Search

Background: Recent consternation over the number of unfilled Pediatric Anesthesiology fellowship positions in the United States compelled us to assess the change in the ratio of Pediatric Anesthesiology fellows to the number of graduating anesthesiology residents over the 14‐year period between 2008 and 2022. We also sought to report the total ratio of anesthesiology fellows to graduating residents and trends in the annual number of fellowship applicants relative to the number of Accreditation Council for Graduate Medical Education (ACGME)‐accredited anesthesiology fellowship positions by specialty. Methods: We used publicly available resources, including ACGME Data Resource Books, National Resident Matching Program (NRMP) data, San Francisco (SF) Match data, and American Board of Medical Specialties (ABMS) data, to determine the ratio of anesthesiology fellows to graduating anesthesiology residents and to compare the number of fellowship applicants to fellowship positions for Adult Cardiothoracic Anesthesiology, Critical Care Anesthesiology, Obstetric Anesthesiology, Pain Medicine and Pediatric Anesthesiology. Results: Since 2008, the ratio of ACGME‐accredited anesthesiology fellows to graduating residents increased from 0.36 in 2008 (2007 residency graduates) to 0.59 in 2022 (2021 residency graduates) and the ratio of Pediatric Anesthesiology fellows to graduating residents remained relatively stable from 0.10 to 0.11. The number of unmatched positions in Pediatric Anesthesiology increased from 17 in 2017 to 86 in 2023, and all ACGME‐accredited fellowships had more positions available than applicants in 2023. Conclusion: In the USA, while the ratio of Pediatric Anesthesiology fellowship graduates to anesthesiology residency graduates remained relatively constant from 2008 to 2022, this is likely a lagging indicator that has not yet accounted for the recent decrease in fellowship applicants. These findings refute prior estimates for a surplus in Pediatric Anesthesia supply in the USA and have significant implications for the future. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Background: The COVID‐19 pandemic created a situation with an urgent need to produce a virtual system for the 2019–2020 pediatric anesthesiology fellowship cycle. With fellowship interviews beginning in April 2020, there was minimal time for programs to adapt. Each program rapidly developed its own platform, expectations, materials, and process for interviews—all while under the stress of managing the unfolding patient care, financial, and leadership crises of the unfolding pandemic. Aims: The aim of this survey‐based study was to help identify changes compared with previous traditional cycles, obstacles encountered, and program director attitudes toward this, and possible future, virtual application cycles. We separately report the results of an applicant‐based survey about the 2020 virtual interview cycle. Methods: A 50‐question survey was developed utilizing Qualtrics. An anonymous survey link was sent to all pediatric anesthesiology program directors with an invitation for one program leader (either the program director or assistant/associate program director but not both) from each program to complete the voluntary survey. Result: Thirty respondents completed the survey, for a response rate of 50% based on the 60 ACGME‐approved pediatric anesthesiology fellowships. Compared to previous traditional cycles, almost half of respondents (14/29, 48.3%) reported no increase in the number of applications received, and a majority of respondents (16/29, 55.2%) reported that they offered the same number of interview spots for the year. The virtual interview process appears to have gone smoothly, as a majority of programs reported they never or rarely had technical problems across a number of different domains. Importantly, the majority of respondents were either somewhat satisfied or extremely satisfied (21/28, 75%) with the overall virtual interview process. Given the choice of preferred interview format going forward, half of the respondents (14/28) would offer a combination of traditional and virtual interviews. Conclusions: These results demonstrate that virtual interviews are a viable alternative to traditional interviews and can be completed without many technological complications. PDs were overall satisfied with virtual interviews, despite not having appropriate time to plan and coordinate, and would be interested in continuing this option into the future. There are areas where improvements can be made and with appropriate planning could look to mitigate some of the areas where virtual interviews fall short of traditional interviews. In combination with our previously published survey of applicants (Paediatr Anaesth. 2021;31(9):968–976), these data form a more complete picture of virtual interview best practices going forward. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]