and well-paced for learning. Only 32% recognised the videos as AI-generated, citing limited facial expressions, hand gestures and monotone vocal expression. Importantly, only 24% considered disclosure of AI-generated content necessary. This research indicates that AI-generated videos can be a viable alternative to traditionally produced educational videos. It offers an efficient, cost-effective solution for producing educational content. Ethical considerations regarding AI content disclosure should be addressed to maintain transparency.

Sex, Race, and Ethnicity of Faculty and Department Chairs in Orthopaedic Surgery and Comparable Fields: 2015 to 2022

INTRODUCTION

The field of orthopaedic surgery has disproportionately low numbers of women and underrepresented in medicine (URM) groups. Although the representation of women and URM in orthopaedics has increased over the past several years, the growth has not kept up with other surgical specialties.

METHODS

This is a retrospective review of data presented by the Association of American Medical Colleges (AAMC) regarding US medical school faculty and department chair makeup in 2018 to 2022 and 2015 data from the AAMC Group on Women in Medicine and Sciences reports. Data regarding the sex and race/ethnicity of faculty and department chairs in orthopaedic surgery, a comparable surgical specialty (otolaryngology), surgery, and all medical fields were assessed. Otolaryngology was chosen as a comparable specialty because orthopaedic surgery and otolaryngology are the only two surgical specialties classified within the AAMC faculty report, separate from any medical counterpart.

RESULTS

Among orthopaedic surgery, otolaryngology, surgery, and all clinical sciences, the representation of women and individuals from URM groups increased between 2015 and 2022. During this time, orthopaedic surgery had the lowest growth rate of the four groups in female faculty (+0.63%/year), URM faculty (+0.32%/year), and URM department chairs (+0.11%/year). However, orthopaedic surgery did have an increase in female department chairs (0.96%/year to 7% in 2022), similar to increases seen in surgery and all clinical sciences.

DISCUSSION

The increase in representation in female and URM faculty and department chairs in orthopaedic surgery lags behind comparable fields and medicine as a whole. In addition, orthopaedic surgery had the lowest representation of female and URM faculty in 2015 and 2022. Improving the representation of female and URM orthopaedic faculty and department chairs is critical because this may encourage more diverse medical students to consider pursuing a career in the field.

Let's Take a Look at the Tape: The Impact of ERAS Video Prompts on Interview Offerings for Orthopaedic Surgery Residency Applicants: A Prospective Observational Study

INTRODUCTION

Matching into an orthopaedic surgery residency consistently reinforces a competitive landscape, challenging the applicants and programs. A group of orthopaedic surgery residency programs implemented video prompts asking applicants to respond to a standardized question by video recording. Assessing the impact of this video on the decision to offer an interview can help guide programs and applicants through the interview process.

METHODS

Twenty residency applications to one institution requiring video prompts were randomly selected and deidentified. Thirteen experienced faculty from various orthopaedic surgery programs served as applicant reviewers. The reviewers evaluated the electronic residency application service (ERAS) application and determined whether they would grant the applicant an interview ("no," "maybe," or "yes") before and after watching the video prompt. The reviewer also scored the impact of the applicant's dress, facial presentation, and video background distractions on their evaluation of the video. Multivariable logistic regressions were conducted using a group of applicants where interview status was not impacted by the video compared with the group of applicants where the interview status changed after video review. An alpha value of 0.05 was used to define significance.

RESULTS

The video prompt impacted the decision to offer an interview 29.3% of the time; 15.8% were switched from "yes" or "maybe" to "no" and 13.5% were switched from "no" or "maybe" to "yes." For the positively impacted applicants, facial presentation score was significantly higher ( P = 0.005). No recorded variables were associated with decreased chance of interview.

DISCUSSION

Video prompts impacted the decision to offer interviews to orthopaedic surgery applicants approximately one-third of the time, with a similar number of applicants being positively and negatively impacted. Facial presentation score was associated with increased chance of interview, and no variables were associated with decreased chance of interview. Thus, the answer to the videos presumably negatively impacted applicants.

Odds of Attaining Orthopaedic Leadership Based on Race, Ethnicity, and Sex

BACKGROUND

Despite widespread acceptance of the importance of diversity in leadership, systemic challenges in leadership attainment in orthopaedic surgery still exist for several groups. We hypothesize that women, underrepresented in medicine groups, and Asians have decreased odds of achieving program director and chairperson positions compared with peers.

METHODS

Demographic data were collected from the Association of American Medical Colleges for faculty, program directors, and chairpersons in orthopaedic surgery. Odds ratios were calculated treating race, ethnicity, or sex as the predictor variables and attainment of a leadership position as the outcome, comparing the composition of program directors in 2020 and chairpersons in 2019 with faculty in 2019.

RESULTS

Significantly decreased odds were found for women at 0.37 (0.264 to 0.51 [ P < 0.0001]) and the Other category at 0.16 (0.065 to 0.3864 [ P = 0.0001]) while significantly increased odds were found for White and Black/African American faculty at 1.32 (1.02 to 1.71 [ P = 0.0314]) and 1.95 (1.17 to 3.26 [ P = 0.011]), respectively, in holding program director positions. Significantly decreased odds of attaining chairpersonship were found for women at 0.17 (0.07 to 0.41 [ P = 0.0075]) and Asian faculty at 0.33 (0.14 to 0.75 [ P = 0.0062]) while White faculty demonstrated significantly increased odds at 2.43 (1.41 to 4.19 [ P = 0.0013]).

CONCLUSIONS

Women showed markedly decreased odds of leadership attainment while Black/African American faculty had increased likelihood of becoming program directors but were not markedly more likely to become chairs. Asian faculty were less likely to become program directors and markedly less likely to become chairs. While decreased odds for women were expected based on current literature, decreased odds of Asians becoming chairs and an increased likelihood of Black/African American orthopaedic surgeons becoming program directors but not attaining the role of chairs at the same rate were novel findings, revealing concerning trends for these groups.

An Analysis of the Relationship Between Female Faculty and Female Resident Representation in Neurosurgery Residency Programs

BACKGROUND

Promoting minorities within medical specialties has been postulated to be crucial to patient care and recruitment of diverse candidates. This concept has been suspected but not formally studied in the minority of women faculty and trainees in neurosurgery. We aimed to quantitatively investigate the postulated correlation relative to female representation in neurosurgery.

METHODS

Data obtained from accredited neurosurgery residency programs were reviewed. Data describing the percentage of female residents and 6 demographic and 14 program-specific variables were collected. All program websites were reviewed to assess percentages of female faculty and visible commitment to diversity in applicants, evident through communicated policies, statements, or initiatives. Included programs were defined as "low" or "high" percentage of female residents or faculty relative to the grouped median value for both categories; groups were assessed for significant differences. Percentages of female faculty and residents and program-communicated diversity initiatives were investigated for significant correlation.

RESULTS

Female faculty and diversity data were available at 117 program sites; 81 programs reported female resident percentages. Analysis revealed a significant positive correlation between female faculty and female resident percentages. Programs with higher female resident percentages had higher levels of diversity in terms of race and ethnicity. No significant correlation was found between the percentage of female faculty or residents and a communicated diversity initiative.

CONCLUSIONS

This study of current female representation in neurosurgery revealed a previously undocumented positive correlation between percentages of female faculty and female trainees. These data suggest a modifiable barrier to female entry into neurosurgical residency programs.

Sex diversity in spine surgery fellowship training: analysis of recent trends and program characteristics associated with increased diversity

BACKGROUND CONTEXT

Sex diversity in the spine surgery workforce remains limited. Accelerated efforts to recruit more female trainees into spine surgery fellowship training may help promote diversity and inclusion in the emerging spine surgery workforce.

PURPOSE

This study assessed the representation of female trainees in spine surgery fellowship training and program factors associated with greater sex diversity among fellows.

STUDY DESIGN/SETTING

This was a cross-sectional analysis of spine surgery fellows in the United States during the 2016-2017 to 2022-2023 academic years.

PATIENT SAMPLE

N/A.

OUTCOME MEASURES

Representation (%) and participation-to-prevalence ratios (PPRs) defined as the participation of female trainees in spine surgery fellowship training divided by the prevalence of female trainees in previous training cohorts. PPR values <0.8 indicated underrepresentation.

METHODS

Sex diversity was assessed among spine surgery faculty, spine surgery fellows, orthopaedic surgery residents, neurosurgery residents, and allopathic medical students. Fellowship program characteristics associated with increased sex diversity were calculated with chi square tests.

RESULTS

There were 693 spine surgery fellows and 41 were female (5.9%). Sex diversity in spine surgery fellowship training decreased over the study period (6.4% vs. 4.1%, p=.025). Female trainee representation in spine surgery fellowship training was less than that in orthopaedic surgery residency (14.2%, PPR=0.42), neurosurgery residency (17.1%, PPR=0.35), and allopathic medical school (47.6%, PPR=0.12) training (p<.001). There were 508 faculty at 78 spine surgery fellowships and 25 were female (4.9%). There were 3 female fellowship program directors (3.8%). Fellowship program characteristics associated with increased sex diversity included the presence of female faculty (p=.020). Additional program characteristics including geographic region, accreditation status, number of faculty and fellows were not associated with sex diversity (p>.05).

CONCLUSIONS

Female representation in spine surgery fellowship training decreased over the study period and remains underrepresented relative to earlier stages of medical and surgical training. There was a positive association between female faculty and increased sex diversity among fellows. Greater efforts are needed to create training environments that promote diversity, equity, and inclusion in spine surgery fellowship training.

Gender diversity at spine surgery academic conferences: a 15-year investigation

BACKGROUND CONTEXT

Enhancing gender diversity at academic conferences is critical for advancing women's representation and career trajectories in spine surgery.

PURPOSE

To discover trends in women's representation at major spine conferences over a 15-year period.

STUDY DESIGN/SETTING

Conference records from the 2007-2021 annual meetings of the Congress of Neurological Surgeons, North American Spine Society, and Scoliosis Research Society (SRS).

PATIENT SAMPLE

Authors of spine-related presentations.

OUTCOME MEASURES

Authorship by gender.

METHODS

Retrospective bibliometric analysis with univariate and multivariate modeling to identify trends and predictors of gender diversity.

RESULTS

Among 8,948 presentations, 750 (8.4%) had female first authors and 618 (6.9%) had female senior authors. There was no change in rates of female first authorship (p=.41) or senior authorship (p=.88) over time. The strongest predictors of female first authorship were having a female senior author (OR 7.32, p<.001), and delivering presentations at SRS (OR 1.95, p=.001). Factors negatively associated with female first authorship included poster format (OR 0.82, p=.039) and conference location in the United States/Canada (OR 0.76, p=.045). Similar trends were encountered for senior authorship. Productivity per senior author was similar between genders (p=.160); whereas a gender gap in productivity per first author during 2007 to 2011 (p=.020) equalized by 2017 to 2021 (p=.300). Among the 10 most productive authors of each gender, male authors delivered more presentations, but all authors shared similar format, content, and location.

CONCLUSIONS

Women's representation in spine-related presentations did not increase at three major conferences over a 15-year period. Our findings regarding the positive effects of female mentorship, and international or virtual venues merit further investigation to address the gender gap. The upstream pipeline of recruiting women into academic spine surgery also needs to be addressed.

LEVEL OF EVIDENCE: 3

The American Association of Latino Orthopaedic Surgeons: Our History, Achievements, and Future Goals

ABSTRACT

The mission of the American Association of Latino Orthopaedic Surgeons (AALOS) is to provide collegiality, advancement, education, and social justice for Latino orthopaedic surgeons and the minority populations they represent. We strive to enhance diversity within the field of orthopaedic surgery by increasing the visibility of AALOS, highlighting its core focus, and emphasizing its mission. The purposes of this article are to discuss the need for this organization and highlight its history and future goals. As AALOS recently celebrated its 15-year anniversary, we are excited to continue advancing the field of orthopaedic surgery and improving our patients' care.

The Evolving Plastic Surgery Applicant: How Far Have We Come in 30 Years?

BACKGROUND

Plastic surgery training has undergone tremendous change and transitioned through many models over the years, including independent, combined, and integrated. This study evaluates how these changes and others have affected plastic surgery applicants' demographics and academic qualifications over the last 30 years.

METHODS

Data on applicant demographics and academic qualifications were extracted from multiple sources including the National Resident Matching Program, the American Association of Medical Colleges, and cross-sectional surveys of plastic surgery applicants for the years 1992, 2005, 2011, and 2022. Data were compared using pairwise χ2 goodness of fit tests.

RESULTS

The sex distribution of plastic surgery applicants changed significantly over the last 30 years: whereas men predominated in 1992 (86% male vs 14% female), by 2011, the distribution was nearly equal (54% male vs 46% female in both 2011 and 2022, P < 0.001).The racial makeup of applicants also changed over time (P < 0.05). White applicants decreased from 73% in 1992 to 55% in 2011, and 53% in 2022. While there was an increase in Asian (7% to > 17% to > 20%) and other (13% to > 14% to > 21%) applicants over time, whereas the proportion of Black applicants remained stagnant (5% to > 6% to > 8%).Applicants with prior general surgery experience declined precipitously over the years: 96% in 1992, 64% in 2005, 37% in 2011, and 26% in 2022 (P < 0.001). When compared with 1992, Alpha Omega Alpha status increased significantly in 2011 (36% vs 12%, P < 0.05) but did not change considerably in 2005 (22%) and 2022 (23%). Research experience increased dramatically over the years, with the proportion of applicants with at least one publication going from 43% in 1992, to 75% in 2005, to 89% in 2011, and to 99% in 2022 (P < 0.001). Applicant interest in academic plastic surgery did not change considerably over the years at roughly ranging from 30% to 50% of applicants (P = ns).

CONCLUSIONS

There has been a shift in the demographics and academic qualifications of plastic surgery applicants over the last 3 decades. Understanding this evolution is critical for reviewing and evaluating the makeup of our specialty, and enacting changes to increase representation where necessary.

Gender Equity Efforts in Sports Medicine

Great progress has been made toward gender equality in athletics, whereas true equality has not yet been realized. Concurrently, women orthopedists along with advocate men have paved the way toward gender equity in orthopedics as a whole and more specifically in sports medicine. The barriers that contribute to gender disparities include lack of exposure, lack of mentorship, stunted career development, childbearing considerations and implicit gender bias and overt gender discrimination.

Gender Diversity in Orthopaedic Surgery Residencies Does Not Translate to Accreditation Council for Graduate Medical Education-Accredited Fellowships

Introduction

Gender representation among orthopaedic surgery applicants and residents has increased over the past two decades. The aims of this study were to evaluate trends of female fellows in ACGME-accredited orthopaedic subspecialties between 2007 and 2021, and to compare the fellowship trends of female representation to those of ACGME-accredited orthopaedic residencies.

Methods

We conducted a retrospective review of publicly available ACGME-accredited fellowship demographic data from 2007 to 2021. The distribution of genders (male vs. female) across subspecialties and orthopaedic surgery residency programs was compared. Chi-square, Spearman correlation, and logistic regression tests were performed to analyze the relationships between year, gender, and fellowship.

Results

Chi-square analysis demonstrated a significant relationship between gender and year for orthopaedic residency (p < 0.001), but not for any fellowship. There was a significant negative Spearman correlation between the two variables for hand (r(1844) = -0.06, p = 0.02) and sports medicine (r(2804) = -0.05, p = 0.01) fellowships. The negative Spearman correlation for pediatrics (r(499) = -0.09, p = 0.054) approached but did not reach statistical significance. Logistic regression analysis revealed that, holding year constant and comparing to orthopaedic residency, the odds of male participation increased by 173% (95% CI, 1.8-4.1) in spine, increased by 138% (95% CI, 1.7-3.3) in adult reconstruction, increased by 51% (95% CI, 1.3-1.7) in sports medicine, decreased by 41% (95% CI, 0.5-0.7) in hand, decreased by 36% (95% CI, 0.5-0.9) in foot and ankle, decreased by 48% (95% CI, 0.4-0.7) in musculoskeletal oncology, and decreased by 68% (95% CI, 0.3-0.4) in pediatrics.

Conclusion

Although the percentage of female orthopaedic residents in ACGME-accredited programs increased significantly from 2007 to 2021, this has not translated to ACGME-accredited fellowship positions. Future research optimizing methods to improve the representation of females in orthopaedic surgery should be considered.

Level of Evidence

III.

The Effect of Underrepresented Minority Mentorship on Orthopaedic Spine Surgery Recruitment and Diversity: A 20-Year Analysis at a Single Institution

INTRODUCTION

Despite national efforts to increase diversity and inclusion, underrepresented minority (URM) representation among orthopaedic spine surgery faculty remains low. Research has shown that URM trainees are more likely to pursue surgical careers when they have access to URM mentors. The purpose of this study was to explore the influence of URM representation among spine faculty on the rate of URM orthopaedic residents pursuing spine surgery fellowships.

METHODS

From 2004 to 2023, data were collected from each residency class at our academic institution: residency year, number of residents per class (total and URM), and number of residents applying to spine surgery fellowships. These ethnicities were considered URM: Black or African American, Hispanic or Latino, and Native American. In 2018, two African American spine faculty were hired. Data were compared between Before and After their arrival. A subanalysis was done to include a period of increasing URM recruitment (2012 to 2018). Binary logistic regression analysis evaluated associations between appointment of URM faculty and fellowship choice of URM residents.

RESULTS

Two hundred fifty-six residents were included. Thirty-one total URM residents were in the program during the study period (12.1%). Overall, URM representation in the program increased over time [OR: 1.1, 95% CI: 1.1 to 1.2], whereas residents applying to spine surgery fellowships did not change [OR: 1.0, 95% CI: 1.0 to 1.1]. Comparing Before-2012 and 2012 to 2018 groups with the After-2018 group demonstrated a significant difference in the proportion of URM residents applying to spine surgery fellowships after the hiring of URM spine faculty (0.0% versus 23.1% versus 74.1%; P = 0.001).

CONCLUSION

This retrospective study provides empirical evidence of the importance of URM representation among orthopaedic spine surgery faculty and the potential effect on URMs pursuing orthopaedic fellowships. Institutions should consider prioritizing the representation of URM faculty in spine surgery to address the lack of current and future diversity in the field.

LEVEL OF EVIDENCE

III.

Racial/Ethnic and Gender Diversity of Orthopaedic Journal Editorial Boards

BACKGROUND

In the current era of evidence-based medicine, scientific publications play a crucial role in guiding patient care. While the lack of diversity among orthopaedic surgeons has been well documented, little is known about the diversity of orthopaedic journal editorial boards. The purpose of this study was to assess the racial/ethnic and gender diversity of U.S. orthopaedic journal editorial boards.

METHODS

The editorial boards of 13 orthopaedic journals were examined, including 10 subspecialty and 3 general orthopaedic journals. Race/ethnicity and gender were determined for each editorial board member. The representation observed on orthopaedic journal editorial boards was compared with representation at other phases of the orthopaedic pipeline, as well as within the various subspecialty fields of orthopaedics. Logistic regression and t tests were used to evaluate these comparisons.

RESULTS

We identified 876 editorial board members of the 13 journals; 14.0% were Asian, 1.9% were Black, 1.9% were Hispanic, 2.4% were multiracial/other, and 79.7% were White. Racial/ethnic representation was similar across the subspecialty fields of orthopaedics (p > 0.05). The representation of women on orthopaedic editorial boards was 7.9%, with differences in gender diversity observed across subspecialty fields (p < 0.05). Among journals in the subspecialty fields of spine and trauma, female editorial board representation was lower than expected, even after taking into account the representation of women in these subspecialty fields (2.0% versus 9.0% [p = 0.002] and 3.8% versus 10.0% [p = 0.03], respectively).

CONCLUSIONS

In this study of 13 subspecialty and general orthopaedic journals, the representation of racial/ethnic minorities and women on editorial boards was similar to their representation in academic orthopaedics. However, these values remain low in comparison with the population of patients treated by orthopaedic surgeons. Given the importance of scientific publications in the current era of evidence-based medicine, orthopaedic journals should continue working to diversify the membership of their editorial boards.

Analysis of Academic Accomplishments and Demographics for Elected Presidents of National Orthopedic Surgery Organizations in the United States

This study analyzed the academic accomplishments and demographics of elected presidents of the American Academy of Orthopaedic Surgeons (AAOS), American Orthopaedic Association (AOA), and American Board of Orthopaedic Surgery (ABOS). Curriculum vitae and internet-based resources were reviewed to collect demographics, training characteristics, bibliometrics, and National Institutes of Health (NIH) research funding of contemporary presidents (1990-2020). Eighty presidents were included. Most presidents were men (97%), and 4% of presidents were non-White (3% Black and 1% Hispanic). Few had an additional graduate degree (4% MBA, 3% MS, 1% MPH, 1% PhD). Ten orthopedic surgery residency programs trained 47% of these presidents. Most had fellowship training (59%), and the top three were hand surgery (11%), pediatric orthopedics (11%), and adult reconstruction (10%). Twenty-nine presidents (36%) participated in a traveling fellowship. The mean age at appointment was 58±5 years, which was 27 years since residency graduation. The mean h-index was 36±23, resulting from 150±126 peer-reviewed manuscripts. Orthopedic surgery presidents had more peer-reviewed manuscripts (150±126) than chairs (73±81) and program directors (27±32) (P<.001). AOA presidents had the highest mean h-index (42±21) compared with AAOS (38±27) and ABOS (25±16) presidents (P=.035). Nineteen presidents had NIH funding (24%). More presidents had NIH funding in the AOA (39%) and AAOS (25%) than the ABOS (0%) (P=.007). Orthopedic surgery presidents possess high levels of scholarly output. AOA presidents had the highest h-index values and prevalence of NIH funding. Females and racial minorities remain underrepresented at the highest levels of leadership. [Orthopedics. 2024;47(1):e45-e51.].

What are the Trends in Racial Diversity Among Orthopaedic Applicants, Residents, and Faculty?

BACKGROUND

Orthopaedic surgery has recruited fewer applicants from underrepresented in medicine (UIM) racial groups than many other specialties, and recent studies have shown that although applicants from UIM racial groups are competitive for orthopaedic surgery, they enter the specialty at lower rates. Although previous studies have measured trends in orthopaedic surgery applicant, resident, or attending diversity in isolation, these populations are interdependent and therefore should be analyzed together. It is unclear how racial diversity among orthopaedic applicants, residents, and faculty has changed over time and how it compares with other surgical and medical specialties.

QUESTIONS/PURPOSES

(1) How has the proportion of orthopaedic applicants, residents, and faculty from UIM and White racial groups changed between 2016 and 2020? (2) How does representation of orthopaedic applicants from UIM and White racial groups compare with that of other surgical and medical specialties? (3) How does representation of orthopaedic residents from UIM and White racial groups compare with that of other surgical and medical specialties? (4) How does representation of orthopaedic faculty from UIM and White racial groups compare with that of other surgical and medical specialties?

METHODS

We drew racial representation data for applicants, residents, and faculty between 2016 and 2020. Applicant data on racial groups was obtained for 10 surgical and 13 medical specialties from the Association of American Medical Colleges Electronic Residency Application Services report, which annually publishes demographic data on all medical students applying to residency through Electronic Residency Application Services. Resident data on racial groups were obtained for the same 10 surgical and 13 medical specialties from the Journal of the American Medical Association Graduate Medical Education report, which annually publishes demographic data on residents in residency training programs accredited by the Accreditation Council for Graduate Medical Education. Faculty data on racial groups were obtained for four surgical and 12 medical specialties from the Association of American Medical Colleges Faculty Roster United States Medical School Faculty report, which annually publishes demographic data of active faculty at United States allopathic medical schools. UIM racial groups include American Indian or Alaska Native, Black or African American, Hispanic or Latino, and Native American or Other Pacific Islander. Chi-square tests were performed to compare representation of UIM and White groups among orthopaedic applicants, residents, and faculty between 2016 and 2020. Further, chi-square tests were performed to compare aggregate representation of applicants, residents, and faculty from UIM and White racial groups in orthopaedic surgery to aggregate representation among other surgical and medical specialties with available data.

RESULTS

The proportion of orthopaedic applicants from UIM racial groups increased between 2016 to 2020 from 13% (174 of 1309) to 18% (313 of 1699, absolute difference 0.051 [95% CI 0.025 to 0.078]; p < 0.001). The proportion of orthopaedic residents (9.6% [347 of 3617] to 10% [427 of 4242]; p = 0.48) and faculty (4.7% [186 of 3934] to 4.7% [198 of 4234]; p = 0.91) from UIM racial groups did not change from 2016 to 2020. There were more orthopaedic applicants from UIM racial groups (15% [1151 of 7446]) than orthopaedic residents from UIM racial groups (9.8% [1918 of 19,476]; p < 0.001). There were also more orthopaedic residents from UIM groups (9.8% [1918 of 19,476]) than orthopaedic faculty from UIM groups (4.7% [992 of 20,916], absolute difference 0.051 [95% CI 0.046 to 0.056]; p < 0.001). The proportion of orthopaedic applicants from UIM groups (15% [1151 of 7446]) was greater than that of applicants to otolaryngology (14% [446 of 3284], absolute difference 0.019 [95% CI 0.004 to 0.033]; p = 0.01), urology (13% [319 of 2435], absolute difference 0.024 [95% CI 0.007 to 0.039]; p = 0.005), neurology (12% [1519 of 12,862], absolute difference 0.036 [95% CI 0.027 to 0.047]; p < 0.001), pathology (13% [1355 of 10,792], absolute difference 0.029 [95% CI 0.019 to 0.039]; p < 0.001), and diagnostic radiology (14% [1635 of 12,055], absolute difference 0.019 [95% CI 0.009 to 0.029]; p < 0.001), and it was not different from that of applicants to neurosurgery (16% [395 of 2495]; p = 0.66), plastic surgery (15% [346 of 2259]; p = 0.87), interventional radiology (15% [419 of 2868]; p = 0.28), vascular surgery (17% [324 of 1887]; p = 0.07), thoracic surgery (15% [199 of 1294]; p = 0.94), dermatology (15% [901 of 5927]; p = 0.68), internal medicine (15% [18,182 of 124,214]; p = 0.05), pediatrics (16% [5406 of 33,187]; p = 0.08), and radiation oncology (14% [383 of 2744]; p = 0.06). The proportion of orthopaedic residents from UIM groups (9.8% [1918 of 19,476]) was greater than UIM representation among residents in otolaryngology (8.7% [693 of 7968], absolute difference 0.012 [95% CI 0.004 to 0.019]; p = 0.003), interventional radiology (7.4% [51 of 693], absolute difference 0.025 [95% CI 0.002 to 0.043]; p = 0.03), and radiation oncology (7.9% [289 of 3659], absolute difference 0.020 [95% CI 0.009 to 0.029]; p < 0.001), and it was not different from UIM representation among residents in plastic surgery (9.3% [386 of 4129]; p = 0.33), urology (9.7% [670 of 6877]; p = 0.80), dermatology (9.9% [679 of 6879]; p = 0.96), and diagnostic radiology (10% [2215 of 22,076]; p = 0.53). The proportion of orthopaedic faculty from UIM groups (4.7% [992 of 20,916]) was not different from UIM representation among faculty in otolaryngology (4.8% [553 of 11,413]; p = 0.68), neurology (5.0% [1533 of 30,871]; p = 0.25), pathology (4.9% [1129 of 23,206]; p = 0.55), and diagnostic radiology (4.9% [2418 of 49,775]; p = 0.51). Compared with other surgical and medical specialties with available data, orthopaedic surgery had the highest proportion of White applicants (62% [4613 of 7446]), residents (75% [14,571 of 19,476]), and faculty (75% [15,785 of 20,916]).

CONCLUSION

Orthopaedic applicant representation from UIM groups has increased over time and is similar to that of several surgical and medical specialties, suggesting relative success with efforts to recruit more students from UIM groups. However, the proportion of orthopaedic residents and UIM groups has not increased accordingly, and this is not because of a lack of applicants from UIM groups. In addition, UIM representation among orthopaedic faculty has not changed and may be partially explained by the lead time effect, but increased attrition among orthopaedic residents from UIM groups and racial bias likely also play a role. Further interventions and research into the potential difficulties faced by orthopaedic applicants, residents, and faculty from UIM groups are necessary to continue making progress.

CLINICAL RELEVANCE

A diverse physician workforce is better suited to address healthcare disparities and provide culturally competent patient care. Representation of orthopaedic applicants from UIM groups has improved over time, but further research and interventions are necessary to diversify orthopaedic surgery to ultimately provide better care for all orthopaedic patients.

Patient Preferences and Perceptions of Provider Diversity in Orthopaedic Surgery

BACKGROUND

Orthopaedic surgery in the U.S. historically has been among the least demographically diverse specialties in medicine. Currently, limited data exist on how patients perceive diversity within the field and what patients look for when choosing an orthopaedic surgeon. The purpose of this study was to identify specific patient preferences for surgeon demographics and understand patient perceptions of racial and gender diversity in orthopaedic surgery.

METHODS

Nonconsecutive patients from orthopaedic clinics affiliated with a U.S. academic health system voluntarily completed a 39-item questionnaire that surveyed basic demographic information, perception of diversity, racial and gender preferences during surgeon selection, and perception of health-care inequalities. Bivariate analyses were used to test the association between patient-surgeon demographic variables and ratings of diversity. Multiple regression models were used to identify independent predictors of overall perceived diversity ratings.

RESULTS

A total of 349 patients (80.6% White, 17.9% Black, and 1.5% other) were analyzed. Black patients were more likely to experience difficulty relating to their surgeon than White patients (11.48% versus 2.29%; odds ratio [OR], 5.62; 95% confidence interval [CI], 1.55 to 21.1; p = 0.004). Moreover, Black patients were more likely to perceive racial bias from their surgeon than White patients (5.17% versus 0.37%; OR, 14.44; 95% CI, 1.14 to 766.29; p = 0.02). While the level of racial diversity perceived by White patients (2.57 of 10) was significantly higher than that perceived by Black patients (2.10 of 10) (p = 0.001), the absolute difference between these 2 figures was small, suggesting that both groups perceived racial diversity in orthopaedics to be low. White and Black patients differed in their importance ranking of a surgeon's race (p < 0.0001): Black patients ranked a surgeon's race with higher importance (mean, 3.49 of 10) when selecting a surgeon compared with White patients (1.45 of 10). Both male and female patients gave relatively low importance rankings for a surgeon's gender (mean, 1.58 of 10 and 2.15 of 10, respectively, p = 0.02).

CONCLUSIONS

Patients in this study did not perceive orthopaedic surgery as a diverse field (overall diversity rating, <3 of 10). There were significant racial and gender differences in patients' preferences for specific physician characteristics when choosing an orthopaedic surgeon, which may help explain some instances of perceived racial bias and difficulty relating to their orthopaedic surgeon.

Women Are Underrepresented Among Principal Investigators of Hip and Knee Arthroplasty Clinical Trials in the United States

BACKGROUND

Leadership of clinical trials confers national recognition and promotes academic advancement. We hypothesized that women would be underrepresented among principal investigators (PIs) of hip and knee arthroplasty clinical trials in the United States.

METHODS

A query of hip and knee arthroplasty clinical trials from 2015 to 2021 was performed on ClinicalTrials.gov. Clinical trials were included if they involved a U.S.-based orthopaedic-surgeon PI. We analyzed the sex representation of arthroplasty PIs among junior-level (assistant professor) and senior-level (associate or full professor) faculty. Participation-to-prevalence ratios (PPRs) were calculated by comparing the sex representation among arthroplasty PIs with that among academic arthroplasty faculty at institutions conducting hip and knee arthroplasty clinical trials. A PPR of <0.8 indicated underrepresentation and a PPR of >1.2 indicated overrepresentation.

RESULTS

A total of 157 clinical trials involving 192 arthroplasty PIs were included. Of these PIs, only 2 (1.0%) were women. PIs were mostly funded by academic institutions (66%) and industry (33%). U.S. federal sources funded a minority (1%) of PIs. Of the 243 male arthroplasty faculty who were eligible, 190 men (78.2%) served as PIs. In contrast, of the 17 female arthroplasty faculty who were eligible, only 2 women (11.8%) served as PIs (p < 0.001). Across the entire cohort of arthroplasty PIs, women were underrepresented (PPR = 0.16), whereas men were equitably represented (PPR = 1.06). Women were underrepresented at the assistant professor (PPR = 0.0), associate professor (PPR = 0.52), and full professor (PPR = 0.58) levels.

CONCLUSIONS

Women were underrepresented among PIs of hip and knee arthroplasty clinical trials, which may lead to disparities in academic promotion and advancement. More research is needed to understand the potential barriers to female leadership of clinical trials. Greater awareness and engagement are needed to create sex equity in clinical trial leadership for hip and knee arthroplasty research.

CLINICAL RELEVANCE

The underrepresentation of women among arthroplasty PIs may lead to fewer options in surgical providers for patients and may limit access to musculoskeletal care for certain patient populations. A diverse arthroplasty workforce can promote attention to issues that disproportionately affect historically underrepresented and vulnerable patient populations.

Gender disparities among speakers at major spine conferences

PURPOSE

To examine ten-year trends in gender representation in speaking roles at major spine conferences.

BACKGROUND CONTEXT

Medical conferences play an important role in career opportunities. There is little analysis on gender representation of major spine conferences despite several studies demonstrating gender disparities within spine surgery.

STUDY DESIGN

Observational study.

SAMPLE

A total of 20,181 abstract speakers across 10 years of academic conferences for six spine societies.

OUTCOME MEASURES

Percent of female abstract presenters.

MATERIALS AND METHODS

We collated the annual meeting programs of six major spine conferences (North American Spine Society (NASS), Scoliosis Research Society (SRS), International Meeting on Advanced Spine Techniques (IMAST), Global Spine Congress (GSC), American Association of Neurological Surgeons/Congress of Neurological Surgeons (AANS/CNS) Spine Summit, and the Cervical Spine Research Society (CSRS)) dating from 2013 to 2022. Departmental websites, society webpages, or personal social media were identified for images or the use of gendered pronouns in order to determine speaker gender for each speaker type. All categorical variables were compared using Pearson chi-square analysis.

RESULTS

Women constituted 1,816 (9.0%) of all 20,181 identified conference speakers. Female representation was highest at NASS (N=680, 12.2%) but lowest at CSRS (6.6%) and GSC (7.1%). Spine Summit (7.4%), IMAST (9.92%), and GSC (9.87%) demonstrated the largest annual percent increases in female representation. Institutions in Middle East and Africa (1.4%), and Central and South America (1.8%) supported the lowest percent of female speakers. Women were significantly less likely to be speakers or moderators/course faculty than to be podium abstract presenters (p<.001). The percent of women as invited speakers (10.4% vs. 5.5%, p=.001) and moderators (11.4% vs. 3.7%, p<.001) increased significantly over the study period, with annual increases of 8.8% and 20.8%, respectively, from 2013 to 2022 (p<.001).

CONCLUSIONS

While academic spine societies have made significant progress in promoting gender representation, especially among invited speakers and session moderators, women continue to be underrepresented compared to the percent of women in orthopedic surgery and neurosurgery.

AOA Critical Issues: Gender Justice in Academic Medicine: What It Might Look Like in Orthopaedic Surgery

ABSTRACT

As the number of women entering medicine has increased, so has the number of women entering orthopaedics; however, many orthopaedic programs struggle to create an equitable space for women, particularly in leadership. Struggles experienced by women include sexual harassment and gender bias, lack of visibility, lack of well-being, disproportionate family care responsibilities, and lack of flexibility in the criteria for promotions. Historically, sexual harassment and bias has been a problem faced by women physicians, and often the harassment continues even when the issue has been reported; many women find that reporting it results in negative consequences for their career and training. Additionally, throughout medical training, women are less exposed to orthopaedics and lack the mentorship that is given to their colleagues who are men. The late exposure and lack of support prevent women from entering and advancing in orthopaedic training. Typical surgery culture can also result in women orthopaedic surgeons avoiding help for mental wellness. Improving well-being culture requires systemic changes. Finally, women in academics perceive decreased equality in promotional considerations and face leadership that already lacks representation of women. This paper presents solutions to assist in developing equitable work environments for all academic clinicians.

National Institutes of Health Funding to Departments of Orthopaedic Surgery at U.S. Medical Schools from 2015 to 2021

BACKGROUND

National Institutes of Health (NIH) funding of orthopaedic surgery departments has historically lagged behind that of other surgical disciplines. In this study, we present an updated analysis of NIH grants awarded to orthopaedic surgery departments at U.S. medical schools and an evaluation of the characteristics of NIH-funded principal investigators (PIs).

METHODS

The NIH Research Portfolio Online Reporting Tools Expenditures and Results (RePORTER) database was queried for grants awarded to orthopaedic surgery departments in the 2015 to 2021 fiscal years. Funding totals were calculated for 4 categories: award mechanism, awarding institute, recipient institute, and PI. Trends in funding from 2015 to 2021 were determined and compared with the annual NIH budget. Funding awarded to orthopaedic surgery departments was compared with awards received by other surgical specialties in 2021. The characteristics of NIH-funded PIs and co-PIs were evaluated. Funding awarded to orthopaedic surgery departments in 2021 was compared with funding in 2014 as reported in a previous study.

RESULTS

In 2021, 287 grants were awarded to 187 PIs at 47 orthopaedic surgery departments for a total of $104,710,841, representing 0.4% of the overall NIH budget. The top 5 departments earned $41,750,321 (39.9%) of the total NIH funding for orthopaedic surgery. From 2015 to 2021, total funding increased by 79.7% (p < 0.001), but the rate of increase was not significantly different from that of the overall annual NIH budget (p = 0.469). In 2021, grants were most commonly awarded via the R01 mechanism (70.0% of total funding), with a median annual award of $397,144 (interquartile range [IQR], $335,017 to $491,248). The majority of grants (70.0%) supported basic science research, followed by translational (12.2%), clinical (9.4%), and educational (8.4%) research. NIH funding did not vary by the gender of the PI (p = 0.505), and the proportion of female PIs was significantly greater in 2021 than in 2014 (33.9% versus 20.5%, p = 0.009). Compared with other surgical departments, orthopaedic surgery departments ranked second-lowest in terms of the total NIH funding received in 2021.

CONCLUSIONS

NIH funding to orthopaedic surgery departments continues to be limited and lags behind that of other surgical subspecialties, which may create challenges in addressing the rising burden of musculoskeletal disease in the U.S. These findings highlight the importance of efforts to identify barriers to grant procurement in orthopaedic surgery.

Education Research in Orthopaedic Surgery

With the ever-changing dynamics of surgical training, it is essential for the content of educational research to evolve simultaneously. This study aimed to assess the current state of scholarly work in orthopaedic training education and to identify particular educational topics that are trending in the literature.

Racial and Sex Disparities in Resident Attrition in Orthopaedic Surgery

Studies have suggested that female individuals and individuals from backgrounds under-represented in medicine (URiM) are at increased risk of attrition during residency. This likely exacerbates the lack of diversity in our field. The aims of this study were to (1) characterize demographic composition in orthopaedic residency from 2001 to 2018 and (2) determine the race/ethnicity and identify any disparities.

Methods

Demographic and attrition data from 2001 to 2018 were obtained from the Association of American Medical Colleges. Attrition data comprised the following categories: withdrawals, dismissals, and transfers to another specialty. Analysis compared demographic composition and determined attrition rates with subgroup analysis by race/ethnicity and sex.

Results

From 2001 to 2018, female orthopaedic residents increased from 8.77% to 15.54% and URiM residents from 9.49% to 11.32%. The overall and unintended attrition rates in orthopaedic surgery were 3.20% and 1.15%, respectively. Among female residents, the overall and unintended attrition rates were 5.96% and 2.09% compared with 2.79% and 1.01%, respectively, in male residents. URiM residents had overall and unintended attrition rates of 6.16% and 3.11% compared with 2.71% and 0.83%, respectively, for their White counterparts. Black/African American residents had an attrition rate of nearly 10%. Female residents averaged 12.9% of all residents but 24% of those leaving orthopaedics. URiM residents were 10.14% of all residents but 19.51% of those experiencing attrition. In logistic regression models, female residents had a relative risk (RR) of 2.20 (p < 0.001) for experiencing all-cause attrition and 2.09 (p < 0.001) for unintended attrition compared with male residents. Compared with their White male counterparts, URiM residents had a RR for overall and unintended attrition of 2.36 and 3.84 (p < 0.001), respectively; Black/African American residents had a RR for the same of 3.80 and 7.20 (p < 0.001), respectively.

Conclusion

Although female resident percentage has increased, orthopaedics continues to train fewer female surgeons than all other fields. Female and URiM residents in orthopaedic surgery are disproportionately affected by attrition. While recruitment has been the primary focus of diversity, equity, and inclusion efforts, this study suggests that resident retention through appropriately supporting residents during training is equally critical.

What Program Characteristics Are Associated with Resident Racial Diversity in Orthopaedic Surgery? An Analysis of Association of American Medical Colleges Data

In orthopaedic surgery, there are fewer Black or African American (4%) and Hispanic or Latino (4%) residents compared with general surgery, internal medicine, family medicine, and pediatrics (5%-7% Black residents and 7%-9% Hispanic/Latino residents, respectively). There are also fewer underrepresented in medicine minority (URiM) faculty in orthopaedic surgery (6.1%) compared with general surgery (8.9%), otolaryngology (7.8%), internal medicine (9.7%), and obstetrics and gynecology (15.6%). Identifying program characteristics that are associated with the percentage of URiM residents could reveal strategies for improving diversity.

Methods

Using Association of American Medical Colleges orthopaedic resident and faculty race/ethnicity data from 2007 to 2016, we analyzed the racial diversity of 166 of 207 residency programs. The primary outcome was program racial diversity, measured as the percentage of URiM residents per program. The top quartile of programs was compared with the other quartiles. Characteristics analyzed included percentage of URiM faculty, affiliation with a university/top 40 medical school/top 40 orthopaedic hospital, geographic region, city type, and city size. We used a multivariable linear regression model to evaluate program characteristics associated with diversity and a linear mixed-effects model with program-specific random effects to evaluate time trends.

Results

The mean percentage of URiM residents per program was 9.3% (SD = 10.5%). In the top quartile of programs, URiM residents composed 20.7% ± 2.5% of the program compared with 5.8% ± 0.3% in other quartiles (p < 0.001). After adjusting for program and faculty size, the only factor associated with the number of URiM residents per program was the number of URiM faculty. For every 5 additional URiM faculty members, there was an associated increase in the number of URiM residents per program by 3.6 (95% confidence interval [CI]: 2.3-5.0). There was a small but statistically significant annual increase in the percentage of URiM residents per program of 0.207 (95% CI: 0.112-0.302) percentage points during the study period.

Conclusion

URiM representation remains low among orthopaedic residents. Efforts to increase the URiM faculty base represent a potential strategy for programs to increase URiM representation among residents by attracting more diverse applicants.

Orthopedic Surgery Fellowship Directors: Trends in Demographics, Education, Employment, and Institutional Familiarity

Background: Fellowship directors are assumed to be distinguished in orthopedics, but the traits and training that have enabled them to achieve their leadership positions have not been assessed. Purpose: We sought to identify common demographics, research output, and educational trends of fellowship directors in orthopedics, with an emphasis on racial, ethnic, and gender diversity. Methods: We conducted a literature review to identify published studies on fellowship directors in orthopedic surgery and found 4 cross-sectional studies of fellowship directors in spine, arthroplasty, pediatrics, and sports medicine subspecialties. Another 4 accredited orthopedic subspecialties and their fellowship directors were identified using the American College of Graduate Medical Education Public Accreditation Data System for 2020-2021 and national fellowship directories. Data endpoints included race/ethnicity, age, sex, residency and fellowship training institutions, year of fellowship completion, year of hire at current institution, year of fellowship directors appointment, and h-index. The demographics and educational backgrounds for listed fellowship directors were collected from curricula vitae (CVs). Results: Of the 537 fellowship directors identified among 8 orthopedic subspecialties, the average age was 52.9 ± 2.2 years, 5.6% (N = 30) were women, 79.1% (N = 406) were white, 12.5% (N = 64) were Asian American, 3.7% (N = 19) were African American, 2.9% (N = 15) were Middle Eastern, and 1.7% (N = 9) were Hispanic/Latino. Oncology 20% (N = 4) had the highest percentage of female fellowship directors; 37.6% (N = 202) of fellowship directors were at the same institution they trained at for residency or fellowship. Their average h-index was 18.6 ± 3.7. Conclusion: This study of fellowship directors in orthopedics found that they have a high research output and a high level of institutional familiarity. We identified a need for greater diversity in these leadership positions in both gender and race/ethnicity.

Race and Ethnicity Reporting in Randomized Controlled Trials Published in Upper-Extremity Journals

PURPOSE

Hand surgery remains one of the least racially and ethnically diverse subspecialties in all of medicine, and minority patients demonstrate overall worse health care outcomes compared with White patients. Our purpose was to determine the frequency of race and ethnicity reporting in randomized controlled trials (RCTs) published in journals with an upper-extremity (UE) focus.

METHODS

A systematic review was conducted in accordance with Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses guidelines by searching EMBASE and MEDLINE for RCTs contained in peer-reviewed journals with an UE focus. All articles from 2000 to 2021 were included. Information such as article sample size, center type, funding, and location was recorded. We assessed each article to determine whether demographic information, including race and ethnicity, was reported for study participants.

RESULTS

A total of 481 RCTs in 9 UE journals were included. For UE RCTs, 96% of studies reported age, 90% reported sex, and 5% reported either race or ethnicity. Demographic information about economic status, insurance status, mental health, educational level, and marital status were each reported in <10% of RCTs. Racial representation was highest for White participants (80%) and lowest among American Indian participants. Of studies conducted within the United States, all racial groups except for White patients were underrepresented compared with census data.

CONCLUSIONS

Demographic data related to race and ethnicity for patients involved in UE RCTs are infrequently reported. When reported, the racial demographics of UE RCT patients do not match the demographics of the patients in United States. Black patients remain underrepresented in RCTs.

CLINICAL RELEVANCE

Academic journals mandating the reporting of demographic data related to race may aid in improved reporting and allow for subsequent aggregation within systematic reviews to assess outcomes for racial minorities.

Racial and Gender Diversity of Physicians Accepted to American Military Orthopaedic and Surgical Residencies: An 18-Year Analysis

Orthopaedic surgery ranks among the least racially and gender diverse medical/surgical specialties. United States military surgeons train in military or military-funded residency positions to care for a markedly diverse population; however, the composition and diversity of these training programs have not been previously assessed. The purpose of this study was to analyze the trends of physician diversity in military orthopaedics in comparison with other surgical specialties over time.

Methods

We performed a retrospective cohort study evaluating matriculation into first year of residency training in US military surgical training programs between 2002 and 2020. In total, 9,124 applicants were reviewed. We collected matriculant self-reported race/ethnicity and sex and the medical/specialty program. We considered under-represented minorities as those who reported their race as African American, Indian/Alaskan Native, and Native, other, or who reported ethnicity as Hispanic. We calculated changes in persons accepted to training positions over time and used linear regression to model trends in diversity among orthopaedic matriculating residents when compared with other surgical subspecialities over time.

Results

Across all surgical subspecialities, the average change in percent women was 0.94% per year for the study period (p < 0.01). The average annual percent women entering orthopaedic surgery residency programs was 14% for the 18-year study period. Across all surgical subspecialties, the average change for accepted applicants from groups underrepresented in medicine (URiM) was 1.01% per year for the study period (p < 0.01). The average annual percent URiM entering orthopaedic surgery residency programs was 17% for the 18-year study period. The annual change of women and URiM entering military orthopaedic residencies was 0.10% and 1.52%, respectively.

Conclusions

Despite statistically significant improvements, recruitment efforts as used to date fall far short of reversing sexual, racial, and ethnic disparities in military orthopaedic residencies. Orthopaedics has a lower representation of both women and physicians with minority backgrounds when compared with many surgical subspecialties. Additional interventions are still necessary to increase diversity for military orthopaedic surgeons.

Institutional Variability in Representation of Women and Racial and Ethnic Minority Groups Among Medical School Faculty

Importance

Bolstering the ranks of women and underrepresented groups in medicine (URM) among medical faculty can help address ongoing health care disparities and therefore constitutes a critical public health need. There are increasing proportions of URM faculty, but comparisons of these changes with shifts in regional populations are lacking.

Objective

To quantify the representation of women and URM and assess changes and variability in representation by individual US medical schools.

Design, Setting, and Participants

This retrospective cross-sectional study assessed US medical school faculty rosters for women and URM, including American Indian and Alaska Native, Black, Hispanic, and Native Hawaiian or other Pacific Islander faculty. US allopathic medical schools participating in the Association of American Medical Colleges (AAMC) Faculty Administrative Management Online User System from 1990 to 2019 (updated December 31 for each year), were included. Faculty data were analyzed from yearly cross-sections updated as of December 31 for each year from 1990 to 2019. For census data, decennial census data were used for years 1990, 2000, and 2010. Intercensal estimates were used for all other years from 1990 to 2019.

Main Outcomes and Measures

Trends and variability in representation quotient (RQ), defined as representation of a group within an institution's faculty compared to its respective US county.

Results

There were 121 AAMC member institutions (72 076 faculty) in 1990, which increased to 144 institutions (184 577 faculty) in 2019. The median RQ of women faculty increased from 0.42 (IQR, 0.37-0.46) to 0.80 (IQR, 0.74-0.89) (slope, +1.4% per year; P < .001). The median RQ of Black faculty increased from 0.10 (IQR, 0.06-0.22) to 0.22 (IQR, 0.14-0.41) (slope, +0.5% per year; P < .001), but remained low. In contrast, the median RQ of Hispanic faculty decreased from 0.44 (IQR, 0.19-1.22) to 0.34 (IQR, 0.23-0.62) (slope, -1.7% per year; P < .001) between 1990 and 2019. Absolute total change in RQ of URM showed an increase; however, the 30-year slope did not differ from zero (+0.1% per year; P = .052). Although RQ of women faculty increased for most institutions (127 [88.2%]), large variability in URM faculty trends were observed (57 institutions [39.6%] with increased RQ and 10 institutions [6.9%] with decreased RQ). Nearly one-quarter of institutions shifted from the top to bottom 50th percentile institutional ranking by URM RQ with county vs national comparisons.

Conclusions and Relevance

The findings of this cross-sectional study suggest that representation of women in academic medicine improved with time, while URM overall experienced only modest increases with wide variability across institutions. Among URM, the Hispanic population has lost representational ground. County-based population comparisons provide new insights into institutional variation in representation among medical school faculty.

An Analysis of Underrepresented in Medicine Away Rotation Scholarships in Surgical Specialties

BACKGROUND

Underrepresented in medicine (UIM) visiting student clerkship scholarships provide an opportunity for supporting diversity. Although these scholarships have become a popular initiative to recruit diverse surgical applicants, they have not been thoroughly analyzed regarding which programs offer scholarships and the characteristics of the scholarships. UIM scholarship opportunity disparities may exist depending on location, funding, reputation, and program size among different specialties.

OBJECTIVE

To describe the characteristics and prevalence of UIM visiting student scholarships by examining institutional and program websites for the surgical specialties.

METHODS

Using the Accreditation Council for Graduate Medical Education (ACGME) Accreditation Data System for 2021, residency training and diversity websites were identified and evaluated for the availability of UIM visiting student scholarships in July 2021. Eight surgical specialties were examined. Scholarships were categorized by how UIM was defined, the funding amount provided, and scholarship application requirements. We analyzed the association of the program's National Institutes of Health funding, size, type, region, reputation, and population density of the program's area via Doximity on scholarship availability using chi-square and multivariate analysis.

RESULTS

Of the 1058 analyzed programs, 314 (29.7%) had a UIM visiting student scholarship. There were 4 different definitions of UIM used among the analyzed programs. The average scholarship amount offered was $1,852.25 ($500-$4,000). Depending on the specialty, different variables were associated with whether a program had a UIM scholarship.

CONCLUSIONS

Currently, UIM scholarship offerings were variable between programs and surgical specialties.

Racial, Ethnic, and Gender Diversity in Academic Orthopaedic Surgery Leadership

BACKGROUND

Multiple investigations in the past 50 years have documented a lack of racial/ethnic and gender diversity in the orthopaedic surgery workforce when compared with other specialties. Studies in other industries suggest that diversification of leadership can help diversify the underlying workforce. This study investigates changes in racial/ethnic and gender diversity of orthopaedic surgery leadership from 2007 to 2019 and compares leadership diversity to that of other surgical and nonsurgical specialties, specifically in terms of chairpersons and program directors.

METHODS

Demographic data were collected from The Journal of the American Medical Association and the Association of American Medical Colleges. Aggregate data were utilized to determine the racial, ethnic, and gender composition of academic leadership for 8 surgical and nonsurgical specialties in 2007 and 2019. Comparative analysis was conducted to identify changes in diversity among chairpersons between the 2 years. Furthermore, current levels of diversity in orthopaedic leadership were compared with those of other specialties.

RESULTS

A comparative analysis of diversity among program directors revealed that orthopaedic surgery had significantly lower minority representation (20.5%) when compared with the nonsurgical specialties (adjusted p < 0.01 for all) and, with the exception of neurological surgery, had the lowest proportion of female program directors overall, at 9.0% (adjusted p < 0.001 for all). From 2007 to 2019, orthopaedic surgery experienced no change in minority representation among chairpersons (adjusted p = 0.73) but a significant increase in female representation among chairpersons, from 0.0% (0 of 102) to 4.1% (5 of 122) (adjusted p = 0.04). Lastly, a significant decrease in minority and female representation was observed when comparing the diversity of 2019 orthopaedic faculty to orthopaedic leadership in 2019/2020 (p < 0.05 for all).

CONCLUSIONS

Diversity in orthopaedic surgery leadership has improved on some key fronts, specifically in gender diversity among chairpersons. However, a significant decrease in minority and gender representation was observed between 2019 orthopaedic faculty and 2019/2020 orthopaedic leadership (p < 0.05), which was a trend shared by other specialties. These findings may suggest a more pervasive problem in diversity of medical leadership that is not only limited to orthopaedic surgery.

Sex diversity within U.S. residencies: a cross-sectional study of trends from 2011 to 2019

BACKGROUND

Despite females comprising 50.8% of the U.S. population, the percentage of females in the physician workforce is only 36.3%. Studies have examined sex trends within select specialties, however there is insufficient literature studying trends across all specialties. In this study, the authors examined trends in the proportion of female residents from 2011 to 2019 across all specialties, including both surgical and non-surgical.  METHODS: Data on the proportion of female residents from 2011 to 2019 in all specialties was extracted from the Accreditation Council for Graduate Medical Education (ACGME) Data Resource Books and analyzed with the chi-square test for trend.

RESULTS

From 2011 to 2019, there was a statistically significant increase in the percentage of female residents in surgical specialties (p < 0.001) and no significant change in the percentage of female residents in non-surgical specialties. In the same time period, the specialty with the highest percentage of females was Obstetrics & Gynecology (81.3%), and the specialty with the lowest percentage of females was Orthopedic Surgery (13.8%).

CONCLUSIONS

Although there has been a positive overall trend in the percentage of females entering medical and surgical specialties, the percentage of females in medicine overall still lies below that of the entire population. Increased efforts are needed to increase female representation in medicine, especially in the U.S. in specialties where they are traditionally underrepresented.

Racial and Ethnic Diversity Within U.S. Residencies: Trends from 2011 to 2019

OBJECTIVE

Examine trends in the proportion of underrepresented minority (URM) residents from 2011 to 2019 across all specialties and investigate differences between surgical and non-surgical specialties.

DESIGN

Cross-sectional study.

SETTING

N/A.

PARTICIPANTS

The authors extracted data on the proportion of URM residents in all specialties from the Accreditation Council for Graduate Medical Education yearly reports.

RESULTS

There was a statistically significant decline in the proportion of URM residents in surgical specialties (p < 0.01) from 2011 (9.9%) to 2019 (9.1%) and a significant increase in the proportion of URM residents in non-surgical specialties (p < 0.01) from 2011 (9.6%) to 2019 (10.2%).

CONCLUSIONS

This study emphasizes the need to increase recruitment of URMs in medicine, especially in surgical specialties. Findings from this study can inform much-needed initiatives to address barriers to entry for diverse applicants within specialties that lack diversity and have shown minimal improvement over time.

Representation of Women in Academic Orthopaedic Leadership: Where Are We Now?

BACKGROUND

Women have long been underrepresented in orthopaedic surgery; however, there is a lack of quantitative data on the representation of women in orthopaedic academic program leadership.

QUESTIONS/PURPOSES

(1) What is the proportion of women in leadership roles in orthopaedic surgery departments and residency programs in the United States (specifically, chairs, vice chairs, program directors, assistant program directors, and subspecialty division chiefs)? (2) How do women and men leaders compare in terms of years in position in those roles, years in practice, academic rank, research productivity as represented by publications, and subspecialty breakdown? (3) Is there a difference between men and women in the chair or program director role in terms of whether they are working in that role at institutions where they attended medical school or completed their residency or fellowship?

METHODS

We identified 161 academic orthopaedic residency programs from the Accreditation Council for Graduate Medical Education (ACGME) website. Data (gender, length of time in position, length of time in practice, professorship appointment, research productivity as indirectly measured via PubMed publications, and subspecialty) were collected for chairs, vice chairs, program directors, assistant program directors, and subspecialty division chiefs in July 2020 to control for changes in leadership. Information not provided by the ACGME and PubMed was found using orthopaedic program websites and the specific leader's curriculum vitae. Complete data were obtained for chairs and program directors, but there were missing data points for vice chairs, assistant program directors, and division chiefs. All statistical analysis was performed using SPSS using independent t-tests for continuous variables and the Pearson chi-square test for categorical variables, with p < 0.05 considered significant.

RESULTS

Three percent (4 of 153) of chairs, 8% (5 of 61) of vice chairs, 11% (18 of 161) of program directors, 27% (20 of 75) of assistant program directors, and 9% (45 of 514) of division chiefs were women. There were varying degrees of missing data points for vice chairs, assistant program directors, and division chiefs as not all programs reported or have those positions. Women chairs had fewer years in their position than men (2 ± 1 versus 9 ± 7 [95% confidence interval -9.3 to -5.9]; p < 0.001). Women vice chairs more commonly specialized in hand or tumor compared with men (40% [2 of 5] and 40% [2 of 5] versus 11% [6 of 56] and 4% [2 of 56], respectively; X2(9) = 16; p = 0.04). Women program directors more commonly specialized in tumor or hand compared with men (33% [6 of 18] and 17% [3 of 18] versus 6% [9 of 143] and 11% [16 of 143], respectively; X2(9) = 20; p = 0.02). Women assistant program directors had fewer years in practice (9 ± 4 years versus 14 ± 11 years [95% CI -10.5 to 1.6]; p = 0.045) and fewer publications (11 ± 7 versus 30 ± 48 [95% CI -32.9 to -5.8]; p = 0.01) than men. Women division chiefs had fewer years in practice and publications than men and were most prevalent in tumor and pediatrics (21% [10 of 48] and 16% [9 of 55], respectively) and least prevalent in spine and adult reconstruction (2% [1 of 60] and 1% [1 of 70], respectively) (X2(9) = 26; p = 0.001). Women program directors were more likely than men to stay at the same institution they studied at for medical school (39% [7 of 18] versus 14% [20 of 143]; odds ratio 3.9 [95% CI 1.4 to 11.3]; p = 0.02) and trained at for residency (61% [11 of 18] versus 42% [60 of 143]; OR 2.2 [95% CI 0.8 to 5.9]; p = 0.01).

CONCLUSION

The higher percentage of women in junior leadership positions in orthopaedic surgery, with the data available, is a promising finding. Hand, tumor, and pediatrics appear to be orthopaedic subspecialties with a higher percentage of women. However, more improvement is needed to achieve gender parity in orthopaedics overall, and more information is needed in terms of publicly available information on gender representation in orthopaedic leadership.

CLINICAL RELEVANCE

Proportional representation of women in orthopaedics is essential for quality musculoskeletal care, and proportional representation in leadership may help encourage women to apply to the specialty. Our findings suggest movement in an improving direction in this regard, though more progress is needed.

Current Perceptions of Diversity Among Head Team Physicians and Head Athletic Trainers: Results Across US Professional Sports Leagues

BACKGROUND

Discrepancies in race, ethnicity, and sex among health care providers and their patients have been shown to affect the patient-provider relationship as well as the quality of care. Currently, minority and female representation among orthopaedic surgeons remains low. Given the large proportion of minority athletes and their degree of public visibility, professional sports serves as an important arena within which to analyze the diversity of health care providers.

PURPOSE

To describe and evaluate the current level of diversity of head team physicians (HTPs) and head athletic trainers (ATCs), primarily in terms of race and sex, within men's professional sports leagues in the United States.

STUDY DESIGN

Cross-sectional study.

METHODS

Five major US professional sports leagues were evaluated: National Basketball Association, National Football League, National Hockey League, Major League Soccer, and Major League Baseball. Publicly available data were collected to identify the HTPs and head ATCs for each team within these leagues. Two independent observers analyzed photographs and names of these individuals to determine his or her perceived race and sex, with disagreements being resolved by a third independent observer. Other physician data collected included graduate degree(s), specialty, and number of years in practice. Kappa coefficients (κ) were employed to evaluate interobserver reliability. Chi-square, Fisher exact, and t tests were used for statistical comparisons across leagues.

RESULTS

The κ values for perceived race were 0.85 for HTPs and 0.89 for head ATCs, representing near-perfect interobserver agreement. Minorities comprised 15.5% of HTPs and 20.7% of ATCs (P = .24). Women comprised 3.9% of HTPs and 1.3% of head ATCs (P = .017). The majority of HTPs were orthopaedic surgeons with medical doctorates. Female HTPs had significantly fewer years in practice compared with male HTPs (15.0 ± 4.9 vs 23.1 ± 9.6; P = .04).

CONCLUSION

The lead physicians and athletic training providers for men's professional sports teams demonstrated low rates of minority and female representation, denoting a highly visible area for discussing the role of increased diversity in health care.

How Long Will It Take to Reach Gender Parity in Orthopaedic Surgery in the United States? An Analysis of the National Provider Identifier Registry

BACKGROUND

Although previous studies have evaluated how the proportion of women in orthopaedic surgery has changed over time, these analyses have been limited by small sample sizes, have primarily used data on residents, and have not included information on growth across subspecialties and geographic regions.

QUESTION/PURPOSE

We used the National Provider Identifier registry to ask: How have the (1) overall, (2) regional, and (3) subspecialty percentages of women among all currently practicing orthopaedic providers changed over time in the United States?

METHODS

The National Provider Identifier Registry of the Centers for Medicare and Medicaid Services (CMS) was queried for all active providers with taxonomy codes pertaining to orthopaedic subspecialties as of April 2020. Women orthopaedic surgeons were identified among all physicians with subspecialty taxonomy codes. As all providers are required to provide a gender when applying for an NPI, all providers with queried taxonomy codes additionally had gender classification. Our final cohort consisted of 31,296 practicing orthopaedic surgeons, of whom 8% (2363 of 31,296) were women. A total of 11,714 (37%) surgeons possessed taxonomy codes corresponding with a specific orthopaedic subspecialty. A univariate linear regression analysis was used to analyze trends in the annual proportions of women who are active orthopaedic surgeons based on NPI enumeration dates. Specifically, annual proportions were defined using cross-sections of the NPI registry on December 31 of each year. Linear regression was similarly used to evaluate changes in the annual proportion of women orthopaedic surgeons across United States Census regions and divisions, as well as orthopaedic subspecialties. The national growth rate was then projected forward to determine the year at which the representation of women orthopaedic surgeons would achieve parity with the proportion of all women physicians (36.3% or 340,018 of 936,254, as determined by the 2019 American Medical Association Physician Masterfile) and the proportion of all women in the United States (50.8% or 166,650,550 of 328,239,523 as determined by 2019 American Community Survey from the United States Census Bureau). Gender parity projections along with corresponding 95% confidence intervals were calculated using the Holt-Winters forecasting algorithm. The proportions of women physicians and women in the United States were assumed to remain fixed at 2019 values of 36.3% and 50.8%, respectively.

RESULTS

There was a national increase in the proportion of women orthopaedic surgeons between 2010 and 2019 (r2 = 0.98; p < 0.001) at a compound annual growth rate of 2%. Specifically, the national proportion of orthopaedic surgeons who were women increased from 6% (1670 of 26,186) to 8% (2350 of 30,647). Assuming constant growth at this rate following 2019, the time to achieve gender parity with the overall medical profession (that is, to achieve 36.3% women in orthopaedic surgery) is projected to be 217 years, or by the year 2236. Likewise, the time to achieve gender parity with the overall US population (which is 50.8% women) is projected to be 326 years, or by the year 2354. During our study period, there were increases in the proportion of women orthopaedic surgeons across US Census regions. The lowest growth was in the West (17%) and the South (19%). Similar growth was demonstrated across census divisions. In each orthopaedic subspecialty, we found increases in the proportion of women surgeons throughout the study period. Adult reconstruction (0%) and spine surgery (1%) had the lowest growth.

CONCLUSION

We calculate that at the current rate of change, it will take more than 200 years for orthopaedic surgery to achieve gender parity with the overall medical profession. Although some regions and subspecialties have grown at comparably higher rates, collectively, there has been minimal growth across all domains.

CLINICAL RELEVANCE

Given this meager growth, we believe that substantive changes must be made across all levels of orthopaedic education and leadership to steepen the current curve. These include mandating that all medical school curricula include dedicated exposure to orthopaedic surgery to increase the number of women coming through the orthopaedic pipeline. Additionally, we believe the Accreditation Council for Graduate Medical Education and individual programs should require specific benchmarks for the proportion of orthopaedic faculty and fellowship program directors, as well as for the proportion of incoming trainees, who are women. Furthermore, we believe there should be a national effort led by American Academy of Orthopaedic Surgeons and orthopaedic subspecialty societies to foster the academic development of women in orthopaedic surgery while recruiting more women into leadership positions. Future analyses should evaluate the efficacy of diversity efforts among other surgical specialties that have achieved or made greater strides toward gender parity, as well as how these programs can be implemented into orthopaedic surgery.