ABSTRACT
BACKGROUND: Owing to COVID-19, arthroplasty fellowship programs will be required to interview virtually for the current application cycle. Unrelated to COVID-19, our arthroplasty fellowship offered the 2019-2020 interviewees the option of an in-person or virtual interview. The purpose of the present study is to compare interviewee perceptions regarding in-person vs virtual interview formats from that application cycle at a single institution. METHODS: A 17-question survey was sent to all 26 interviewees (13 in-person and 13 virtual) shortly after the rank-list submission deadline. Interviewees were asked to what extent they agreed or disagreed with several statements, ranging from whether the interview was enjoyable to whether interviewees felt they were being adequately evaluated. In this Likert scale rating system, "strongly agree" was given 5 points (more positive outlook), and "strongly disagree" was given 1 point (more negative outlook). Chi-square analyses were performed. RESULTS: Seventeen interviewees (8 in-person and 9 virtual) returned questionnaires (response rate: 65%). Both in-person and virtual interview ratings were similar when averaged across all statements (4.5 vs 4.4, P = .67). In-person and virtual ratings were also similar for each individual statement (all P > .05). On average, interviewees spent $557/in-person interview. Fifteen (88%) said virtual interviews were more convenient, and 14 (94%) said they were more cost-effective. CONCLUSION: At a single institution, perceptions on interview format, as quantified through Likert scale ratings, were similar between in-person and virtual groups. The vast majority also viewed virtual interviews as more convenient and cost-efficient. These findings have immediate implications for future fellowship application cycles.