The Digital Footprint of Academic Plastic Surgeons.

INTRODUCTION: The digital age and global pandemic have transformed the way patients select their plastic surgeon. However, as more patients turn to online resources, there is little information on the digital presence of academic plastic surgeons. METHODS: We identified all academic faculty from integrated and independent plastic surgery residency programs. Using a Google-based custom search, the top 10 search results for each surgeon were extracted and categorized as surgeon noncontrolled (eg, physician rating websites) or controlled (eg, social media, institutional, and research profiles). RESULTS: Eight hundred four academic plastic surgeons were included. Most search results were surgeon-noncontrolled sites (57%, n = 4547). Being male (odds ratio [OR], 0.60, P = 0.0020) and holding a higher academic rank (OR = 0.61, P < 0.0001) significantly decreased the prevalence of physician rating websites, whereas career length was significantly associated with a greater number of rating websites (OR = 1.04, P < 0.0001). Surgeon-controlled websites were significantly influenced by academic rank and years in practice; higher academic rank was associated with more social media platforms (OR = 1.42, P = 0.0008), institutional webpages (OR = 1.57, P < 0.0001), and research profiles (OR = 1.62, P = 0.0008). Conversely, longer career duration was a predictor for fewer social media platforms (OR = 0.95, P < 0.0001) and institutional webpages (OR = 0.95, P < 0.0001). CONCLUSIONS: Academic plastic surgeons do not hold control of the majority of their search results. However, digitally savvy plastic surgeons can focus attention by building on certain areas to optimize their digital footprint. This study can serve as a guide for academic plastic surgeons wishing to control their online presence.

Insurance Coverage of Pediatric Bariatric Surgery: a Cross-Sectional Analysis of the USA.

PURPOSE: Pediatric bariatric surgery is increasingly recognized as a safe and effective option for the management of obesity and obesity-related conditions. However, insurance coverage is a key barrier to accessing these procedures. Criteria are variable and often not evidence-based. In an effort to characterize common patterns in insurance coverage, we report coverage criteria for adolescents relative to adults. MATERIALS AND METHODS: We surveyed medical policies of the 50 highest market share health insurance providers in the USA. Private insurer coverage criteria included age, Tanner staging, skeletal maturity, body mass index, procedures covered, medical weight management requirements, co-morbidities, and multidisciplinary team criteria. These were then compared to the American Society for Metabolic and Bariatric Surgery (ASMBS) guidelines. RESULTS: Two thirds (n = 33, 66%) of companies provided inclusion criteria for adolescents. All policies covered RYGB (n = 33), most covered sleeve gastrectomy (n = 32, 97.0%). Obstructive sleep apnea (OSA) (n = 32, 97%), hypertension (HTN) (n = 27, 81.8%), and gastroesophageal reflux disease (GERD) (n = 11, 33.3%) were the three most commonly cited co-morbidities used as inclusion criteria. Tanner staging or skeletal maturity were most commonly used (n = 10, 30.3%). Similarly, twenty (60.6%) insurers required medical weight management programs. Multi-disciplinary teams were required by 81.8% of adolescent policies (n = 27) as described by the ASMBS. Seventeen (51.5%) policies defined providers for these teams, and 10 (30.3%) provided other defined criteria. CONCLUSION: Contrary to ASMBS guidelines, companies commonly require Tanner staging and/or skeletal maturity criteria as well as participation in medical weight management programs. Also, multi-disciplinary team are frequently required but not well defined.

Post-Abdominal Transplant Hernia: Can We Predict Size and Onset?

INTRODUCTION: Abdominal organ transplant is a life-saving treatment. However, the resultant weakening of abdominal muscles leaves patients susceptible to incisional hernia. Obesity, smoking, and diabetes mellitus are common risk factors for post-transplant hernia. However, the literature is void on the impact these risk factors have on timing and size of hernia. METHODS: We performed a retrospective review of all post-abdominal transplant patients who underwent hernia repair in 2010-2017 at a single institution. Primary outcomes were hernia size and time from transplant to hernia repair. RESULTS: We identified 31 patients. The majority of patients were female (15 male, 16 female), and the average patient was 56 ± 8.7 years old and obese (body mass index 30.6). Smoking (26.7%, n = 8) and diabetes mellitus (51.6%, n = 16) were prevalent. Transplant types represented were renal (n = 24), simultaneous pancreas-kidney (n = 5), liver (n = 1), and liver with subsequent kidney (n = 1). The median size of hernia was 100.0 cm2 (interquartile range [IQR]: 78.5-234.0), and median time to hernia repair was 53.0 months (IQR: 12.5-110.0). Risk factors (obesity, smoking, and diabetes) did not influence hernia size, nor alter time to hernia repair. CONCLUSION: Obesity, smoking, and diabetes mellitus are not prognostic of size or onset of post-transplant incisional hernia. Large cohort studies are needed to determine predictive factors of size and onset of hernia.

Trends in the research profile of matched independent plastic surgery fellows.

ABSTRACT: The independent plastic surgery pathway recruits candidates with 5 years of surgical training who are typically more advanced in research than their integrated counterparts. Research productivity helps to discriminate between applicants. However, no studies exist detailing the academic attributes of matched independent plastic surgery candidates.We performed a cohort study of 161 independent plastic surgery fellows from accredited residency programs from the 2015 to 2017 application cycles. We performed a bibliometric analysis utilizing Scopus, PubMed, and Google Scholar to identify research output measures at the time of application.The cohort was predominantly men (66%) with a median of 3 articles and a H-index of 1 at the time of application. Interestingly, 16% of successful candidates had no published articles at the time of application, and this did not change significantly over time (P = .0740). Although the H-index remained stable (R 0.13, P = .1095), the number of published journal articles per candidate significantly decreased over 3 consecutive application cycles (R -0.16, P = .0484). Analysis of article types demonstrated a significant increase in basic science articles (R 0.18, P = .0366) and a concurrent decrease in editorial-type publications (R = -0.18, P = .0374).Despite the decline in publication volume of matched independent plastic surgery fellows, the quality of their research portfolio has remained constant. Matched applicants appear to be shifting focus from faster-to-publish articles to longer but higher impact projects. In selecting a training route, applicants must weigh the highly competitive integrated path against the dwindling number of independent positions.

Follow the money: Investigating gender disparity in industry payments among senior academics and leaders in plastic surgery.

INTRODUCTION: Differences in academic qualifications are cited as the reason behind the documented gender gap in industry sponsorship to academic plastic surgeons. Gendered imbalances in academic metrics narrow among senior academic plastic surgeons. However, it is unknown whether this gender parity translates to industry payments. METHODS: We conducted a cross-sectional analysis of industry payments disbursed to plastic surgeons in 2018. Inclusion criteria encompassed (i) faculty with the rank of professor or a departmental leadership position. Exclusion criteria included faculty (i) who belonged to a speciality besides plastic surgery; (ii) whose gender could not be determined; or (iii) whose name could not be located on the Open Payment Database. Faculty and title were identified using departmental listings of ACGME plastic surgery residency programs. We extracted industry payment data through the Open Payment Database. We also collected details on H-index and time in practice. Statistical analysis included odds ratios (OR) and Pearson's correlation coefficient (R). RESULTS: We identified 316 senior academic plastic surgeons. The cohort was predominately male (88%) and 91% held a leadership role. Among departmental leaders, women were more likely to be an assistant professor (OR 3.9, p = 0.0003) and heads of subdivision (OR 2.1, p = 0.0382) than men. Industry payments were distributed equally to male and female senior plastic surgeons except for speakerships where women received smaller amounts compared to their male counterparts (median payments of $3,675 vs $7,134 for women and men respectively, p<0.0001). Career length and H-index were positively associated with dollar value of total industry payments (R = 0.17, p = 0.0291, and R = 0.14, p = 0.0405, respectively). CONCLUSION: Disparity in industry funding narrows at senior levels in academic plastic surgery. At higher academic levels, industry sponsorship may preferentially fund individuals based on academic productivity and career length. Increased transparency in selection criteria for speakerships is warranted.

Integrated Plastic Surgery Match: Trends in Research Productivity of Successful Candidates.

BACKGROUND: Plastic surgery continues to be one of the most competitive specialties in the residency match. Research productivity is a key component of the selection process. Nevertheless, potential applicants have a poor understanding of the strength of their research credentials in comparison to other applicants. METHODS: The authors identified successful applicants from the 2012 to 2017 integrated plastic surgery residency application cycles. The authors performed a bibliometric analysis of these residents using Scopus, PubMed, and Google Scholar to identify published articles at the time of application. The authors then calculated the h-index of each applicant at the time of application. RESULTS: The authors included 829 integrated residents. The median h-index was 0 (interquartile range, 0 to 3) and the median number of publications was 2 (interquartile range, 0 to 5) for all applicants. The proportion of applicants with at least one publication at the point of application increased significantly over time (60 percent in 2012 versus 76 percent in 2017; p = 0.0072). In addition, the number of publications per applicant increased over time (one in 2012 versus two in 2017; p = 0.0005), as did h-index (0 in 2012 versus 1 in 2017; p = 0.0015). Strikingly, the number and percentage of review articles among applicants increased significantly over this time frame (9 percent versus 14 percent; p = 0.0299). CONCLUSIONS: The increasing level of academic productivity among applicants may reflect the increasing competitiveness of the integrated plastic surgery residency application process. As the pressure to compete for a training position increases, students may seek faster-to-publish articles to gain an edge.

A Review of Insurance Coverage of Gender-Affirming Genital Surgery.

BACKGROUND: Despite the multiple benefits of gender-affirming surgery for treatment of gender dysphoria, research shows that barriers to care still exist. Third-party payers play a pivotal role in enabling access to transition-related care. The authors assessed insurance coverage of genital reconstructive ("bottom") surgery and evaluated the differences between policy criteria and international standards of care. METHODS: A cross-sectional analysis of insurance policies for coverage of bottom surgery was conducted. Insurance companies were selected based on their state enrollment data and market share. A Web-based search and telephone interviews were performed to identify the policies and coverage status. Medical necessity criteria were abstracted from publicly available policies. RESULTS: Fifty-seven insurers met inclusion criteria. Almost one in 10 providers did not hold a favorable policy for bottom surgery. Of the 52 insurers who provided coverage, 17 percent held criteria that matched international recommendations. No single criterion was universally required by insurers. Minimum age and definition of gender dysphoria were the requirements with most variation across policies. Almost one in five insurers used proof of legal name change as a coverage requirement. Ten percent would provide coverage for fertility preservation, while 17 percent would cover reversal of the procedure. CONCLUSIONS: Despite the medical necessity, legislative mandates, and economic benefits, global provision of gender-affirming genital surgery is not in place. Furthermore, there is variable adherence to international standards of care. Use of surplus criteria, such as legal name change, may act as an additional barrier to care even when insurance coverage is provided.

Gender Surgery Beyond Chest and Genitals: Current Insurance Landscape.

BACKGROUND: Plastic surgery plays an essential role in the treatment of gender dysphoria. International standards of care currently consider genital and chest surgeries to be medically necessary. Ancillary procedures such as facial surgery, chondrolaryngoplasty, hair restoration/removal, and body contouring are considered cosmetic surgeries except in individual circumstances. OBJECTIVE: The authors sought to assess the frequency of coverage provision for ancillary transition-related surgeries through a cross-sectional analysis of US insurance policies. METHODS: The authors selected insurance companies based on state enrollment data and market share. Policies were identified through web-based search and telephone interviews. A list of eligible procedures was compiled and grouped into 5 categories: body masculinization, body feminization, facial procedures, hair restoration/removal, and chondrolaryngoplasty. Medical necessity criteria from publicly accessible policies were then abstracted. RESULTS: Sixty-one insurance companies held an established policy. One-third of these policies offered favorable coverage for at least 1 ancillary procedure. Chondrolaryngoplasty was the most covered category (26%, n = 16), whereas body masculinization was the least covered (8%, n = 5). Almost two-thirds of the companies with favorable policies listed coverage criteria. We identified 4 recurring requirements: age, hormone therapy, continuous living in a congruent gender role, and referral from a mental health professional. CONCLUSIONS: There is a low prevalence of US insurance coverage for ancillary gender surgeries and wide variability in coverage criteria. Reevaluation of ancillary transition-related procedures from cosmetic to medically necessary based on clinical judgement or establishment of defined coverage criteria may augment coverage and better address the needs of transgender patients.

Health Insurance Coverage of Gender-Affirming Top Surgery in the United States.

BACKGROUND: Despite the medical necessity, legislative mandates, and economic benefits of gender-affirming surgery, access to treatment remains limited. The World Professional Association for Transgender Health (WPATH) has proposed guidelines for transition-related surgery in conjunction with criteria to delineate medical necessity. The authors assessed insurance coverage of "top" gender-affirming surgery and evaluated the differences between insurance policy criteria and WPATH recommendations. METHODS: The authors conducted a cross-sectional analysis of insurance policies for coverage of top gender-affirming surgery. Insurance companies were selected based on their state enrollment data and market share. A Web-based search and individual telephone interviews were conducted to identify the policy. Medical necessity criteria were abstracted from publicly available policies. RESULTS: Of the 57 insurers evaluated, bilateral mastectomy (transmasculine) was covered by significantly more insurers than breast augmentation (transfeminine) (96 percent versus 68 percent; p < 0.0001). Only 4 percent of companies used WPATH-consistent criteria. No criterion was universally required by insurers. Additional prerequisites for coverage that extended beyond WPATH guidelines for top surgery were continuous living in congruent gender role, two referring mental health professionals, and hormone therapy before surgery. Hormone therapy was required in a significantly higher proportion of transfeminine policies compared with transmasculine policies (90 percent versus 21 percent; p < 0.0001). CONCLUSIONS: In addition to the marked intercompany variation in criteria for insurance coverage that often deviated from WPATH recommendations, there are health care insurers who categorically deny access to top gender-affirming surgery. A greater evidence base is needed to provide further support for the medical necessity criteria in current use.