Search

Background. In the aftermath of COVID-19, the residency application process has largely remained in the virtual space, introducing a new challenge to prospective integrated plastic surgery residents. Many programs enhanced their online presence to address this challenge, but both programs and applicants are still limited to a virtual snapshot when determining "fit." An important influence of fit is the ability to racially, ethnically, and/or culturally identify with the program. The aims of this study are to: (1) better understand the online information that residency programs are making available to prospective applicants, (2) characterize the racial diversity of programs, and (3) investigate the effect of program leadership on racial diversity. Methods. A cross-sectional study of US integrated plastic surgery residency programs was performed in August 2022. Data on race were collected for residency program directors and resident cohorts and compared with self-reported data from the Association of American Medical Colleges (AAMC). Relationships between these groups were analyzed. Results. Racial data were collected on 82 program directors and their corresponding residency cohorts, representing a total of 1174 individuals. These data closely matched the AAMC data on race/ethnicity in plastic surgery programs. By race, the smallest percentage of resident groups are Black/African American (3.4%) and Hispanic (4.2%). Though not statistically significant, more residents of a given race are in programs with a director of the same race. Conclusions. Online information about residency programs and their cohorts is robust. The racial diversity of a residency cohort is positively associated with racial diversity of program directors. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Background: Post-residency fellowship training has become increasingly popular as a career option. Specifically, the subspecialty of aesthetic surgery has grown tremendously over the past two decades within several fields, including plastic and reconstructive surgery (PRS), otolaryngology, dermatology, and ophthalmology. However, the popularity of aesthetic specialization through fellowship remains unknown. The present study aims to analyze trends in aesthetic specialization across these specialties and compare its popularity to other fellowships., Methods: A retrospective review of data from the San Francisco Match, National Resident Matching Program, American Society for Dermatologic Surgery, and the Accreditation Council for Graduate Medical Education was performed. Data on graduating residents and applicants to fellowship were collected. ANOVA and t-tests were used to compare differences between groups., Results: Significant disparities were observed in applicants and matched applicants to aesthetic fellowships among the four residencies (p<0.001). Aesthetic fellowship was the most popular option after otolaryngology residency (12.5%-27% depending on the year) and second most popular choice after PRS (8%-17%) and dermatology (2%-5%). A comparison between PRS and otolaryngology demonstrated a significantly higher percent of the latter choosing aesthetic fellowship over time (p<0.001). However, no significant difference in applicants to aesthetic fellowship was found between dermatology and ophthalmology (t-test, p=0.060)., Conclusions: The number of applicants to aesthetic fellowship has increased over time across all eligible residencies with the more surgical heavy specialties (ENT and PRS) having the highest percent of applicants. Differences in aesthetic training between fields was also observed, which may reflect underlying variations in training and residency exposure., (Copyright © 2024 by the American Society of Plastic Surgeons.)

Introduction: Acellular dermal matrix (ADM) is pivotal in breast surgery, yet the statistical robustness of surgical outcomes remains underexplored. This study employs the fragility index (FI), reverse fragility index (rFI), and fragility quotient (FQ) to investigate the statistical fragility of ADM breast reconstruction outcomes., Methods: Randomized controlled trials (RCTs) (2013-present) with dichotomous outcomes were sourced from PubMed, Embase, SCOPUS, Medline, and Cochrane databases. FI and rFI-event reversals needed to alter outcome significance-and FQ-standardized fragility across trials-were computed and reported as median (IQR). Subgroup analysis focused on intervention types., Results: Out of 33 studies screened, 19 RCTs comprising 204 outcomes were included, with a median FI of 4 (3 - 5) and FQ of 0.039 (0.029 - 0.070). Twenty-six outcomes achieved statistical significance, with a median FI of 3.5 (1 - 5) and FQ of 0.033 (0.010 - 0.073). The remaining 178 outcomes were nonsignificant, exhibiting a median FI of 4 (3 - 5) and FQ of 0.040 (0.030 - 0.070). Of the 204 outcomes, 18% had a number of patients lost to follow up equal to or surpassing the FI. By intervention type, the median FIs were similar in value but remained low., Conclusion: ADM-related breast reconstruction outcomes are statistically fragile, so reversal of a few outcomes or maintaining follow-up with patients may alter the significance of findings. Future researchers are thus recommended to report FI and FQ metrics with P-values to accurately portray reconstructive surgery outcomes., (Copyright © 2024 by the American Society of Plastic Surgeons.)

Introduction: The relationship between pursuing a research year (RY) and plastic surgery match outcomes is unclear. The present study investigated the association between a dedicated RY and the odds of matching into an integrated Plastic and Reconstructive Surgery (PRS) residency program., Methods: Electronic Residency Application Service applications to an integrated PRS residency program from 2017 to 2021 were evaluated. Match results were determined using online public sources. Students who had taken a RY were compared with those who had not (traditional). The relationship between pursuing a RY and matching was determined with logistic regression analyses., Results: In total, 974 applicants were included, of which 191 (20%) completed an RY. The RY group had significantly higher match rates (83% versus 74%, P = 0.008), more presentations (13 versus 5, P < 0.001), and more publications (11 versus 4, P < 0.001) than the traditional group. The RY group was 80% more likely to match than the traditional group (adjusted odds ratio [OR] = 1.8, P = 0.016). However, this benefit was eliminated after controlling for the number of publications. Subgroup analysis revealed that applicants who completed an RY had increased odds of matching into a top 20 PRS residency program (OR = 2.2, P < 0.001), with the strongest association observed among applicants with 15+ (OR = 2.6, P < 0.001) or 20+ publications (OR = 4.1, P < 0.001)., Conclusions: An RY is associated with 80% higher odds of matching and an increased number of publications. RYs seem to be most associated with benefits for applicants aiming to increase their publication numbers or to match into a top 20 residency program., (Copyright © 2024 Elsevier Inc. All rights reserved.)