The pediatric surgery match from the applicant perspective.

BACKGROUND: Previous studies have examined characteristics critical to make a successful applicant in the pediatric surgery match. No previous study has focused on what applicants consider important as they interview pediatric surgery training programs. STUDY DESIGN: Successfully matched applicants to our training program from 2018 to 2020 were identified and a 49-question survey sent electronically. In addition to a descriptive analysis of responses, comparisons between those who matched into one of their top three programs and those who matched outside of their top three programs were made. A Likert scale was used and data are reported as mean (95% confidence intervals). RESULTS: One hundred and thirty individuals were surveyed. Sixty-three (48%) responded. The most important characteristics identified were total index case volume 1.94 (1.87, 2.00), interactions with faculty on the interview day 1.84 (1.74, 1.94), neonatal case volume 1.75 (1.61, 1.88) and degree of autonomy 1.63 (1.50, 1.77). Respondents also placed a high importance on the in-person interview experience 1.63 (1.49, 1.77). The least important training program characteristics were quantity of vacation time -0.24 (-0.52, 0.05), opportunity to participate in medical mission trips -0.25 (-0.54, 0.06), paid accommodation at the interview -0.29 (-0.57, 0.00), and access to a simulation laboratory -0.51 (-0.78, -0.24). CONCLUSION: Clinical volume, neonatal volume, faulty interactions and the experience on the interview day are the most important characteristics to applicants. There were few, if any, characteristics applicants felt were truly unimportant as they weighed their rank lists. Applicants also placed a high level of importance on an in-person interview LEVEL OF EVIDENCE: Level IV.

Filling the gap: Objective data to guide pediatric surgery applicants who do not match on the first attempt.

PURPOSE: Acquiring a pediatric surgery fellowship is an arduous process, with less than half of applicants matching each year. For those who fail to match initially but remain steadfast in their goal to become a pediatric surgeon, choosing a valuable postresidency path can be challenging. Furthermore, objective data to evaluate the utility of pediatric surgical subspecialty fellowships (PSSF) are lacking. METHODS: PSSF training programs were identified on the APSA website. Names and contact information of PSSF graduates between 2014 and 2018 were obtained from individual training programs. Each graduated fellow was then contacted to participate in a voluntary 14-question survey. RESULTS: Names of 47 graduated fellows were obtained from programs listed on the APSA website. Among them, 30 (64%) ultimately matriculated into a pediatric surgery fellowship, 11 (37%) of whom matched at the same institution they completed their PSSF. The type of PSSF was not predictive of matriculation into a pediatric surgical fellowship (p = 0.43). Thirty-two (68%) of the 47 study participants completed a satisfaction survey. While all but two graduates found their fellowships to be at least satisfactory, those who matched were more likely to recommend their PSSF compared to those who did not (100% vs 67%, respectively, p = 0.02). Within the cohort of fellows who did not ultimately match into pediatric surgery (n = 17) and completed a survey (n = 9), all who completed a critical care fellowship (4/4) currently use/or plan to use the skills obtained during their PSSF while only two of five (40%) completing other PSSFs use them. CONCLUSION: The matriculation rate from a PSSF into a pediatric surgery fellowship was 64% with no significant difference among subspecialties. Of fellows who did not match, those completing a critical care PSSF were more likely to use their fellowship training than those completing a different PSSF. TYPE OF STUDY: Clinical research paper. LEVEL OF EVIDENCE: III.

A Vascular Anastomosis Simulation Can Provide a Safe and Effective Environment for Resident Skills Development.

OBJECTIVE: Vascular anastomoses are complex surgical procedures, performed in time-sensitive circumstances, making intraoperative teaching more challenging. We sought to evaluate whether a vascular anastomosis simulation was effective in developing resident skills. DESIGN, SETTING, PARTICIPANTS: General surgery residents participated in a vascular anastomosis simulation for 1 to 2hours during their transplant rotation. An attending transplant surgeon at the University of Colorado guided the resident through end-to-end and end-to-side anastomoses using bovine carotid artery (Artegraft). The residents completed a presimulation and postsimulation survey which quantitated their confidence. They also completed the MiSSES scale, which assessed the validity of the simulation. RESULTS: Twenty residents participated in the simulation and completed the surveys. The residents reported increased understanding in how to set up an end-to-end anastomosis and an end-to-side anastomosis (p = 0.001 and p = 0.009, respectively). They reported increased ability to suture, forehand and backhand with a Castro-Viejo needle driver (both p < 0.001). The residents reported increased ability to manipulate the needle (p = 0.006), and increased ability to manipulate tissue without causing trauma (p = 0.021). They reported increased confidence in tying a surgical knot with 6-0 Prolene and in operating while wearing loupes (p = 0.002, and p < 0.001, respectively). Overall, the residents reported increased confidence when asked to perform part of a vascular anastomosis in the operating room (p < 0.001). Seventeen residents completed the MiSSES scale with median scores of "somewhat agree" to "strongly agree" on all domains of the scale. CONCLUSIONS: The use of a simple, inexpensive vascular anastomosis simulation is an effective and safe environment to improve residents' surgical skills and the residents felt that the simulation was valid.

Examination of Nondesignated Preliminary Surgery Residents Recruited Since the Inception of Supplementary Offer and Acceptance Program: Lessons Learned From a Large Academic Program.

PURPOSE: The majority of surgery programs roster non-designated preliminary (NDP) residents. We and others have reported on the success of NDP resident mentoring with regard to categorical position placement. Lacking is a focus on the candidates themselves and differences based on initial career of choice. METHODS: NDP residents' files since the institution of SOAP were reviewed for demographics, initial career choice, financial burden, region of medical school of origin, application and interview history, and pre-screen interview candidate score (high score of 22 - data includes USMLE scores, major clerkship grades, and AOA) used for categorical recruitment. RESULTS: From 2012-16 79 NDP residents have been recruited at UCDenver (82% via SOAP). Median age was 28 years, majority were single (73%), and male (82%). Thirty percent belonged to an under-represented minority group. Mean debt was $156,000 but 20% owe over $250,000. 90% attended US medical schools with 65% from the NRMP "South" region. 86% were recruited as fourth year students. NDPs were categorized as failing to match in general surgery (38%), surgical subspecialties (47%), or other (15%). NDPs applied to median of 68 programs (range 7-200) and granted a median of 8 interviews (range 0-24). NDPs had a mean pre-screening interview score of 13 out of 22 and only 9% would have met the standard threshold to obtain a categorical surgery interview. There were no differences in pre-screening scores in the three groups. 95% NDPs (excluding present year) successfully completed their R1 year (three resigned - one obtained a general surgery spot mid-year and two after matching in non-general surgery fields). 68% NDPs placed in categorical positions after the R1 year. The placement was better for the surgical subspecialty group compared to the other two. CONCLUSIONS: The bias is that due to a more competitive applicant pool recruiting NDPs from surgical subspecialties would be optimal. However, those unmatched surgical subspecialty candidates are no better academically than the unmatched general surgery group, often have career interests that do not always align with scheduled rotations, and may not feel compelled to complete the year if they match. They place minimally better when accounting for those unmatched general surgery NDP R1s continuing as NDP R2s. Ultimately the success in a non-designated preliminary R1 surgery program is alignment of clinical educational opportunities with the needs of the trainee.