Search

Orthopaedic surgery residency applicants submit more applications than ever before. While this issue is multifactorial, increased information and transparency regarding residency programs are important. This study aimed to evaluate the completeness and variability of the information that is currently available regarding orthopaedic residency programs on two publicly available databases, the Fellowship and Residency Electronic Interactive Database (FREIDA) and the newly created Orthopaedic Residency Information Network (ORIN).Orthopaedic surgery residency programs were identified and evaluated using FREIDA and ORIN on September 11, 2021. Information on the FRIEDA and ORIN databases were evaluated in the following categories: program overview, the residency application, and education information. Univariate statistical analysis was performed on the data.Of the 194 programs that participated in the FREIDA database, over 48% failed to include basic program information including resident demographics and key application information including USMLE Step requirements. Of the 141 programs that participated in the ORIN database, most the programs did not report USMLE Step median and cutoff scores and clerkship grades. Depending on the database and type of information, factors including the program's National Institutes of Health funding, reputation, size, and type were associated with the availability of information.This study showed that while most orthopaedic surgery residency programs participate in FREIDA and ORIN, the information included was highly variable and incomplete for nearly all programs. Improving the completeness of information in these databases has the potential to allow students to make more informed application decisions.

Background Despite interest among North American orthopaedic residents to pursue rotations in resource-limited settings, little is known regarding resident motivations and impact on host surgeons. Methods Surveys were distributed to North American orthopaedic surgeons and trainees who participated in international rotations during residency to assess motivations for participation and to orthopaedic surgeons at partnering low- and middle-income country (LMIC) institutions to assess impact of visiting trainees. Results Responses were received from 136 North American resident rotators and 51 LMIC host surgeons and trainees. North American respondents were motivated by a desire to increase surgical capacity at the LMIC while host surgeons reported a greater impact from learning from residents than on surgical capacity. Negative aspects reported by hosts included selfishness, lack of reciprocity, racial discrimination, competition for surgical experience, and resource burdens. Conclusions The motivations and impact of orthopaedic resident rotations in LMICs need to be aligned. Host perceptions and bidirectional educational exchange should be incorporated into partnership guidelines.