Factors affecting scientific productivity of German oral-maxillofacial surgery training centers: a retrospective cohort study

Does Training Background Influence Outcomes after Coronal Scalp Incision for Treating Craniomaxillofacial Injuries?: A German Pilot Study

Objectives

To examine outcomes of the coronal scalp approach to craniomaxillofacial (CMF) fractures performed by oral-maxillofacial or craniofacial plastic surgery residents (OMFS/CFPS-Rs) vs. trauma surgery residents (TS-Rs), and to determine differences in treatment outcomes between both operator groups.

Methods

This retrospective cohort study enrolled a sample of CMF fracture adult patients treated via the coronal approach in a German level one trauma center during a two-year interval. The predictor variable was training background (OMFS/CFPS-Rs vs. TS-Rs; each n = 5). All trainees must assist in ≥ two surgeries before self-performance. The main outcomes were length of hospital stay (LHS) and coronal flap-related complications (CFRCs). Appropriate statistics were computed at α = 95%.

Results

Of the 97 patients identified during the study period; 71 of whom (19.7% females; mean age, 40.2 ± 15.2 years; 46.5% operated by TS-Rs; 38% combined upper and midfacial fractures) met the inclusion criteria. Operative time, LHS, CFRCs, readmission rates, and post-discharge emergency room visits were not significantly different between the trainee groups. 60% of CFRCs were visible/unfavorable or hypertrophic scar with/without alopecia. The number needed to treat of short LHS was 44 (95% confidence interval [CI], 3.9 to 4.8), the number needed to harm of CFRCs was 14 (95% CI, 3.6 to 7.4), i.e., the likelihood to be helped or harmed was 0.32.

Conclusions

Coronal flap raising by OMFS/CFPS-Rs does not appear beneficial over that by TS-Rs in terms of LHS and CFRCs evaluated until postoperative month six. Trainees from any surgical specialties could gain partial independence from skilled surgeons in CMF trauma “sub-steps” and favorable clinical outcomes. Further studies in a larger sample cohort are required to confirm this pilot data.

The Influence of Personal and Organizational Factors on Researchers’ Attitudes towards Sustainable Research Productivity in Saudi Universities

Purpose: This paper studies organisational and personal factors affecting the behaviour of academic staff in Saudi universities. It seeks to investigate the beliefs of academic staff regarding the use of ICT and other factors to enhance the productivity of their scientific research. Also, this study aims to improve the sustainability of publication in Saudi universities. ICT includes using the library system for accessing research repository databases such as Science Direct, Web of Science, Scopus, etc. and other factors. The authors also developed the Importance Performance Map Analysis (IPMA) for these factors in order to provide guidelines for Saudi universities to build university systems to manage and measure the research productivity of academic staff. In summary, this research identifies factors critical to enhancing research productivity in Saudi universities. This will help to improve the sustainability of publication in Saudi universities. By enhancing the sustainability of publication, the reputation of Saudi universities will be improved and the reputation of academic staff in Saudi universities. As well the sustainability of publication will assist the promote of Saudi academic staff. Approach: This paper analysed 200 papers related to the enhancement of research productivity from various research databases such as Science Direct, IEEE and Scopus. We included the usage of ICT in research analysis, university policy, university research funding and the number of publications published by academic staff. The authors used different databases and systematic literature reviews (SLR) to find the most important factors which could improve research productivity in universities. An online questionnaire answered by 375 academic staff from four developing Saudi universities that are Taif University, Taibah University, Jeddah University, Hail University—was used to determine the relationship between information technology factors and research performance together with other factors such as university policy, international collaboration, research funding and job satisfaction. In this study, we used SmartPLS v3 to analyse the results from the questionnaires. Findings: The results show that personal factors such as personal use of ICT and organisational factors such as job satisfaction, university policy, IT funding, international collaboration and the level of ICT use in the university have positive effects on scientific research productivity among academic staff at Saudi universities. Those results are based on the beliefs of academic staff regarding the use of information technology for research purposes and other factors. This paper finds that university policy recorded an importance of 0.523, job satisfaction was 0.224, international collaboration was 0.103, personal use of ICT was 0.102, the level of using ICT in the university was 0.074 and the importance of ICT funding was –0.156. Also, the results from SmartPLS show that university policy has a 0.215 effect size on research performance, job satisfaction has a 0.045 effect size on research performance, international collaboration has a 0.009 effect size on research performance, personal use of ICT has a 0.011 effect size on research performance, a university’s use of ICT has a 0.006 effect size on research performance and ICT funding has a 0.014 effect size on the research performance of academic staff in Saudi universities. These results will help to improve the sustainability of publication in Saudi universities in order to enhance the universities’ rankings and the reputation of academic staff. Sustainability is a target for any organization, both for profit-making entities or non-profit organizations such as universities. This means that Saudi universities should enhance the sustainability of their publication. In order to achieves the goals of higher education institutions. Originality: No study has investigated the factors affecting the performance of academic staff in Arab countries, especially in Saudi universities. Therefore, the originality of this study resides in being the first study to investigate the impact of researchers’ attitudes to enhancing the research productivity performance of researchers in Saudi universities. Also, it is one of the few studies which discusses sustainability in Saudi universities.

Factors Affecting Research Productivity of Burn Surgeons: Results from a Survey of American Burn Association Members

While previous studies have examined factors that affect research productivity for surgeons in general, few studies address research productivity specifically of burn specialists. This study aimed to identify factors that promote and impede research participation and productivity of burn surgeons and help elucidate what changes can be made by departments/divisions to improve the research productivity. A 44-question anonymous research survey tool was administered to burn surgeons who are members of the American Burn Association (ABA). The questions analyzed factors such as demographics, career accomplishments, current institution type, educational background, research background, barriers to conducting research, and current research productivity. Chi-square tests were used to analyze significance at P < .05. Most respondents reported not having any protected research time (71.4%) or resources provided by their institution (84.5%). A majority believed increasing regulatory policies/institutional review board restrictions have negatively impacted productivity (65.1%). Factors associated with positive impact on research productivity included having a mentor, conducting research prior to completing residency, and provision of research resources from the institution such as statistical support, start-up funds, grant writing support, and laboratory space. Age and sex had no statistical impact on research productivity. Burn surgeons are more likely to publish research and to receive grants when they have mentors, a history of research prior to completion of residency, and research resources from their institution. Barriers to research productivity include lack of institutional support, lack of protected research time, and increased regulatory policy.

Which Factors Affect Citation Rates in the Oral and Maxillofacial Surgery Literature?

PURPOSE

Citation rate is one of several tools to measure academic productivity. The purposes of this study were to estimate and identify factors associated with citation rates in the oral and maxillofacial surgery (OMS) literature.

MATERIALS AND METHODS

This was a retrospective longitudinal study of publications in the Journal of Oral and Maxillofacial Surgery (JOMS), International Journal of Oral and Maxillofacial Surgery (IJOMS), and Oral Surgery, Oral Medicine, Oral Pathology, and Oral Radiology (OOOO) from January through December 2012. The predictor variables were author- and article-specific factors. The outcome variable was the citation rate, defined as the total number of citations for each article over a 4-year period. Descriptive, bivariate, and multiple regression statistics were computed.

RESULTS

The authors identified 993 articles published during 2012. The mean number of citations at 4 years after publication was 5.6 ± 5.3 (median, 4). In bivariate analyses, several author- and article-specific factors were associated with citation rates. In a multiple regression model adjusting for potential confounders and effect modifiers, first author H-index, number of authors, journal, OMS focus area, and Oxford level of evidence were significantly associated with citation rate (P ≤ .002).

CONCLUSION

The authors identified 5 factors associated with citation rates in the OMS literature. These factors should be considered in context when evaluating citation-based metrics for OMS. Studies that focus on core OMS procedures (eg, dentoalveolar surgery, dental implant surgery), are published in specialty-specific journals (eg, JOMS or IJOMS), and have higher levels of evidence are more likely to be cited.