What COVID Restrictions Have Taught Us About Visiting Subinternships.

BACKGROUND: Integrated plastic surgery applicants complete among the highest number of visiting audition rotations of any specialty. In the 2021 match, we observed that the elimination of audition rotations and in-person interviews drastically increased the number of applicants who matched at their home program. We sought to evaluate the effect of applicants participating in one selective visiting subinternship rotation on home program match rates. METHODS: Top 50 plastic surgery residency programs were identified by 2021 Doximity rankings. Publicly available, online plastic surgery match spreadsheets were used to collect available information including matched applicants' medical school, the institution at which they matched, whether they matched at their home institution, and whether they had previous communication with their matched program including research year or visiting subinternship completed. RESULTS: Fourteen percent of applicants matched at their home institution in 2022, comparable with recent prepandemic rates of 14.1% and 16.7%, versus 24.1% in 2021. The largest effect was observed among the top 25 programs. Separately, approximately 70% of applicants provided self-reported information on whether they completed a subinternship. Among the top 50 programs, 39.0% of applicants completed an audition rotation at the institution at which they eventually matched. CONCLUSIONS: The allowance of medical students to perform only one visiting subinternship in the 2022 match cycle normalized home match rates to the prepandemic baseline, possibly driven by a large proportion of students matching at their visiting rotation institution. Perhaps from both a program and applicant standpoint, 1 away rotation may provide sufficient exposure for eventual match success.

The Impact of Socioeconomic Factors on the 2022 Plastic Surgery Match.

BACKGROUND: In 2022, the plastic and reconstructive surgery (PRS) match faced unprecedented system-wide transitions that have redefined conventional measures of applicant success. This challenges the equitable assessment of student competitiveness and diversity in the field. METHODS: A survey of demography, application content, and 2022 match outcomes was distributed to applicants to a single PRS residency program. Comparative statistics and regression models were performed to assess the predictive value of factors in match success and quality. RESULTS: A total of 151 respondents (response rate 49.7%) were analyzed. Although step 1 and step 2 CK scores were significantly higher among matched applicants, neither examination predicted match success. Most respondents (52.3%) were women, although gender was also not significantly associated with match success. Underrepresented in medicine applicants made up 19.2% of responses and 16.7% of matches, and the plurality of respondents (22.5%) were raised with a household income ≥$300,000. Both Black race and household income ≤$100,000 were associated with lower odds of scoring above a 240 on either step 1 or step 2 CK (Black: OR, 0.03 and 0.06; P < 0.05 and P < 0.001; income: OR, 0.07-0.47 and 0.1 to 0.8, among income subgroups), receiving interview offers (OR, -9.4; P < 0.05; OR, -11.0 to -5.4), and matching into PRS (OR, 0.2; P < 0.05; OR, 0.2 to 0.5), compared with White and high-income applicants, respectively. CONCLUSIONS: Systemic inequities in the match process disadvantage underrepresented in medicine candidates and those from lower household incomes. As the residency match continues to evolve, programs must understand and mitigate the impacts of bias in various application components.

Coronavirus Disease 2019 and the Yale Response: A Semistructured Interview Study on Plastic Surgery Resident Education and Departmental Adaptation to the Lockdown.

BACKGROUND: Sooner-than-expected progression to statewide lockdown at the height of the coronavirus disease 2019 pandemic left minimal time for medical specialty boards, including The American Board of Plastic Surgery, to issue guidance for their respective programs. As a result, programs were tasked with developing creative alternatives to their standard resident curricula and department schedules. OBJECTIVE: To capture attending and resident experience of the coronavirus disease 2019 lockdown in narrative form and to understand what specific changes enacted to maintain adequate education should be considered for continuation after the pandemic's conclusion. METHODS: Qualitative, semistructured interviews of residents, fellows, and faculty of the Section of Plastic and Reconstructive Surgery during 2019 to 2020 academic year were conducted on the following topics: (1) general reflection on lockdown, (2) resident maintenance of daily logs, (3) multi-institutional collaborative lectures, (4) modified didactic curriculum, (5) virtual 3-dimensional craniofacial planning sessions, (6) maintenance of department camaraderie, and (7) effect on preparation to become a surgeon. RESULTS: Twenty interviews (response rate 77%) were conducted between October 2020 and February 2021. Of residents, 100% felt observing the craniofacial planning sessions was beneficial, with many explicitly noting it provided a unique perspective into the surgeon's thought process behind planned manipulations, to which they usually are not privy. Of residents, 100% felt confident at the time of the interview that the lockdown would have no lasting effects on their preparation to become a surgeon. CONCLUSIONS: Rapid changes enacted at Yale enabled resident training to advance, and documentation of the success of these changes can inform future curriculum design.

Mentorship is Critical: An Analysis of the 2022 Plastic Surgery Match.

BACKGROUND: As the second cycle impacted by COVID-19, the 2022 Plastic and Reconstructive Surgery (PRS) Match maintained virtual interviews while offering a modest lift of subinternship restrictions. The residency application process continues to evolve, with changes such as pass/fail United States Medical Licensing Examination Step 1 reporting prompting programs to reconsider metrics of applicant success. It is critical to address the impact of board scores, mentorship, and resource availability on a diverse applicant population in the PRS Match. METHODS: A survey was electronically administered to students applying to a single institutional PRS residency program. The survey inquired about demographics, application statistics, mentorship experience, and match outcomes. Logistic regressions were modeled to assess for odds of matching into plastic surgery. RESULTS: In total, 151 responses were analyzed, a 49.7% response rate. Most participants were female (52.3%), White (68.9%), and not Hispanic/Latino (84.8%). The largest percentage of respondents had a faculty mentor only from their home institution (55.0%) and a resident mentor from only their home institution (32.3%). Participants with a faculty mentor from both a home and outside institution had 7.4 times the odds of matching into PRS ( P = 0.02) than students with no faculty mentorship. Students with dual-institution resident mentorship had 18.5 times higher the odds of matching compared with students with no resident mentorship ( P < 0.001). CONCLUSIONS: Subjective metrics, rather than objective scores, had the most influence on successfully matching into plastic surgery. As the PRS Match continues to become increasingly competitive, it behooves programs to provide equitable access to resources such as mentorship.

COVID-19 Elective Surgery Shutdown and Operative Experience for Graduating Plastic Surgery Independent Residents.

INTRODUCTION: The initial wave of the COVID-19 pandemic led to a temporary shutdown of elective procedures. The purpose of this study is to evaluate how the elective surgery shutdown impacted case log numbers for graduating plastic surgery independent residents. METHODS: The Accreditation Council of Graduate Medical Education graduate self-reported case logs were retrospectively compiled for graduating independent track plastic surgery residents for the year before the pandemic (2019), 4 months into the pandemic (2020) and 16 months into the pandemic (2021). Procedures were grouped into resident review committee area and totals for each area were used for analysis. Average number of cases and standard deviations were compiled. Percent change was calculated comparing each year to the prepandemic baseline. Statistical significance was determined with Student t tests comparing average number of cases. Coefficients of variation were calculated to assess for changes in interprogram variation. Average case numbers were then compared with minimum case requirements necessary for graduation. RESULTS: The Accreditation Council of Graduate Medical Education graduation case log statistics were available for 238 independent residents. There were no statistically significant differences in average case number for graduating independent residents for total reconstructive breast, trunk, hand and upper extremity, or total reconstructive procedures between graduation years. The average case number of total lower extremity reconstruction increased from 2019 to 2020 (average = 83-97.4, P = 0.02). The average total number of breast aesthetic cases increased between all years (average = 92, 98, 114), with the average increase from 2019 to 2021 being statistically significant ( P = 0.02). Differences in head and neck aesthetic deformities and trunk and extremity deformities between years were not statistically significant. The average case number for all graduating plastic surgery independent residents exceeded the minimum case log requirements. CONCLUSIONS: The temporary hold on elective procedures during the pandemic decreased the opportunity for plastic surgery trainees to meet minimum case log requirements. Case log data for graduating plastic surgery independent residents demonstrate that despite the temporary suspension, the pandemic did not greatly impact the average resident case numbers.

Integrated Plastic Surgery Residency Applicant Perceptions of Virtual Interviews.

PURPOSE: The 2020-2021 interview cycle for integrated plastic surgery applicants was the first to be held virtually because of the COVID-19 pandemic. Here, we detail the largest study on integrated plastic surgery applicant perceptions after the virtual interview cycle. METHODS: A 35-question institutional review board-approved survey was distributed to medical students who had applied to the Johns Hopkins/University of Maryland or University of California San Diego integrated residency programs during the 2020-2021 interview cycle. Survey questions assessed the structure, strengths, and weaknesses of the exclusively virtual interview process. Survey administration and data collection were performed using the Qualtrics platform. RESULTS: Of 318 distributed surveys, 94 were completed. In addition, 91.5% of respondents preferred in-person interviews before the interview season, whereas 54.3% preferred in-person interviews afterward. Applicants who favored virtual interviews did not view being unable to physically meet with program staff as a detriment (P = .001) and felt they could effectively advocate for themselves (P = .002). Overall, the most cited strengths were the ability to complete more interviews (P = .01) and cost benefits (P = .02). Criticisms were directed at the impersonal nature of the exchange (86.2%), lack of physical tour (56.4%), and difficulties at self-advocacy (52.1%). CONCLUSION: Preference for virtual interviews increased from 7.5% to 34.0% after the virtual interview cycle. For several students, the ideal interview structure permits both in-person and virtual interviews to maximize flexibility. Augmenting with virtual city tours and one-on-one interviews may mitigate the impersonal nature of virtual interviews as perceived by some applicants.

Impact of the Virtual Format on Plastic Surgery Residency and Fellowship Interviews: A National Cross-Sectional Study.

BACKGROUND: The 2020 to 2021 residency and fellowship application cycles were profoundly affected by the introduction of virtual interviews. The authors investigated the impact the virtual format had on plastic surgery residency and fellowship interviews from the perspectives of program directors. METHODS: Surveys were sent to program directors of integrated plastic surgery residency and fellowship programs to ascertain their perspectives regarding the virtual format's impact on residency and fellowship interviews. Program directors were stratified into residency and fellowship cohorts, and comparative analysis was performed. RESULTS: Ninety-two program directors, 28 from integrated plastic surgery residency programs and 64 from fellowship programs, completed our survey (35 percent). Compared to in-person interviews, virtual interviews were reported to be more economical and time efficient by program directors of residency (100 percent and 46 percent, respectively) and fellowship programs (97 percent and 48 percent, respectively). Consequentially, 36 percent and 47 percent of residency and fellowship programs were able to interview more applicants, respectively. Program directors of residency and fellowship programs reported that virtual interviews hindered their ability to assess applicants' fit with the program (75 percent and 63 percent, respectively), personality and communication skills (75 percent and 64 percent, respectively), and commitment to the field, along with their ability to function as a trainee (57 percent and 50 percent, respectively). Overall, 71 percent of program directors of residency and 58 percent of program directors of fellowship programs preferred in-person interviews. The majority of residency (71 percent) and fellowship (56 percent) program directors intend to conduct both in-person and virtual interviews in future application cycles ( p = 0.12). CONCLUSIONS: Despite preferring in-person interviews, program directors intend to host both in-person and virtual interviews in future application cycles. It remains to be seen how virtual interviews will be used moving forward.

Plastic Surgery Training During Coronavirus Disease 2019 Pandemic: A Quantitative Study on Trainees' Wellness and Education.

PURPOSE: Coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) pandemic has had far reaching impacts on all aspects of the healthcare system, including plastic surgery training. Due to reduction in the number of elective surgery cases and need for social distancing, plastic surgery education has shifted from the operating room to the virtual learning environment. Although these changes have been qualitatively described, the authors present a quantitative analysis of plastic surgery training changes due to the COVID-19 pandemic. Our study has identified residents' greatest impediments and inquired about suggestions for further improvements. Our goal is to help residency programs through the COVID-19 pandemic era and contribute to future guidelines when residency education encounters additional unexpected changes. METHODS: An institutional review board approved anonymous survey using Qualtrics was forwarded on April 23, 2020 to US plastic surgery program directors to be distributed to plastic surgery residents and fellows. Questions centered on the impact of COVID-19 on residents' well-being, education and career plans results were collected for data analysis. Residents were given the option to be in a raffle to win a $50 amazon gift card. Completion of the survey was both anonymous and voluntary. RESULTS: A total of 69 trainees responded (52 integrated residents and 17 independent fellows) from 18 states. Fifty-one percent were male and 49% were female. Fifty-six percent of trainees plan to complete a fellowship program after graduation, 31% will join private practice. Nine percent of trainees reported changes in their postgraduation plans due to the pandemic, 67% were senior trainees. Of those whose goals were affected by COVID-19 pandemic, 56% opted to pursue additional fellowship training. They described reduced operative exposure and cancelations of elective surgeries (50%), the limited availability of private practice jobs (37.5%), and financial reasons (12.5%) for their decision. Twelve percent reported being concerned about not meeting the necessary requirements to finish their residency and graduate on time. Seventy-six percent of trainees expressed concerns about the health and safety of themselves, family and loved ones. Forty-nine percent of trainees reported increased levels of stress since the onset of the pandemic. Ninety-seven percent of trainees reported having reduction in their operative time during the COVID-19 pandemic. They utilized their nonoperative time for online education modules (84%), educational readings (82%), and research (80%). Plastic surgery trainees learned about national webinars through emails from professional society (83%), co-resident/fellow (77%), program director emails (74%), and social media (22%). Webinars attended were mostly through virtual platform modalities, among which Zoom and Webex were the most preferred. Less interactions with colleagues and faculty was the biggest barrier to adopting virtual conferences. Despite this, 72% agreed that having grand rounds, didactics and journal clubs online increased attendance. Additionally, 88% of respondents expressed interests in attending professional society sponsored virtual grand rounds in the future. CONCLUSIONS: Results from our survey demonstrated that the overwhelming majority of plastic surgery residents have had reductions in operative times and widespread curriculum changes during the COVID-19 pandemic. These recent changes have increased residents' stress levels and adversity affected their future career plans. Additionally, COVID-19 has heralded an increase in virtual conferences and learning modules. Plastic surgery trainees expressed a preference for virtual educational platforms and interest in continuing virtual didactics in the future. This may irreversibly change the landscape of future plastic surgery training.

The Effects of Website and Social Media Presence of Integrated Plastic Surgery Residency Programs on Prospective Applicants: An Analysis During the Coronavirus Disease 2019 Pandemic.

PURPOSE: Integrated plastic surgery residency programs have increased their social media presence to educate and recruit prospective residents. This study aims to understand the impact of integrated plastic surgery residency program social media on the 2020 to 2021 applicants' evaluation of prospective programs, particularly during the coronavirus disease 2019 pandemic. MATERIALS AND METHODS: An optional 20-item online survey was sent to integrated plastic surgery residency applicants applying to the authors' program. RESULTS: Surveys were sent to 300 integrated plastic surgery residency applicants with an average of 168 responses (56% response rate). Social media resources included official residency program website (87.1%), Instagram (70.2%), and Doximity (46.8%). The most frequently used resource by applicants was the official residency program website (43.9%); Instagram was the second most frequently used (40.2%) followed by Doximity (8.3%). Most respondents agreed that social media was an effective means to inform applicants (66.1%), and it positively impacted their perception of the program (64.8%). The cited benefits were helping the program exhibit its culture and comradery among residents, faculty, and staff (78.4%). Among applicants, 73.6% noted that it had a significant impact on their perceptions of programs. Most respondents truncated their planned plastic surgery subinternships, completing 1 instead of 3 planned subinternships because of coronavirus disease 2019 limitations. CONCLUSIONS: During the 2020 to 2021 plastic surgery application cycle, applicants used social media accounts of plastic surgery residency programs to inform and educate themselves about prospective programs. This study suggests that investing resources into a social media residency accounts is a meaningful pursuit for integrated plastic surgery programs and is an important aspect in today's recruitment.