Adult Reconstruction Fellowship Interviewee Perceptions of Virtual vs In-Person Interview Formats

The Experience of the Virtual Interview Process for Hand Fellowship Program Directors

Purpose

Due to the Coronavirus Disease-19 pandemic, the fellowship application process has transitioned from in-person interviews to virtual interviews. Although several studies have assessed the impact of Coronavirus Disease-19 on residency and fellowship interviews, fewer studies have investigated the program director's perspective. Therefore, the aim of this study was to assess the experience of virtual interviews on hand fellowship program directors and understand some of the important factors that may make an applicant more competitive.

Methods

A 21-question survey was conducted through Google Forms and distributed through a standardized email to hand fellowship program directors and coordinators. Questions used a 5-point Likert scale with the opportunity for respondents to answer some questions in a free-response format. Statistical analysis was conducted with significance assigned to P values < .05.

Results

Ninety-three surveys were distributed, of which 35 responses were obtained, corresponding to a 37.6% survey response rate. Program directors reported that they tended to place more emphasis on applicant's curriculum vitae, calls from colleagues, and applicants that they had previously met. In addition, program directors felt that applicants were able to accurately represent themselves through the virtual format. Finally, most program directors stated that they were highly likely to continue to offer virtual interviews.

Conclusions

With several parenting organizations and program directors affirming that they are comfortable with proceeding with virtual interviews, it is essential for hand fellowship applicants to understand what factors program directors may perceive as more important. It is possible that the virtual interview process may effectively achieve suitable matches between applicants and institutions.

Type of study/level of evidence

Decision analysis IIIb.

'Click, I Guess I'm Done': Applicants' and Assessors' Experiences Transitioning to a Virtual Multiple Mini Interview Format

Introduction

During the COVID-19 pandemic, medical schools were forced to suspend in-person interviews and transition to a virtual Multiple Mini Interview (vMMI) format. MMIs typically comprise multiple short assessments overseen by assessors, with the aim of measuring a wide range of non-cognitive competencies. The adaptation to vMMI required medical schools to make swift changes to their MMI structure and delivery. In this paper, we focus on two specific groups greatly impacted by the decision to transition to vMMIs: medical school applicants and MMI assessors.

Methods

We conducted an interpretive qualitative study to explore medical school applicants' and assessors' experiences transitioning to an asynchronous vMMI format. Ten assessors and five medical students from one Canadian medical school participated in semi-structured interviews. Data was analyzed using a thematic analysis framework.

Results

Both applicants and assessors shared a mutual feeling of longing and nostalgia for an interview experience that, due to the pandemic, was understandably adapted. The most obvious forms of loss experienced - albeit in different ways - were: 1) human connection and 2) missed opportunity. Applicants and assessors described several factors that amplified their grief/loss response. These were: 1) resource availability, 2) technological concerns, and 3) the virtual interview environment.

Discussion

While virtual interviewing has obvious advantages, we cannot overlook that asynchronous vMMIs do not lend themselves to the same caliber of interaction and camaraderie as experienced in in-person interviews. We outline several recommendations medical schools can implement to enhance the vMMI experience for applicants and assessors.

Optimal hand surgery fellowship interview format

CONTEXT

The ideal format for residency and fellowship interviews has been consistently debated. Secondary to the COVID-19 pandemic, many institutions, including all hand surgery fellowship programs, transitioned interviews to an all-virtual format. In the past year, with ease of travel restrictions, some programs have transitioned back to in-person interviews, while others remain solely virtual. Hand surgery fellowship programs are continually assessing what are the best means for conducting these interviews, with little perspective regarding the applicant's preferences.

OBJECTIVES

The purpose of this study was to examine hand surgery fellowship applicants' perspectives regarding in-person and virtual interviews. It was hypothesized that applicants would value interpersonal relationships between faculty when deciding upon their ideal hand surgery fellowship, which would be easier to appreciate in-person.

METHODS

All hand fellowship interviewees at a single institution were given a voluntary, electronic survey. The survey consisted of questions examining different aspects of the program's interview day and supplemental resources. Responses were recorded after the in-person interview for the years 2018-2020. Questions were altered for the virtual 2021 and 2022 interviews. Questions were scored on a Likert scale.

RESULTS

For the in-person interview cycles, there were 60/86 respondents (69.8 %). For the virtual interview cycles, there were 45/73 respondents (61.6 %). During the in-person interview cycles, applicants reported that the current fellows' perspective talk was the most helpful component. Many applicants commented that they enjoyed meeting their potential co-fellows. The virtual interviewees felt that they had the best understanding of the program's core values/culture and the worst understanding of faculty personalities and personal/family life. Twenty-nine (64.4 %) of virtual applicants would prefer an all in-person interview. Of the 16 respondents who did not advocate for a completely in-person interview, 56.3 % preferred the option for an in-person site visit.

CONCLUSIONS

Hand surgery fellowship applicants desire interpersonal interactions to better understand prospective fellowship programs, which can be difficult to convey with an all-virtual interview. The results of this survey can help guide fellowship programs as they continue to optimize in-person, virtual, and hybrid interview formats and refine recruitment resources.

Orthopaedic Surgery Training and Education During COVID-19: A Systematic Review

COVID-19 forced surgical resident training programs to adapt to meet educational requirements within the constraints of various guidelines. Some of the changes implemented during the pandemic have imparted a lasting effect on orthopaedic education. As such, the purpose of this article was to review how orthopaedic training and education were affected during the COVID-19 pandemic.

Methods

The published literature was queried using search strategies devised by a medical librarian, according to the Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Review and Meta-Analyses guidelines. Studies eligible for inclusion were studies related to COVID-19, orthopaedic surgical training, and medical education. Studies were excluded if they (1) were abstracts, conference proceedings, letters, perspective pieces, reviews, or editorials; (2) evaluated medical student education; (3) included other specialties; or (4) were unrelated to COVID-19 and/or orthopaedic training.

Results

Eighty-three (n = 83) studies were included. Five themes emerged including (I) Fellowship Application, Interview, and Match Processes; (II) Social Media and Websites for Program Information; (III) Changes in Trainee Surgical Volume; (IV) Trainee Mental Health and Well-being; and (V) Innovations in Education. The pandemic decreased opportunities for medical students to gain exposure to orthopaedic surgery. Social media use, particularly Instagram, among orthopaedic residencies increased during the pandemic. Between the cancellation of away rotations and in-person interviews, applicants saved over $6,000; however, both residency applicants and interviewers preferred in-person interviews. The pandemic led to decreased surgical volume and in-person didactics for trainees, thus relying more on virtual learning. Orthopaedic trainees had mixed feelings regarding online virtual education. Although some respondents reported that they preferred the convenience of online learning, others expressed dissatisfaction with the quality of virtual education.

Conclusions

The shift to virtual learning affected how applicants learned about residency programs, with many relying on virtual away rotations and social media to compare different programs. The pandemic also highlighted issues of diversity and accessibility within orthopaedic surgery, with cost savings from virtual interviews and canceled away rotations potentially benefiting applicants from lower socioeconomic backgrounds. Although some innovative approaches and adaptations to orthopaedic education and training have shown promise and may continue to be used in the future after the COVID-19 pandemic, the role of others, such as virtual interviews, is less clear.

Applicant Perceptions of In-Person versus Virtual Interview Format for Surgical Retina Fellowship

Purpose  This article compares applicants' perceptions of and experiences with virtual and in-person interviews for surgical retina fellowship. Methods  A survey was distributed via email to all applicants of three vitreoretinal surgery fellowship programs for the 2021 to 2022 and 2022 to 2023 application cycles. Main Outcome Measures  Participants were surveyed regarding cost; burden of scheduling; number of applications and interviews completed; ability to gain a true feel of the program, location, and preceptor; and number of work and surgical days missed. Results  Of 151 applicants contacted, 36 completed the survey (23.8% response rate). Of the respondents, 25.0% attended only virtual interviews, 19.4% attended mostly virtual interviews, 30.6% attended mostly in-person interviews, and 25.0% attended half virtual and half in-person interviews. Average expenditure was significantly lower for applicants with mostly and completely virtual interviews compared with applicants with mostly in-person and half virtual, half in-person ( p  < 0.001). Applicants with mostly virtual interviews reported a lower ability to gain a true perception of the program and the program location ( p  = 0.003 and p  < 0.001, respectively). There was no difference in burden of scheduling, number of interviews completed, or number of work and surgical days missed. When applicants were asked what type of interview format they would prefer if they could repeat the cycle, those who interviewed mostly in-person largely chose in-person as their preference (72.7%), while participants who interviewed mostly or completely virtually were evenly split between in-person, virtual, and hybrid ( p  = 0.136). Conclusion  As fellowship programs and institutions decide whether they will return to in-person interviews or maintain a virtual interview format in the long term, they must weigh the lower cost of virtual interviews with the improved ability to gain a more accurate perception of the program and location allowed by in-person interviews, as well as potentially greater satisfaction with the in-person format.

Virtual interviewing for graduate medical education recruitment and selection: A BEME systematic review: BEME Guide No. 80

BACKGROUND

The COVID-19 pandemic caused graduate medical education (GME) programs to pivot to virtual interviews (VIs) for recruitment and selection. This systematic review synthesizes the rapidly expanding evidence base on VIs, providing insights into preferred formats, strengths, and weaknesses.

METHODS

PubMed/MEDLINE, Scopus, ERIC, PsycINFO, MedEdPublish, and Google Scholar were searched from 1 January 2012 to 21 February 2022. Two authors independently screened titles, abstracts, full texts, performed data extraction, and assessed risk of bias using the Medical Education Research Quality Instrument. Findings were reported according to Best Evidence in Medical Education guidance.

RESULTS

One hundred ten studies were included. The majority (97%) were from North America. Fourteen were conducted before COVID-19 and 96 during the pandemic. Studies involved both medical students applying to residencies (61%) and residents applying to fellowships (39%). Surgical specialties were more represented than other specialties. Applicants preferred VI days that lasted 4-6 h, with three to five individual interviews (15-20 min each), with virtual tours and opportunities to connect with current faculty and trainees. Satisfaction with VIs was high, though both applicants and programs found VIs inferior to in-person interviews for assessing 'fit.' Confidence in ranking applicants and programs was decreased. Stakeholders universally noted significant cost and time savings with VIs, as well as equity gains and reduced carbon footprint due to eliminating travel.

CONCLUSIONS

The use of VIs for GME recruitment and selection has accelerated rapidly. The findings of this review offer early insights that can guide future practice, policy, and research.

Virtual Pediatric Orthopaedic Fellowship Interviews During the Pandemic: What Did the Applicants and Programs Think?

BACKGROUND

The COVID-19 pandemic precluded in-person interviews for the 2020-2021 fellowship application cycle and may impact future interview cycles. No information is available detailing the implications of a virtual format on either the interviewee or the fellowship program.

METHODS

Two surveys regarding the 2020-2021 virtual interview season were developed and distributed by the Pediatric Orthopaedic Society of North America (POSNA) Fellowship Training and Practice Qualifications Committee: one survey for fellowship applicants and one survey for fellowship program directors.

RESULTS

Surveys were completed by 45 pediatric orthopaedic fellowship applicants and 34 fellowship program directors. Nineteen (42.2%) applicants applied to more programs because of the virtual format and 30 (66.7%) applicants accepted more interviews because of the virtual format. Thirty-one (67%) applicants did not feel the virtual interview format negatively affected their match process. Thirty-eight (84.4%) applicants indicated that they saved >$2000 with the virtual format. Approximately half (22/45, 48.5%) of the applicants would keep the fellowship-interview process virtual-even if in-person interviews were possible-whereas 8 (17.8%) applicants would transition back toward in-person interviews.Most program directors utilized online interviews for the first time (n=28, 82.3%) during the 2020-2021 application cycle. Programs interviewed more applicants for the 2020-2021 cycle than in the prior 5 years (19.3 vs. 15.7 applicants, P <0.01), with programs interviewing 10.1 applicants per fellowship position. The majority (n=22, 64.7%) of programs utilized Zoom for the interview platform. Program directors indicated that the applicants were either more accomplished (n=14, 41.2%) or similar in accomplishment (n=20, 58.8%) when compared with the applicants from prior years. Half of the program directors (n=17, 50%) surveyed would utilize virtual interviews next year, even if in-person interviews are possible.

CONCLUSIONS

During the 2020-2021 fellowship application process, interviewees applied to and were interviewed at more programs because of the virtual format, while saving >$2000. In a similar manner, fellowship programs were able to interview a greater number of applicants without adversely impacting the applicant quality. Approximately half of the interviewees and program directors would continue to perform virtual interviews, even if in-person interviews are possible.

LEVEL OF EVIDENCE

Level V.