Integrated cardiothoracic surgery match: Trends among applicants compared with other surgical subspecialties

A Nationwide Evaluation of Cardiothoracic Resident Research Productivity

BACKGROUND

Evaluating the research productivity of cardiothoracic surgery residents during their training and early career is crucial for tracking their academic development. To this end, the training pathway of residents and the characteristics of their program in relation to their productivity were evaluated.

METHODS

Alumni lists from integrated 6-year thoracic surgery (I-6) and traditional thoracic surgery residency programs were collected. A Python script was used to search PubMed for publications and the iCite database for citations from each trainee. Publications during a 20-year time span were stratified by the year of publication in relation to the trainee's graduation from thoracic surgery residency. Trainees were analyzed by training program type, institutional availability of a cardiothoracic surgery T32 training grant, and protected academic development time.

RESULTS

A total of 741 cardiothoracic surgery graduates (I-6, 70; traditional, 671) spanning 1971 to 2021 from 57 programs published >23,000 manuscripts. I-6 trainees published significantly more manuscripts during medical school and residency compared with traditional trainees. Trainees at institutions with cardiothoracic surgery T32 training grants published significantly more manuscripts than those at non-T32 institutions (13 vs 9; P = .0048). I-6 trainees published more manuscripts at programs with dedicated academic development time compared with trainees at programs without protected time (22 vs 9; P = .004).

CONCLUSIONS

I-6 trainees publish significantly more manuscripts during medical school and residency compared with their traditional colleagues. Trainees at institutions with T32 training grants and dedicated academic development time publish a higher number of manuscripts than trainees without those opportunities.

Disparities in Gender and Diversity Representation Among Surgical Subspecialties: Are we Losing Momentum?

INTRODUCTION

Recruitment efforts have demonstrated small increases in female and under-represented applicants in recent years; however, the majority of surgical programs remain predominantly Caucasian and male. With increased national emphasis on Diversity, Equity, and Inclusion initiatives and mentoring programs, applicants to surgical specialties have continued to increase. While strategies to improve gender and racial diversity are now openly discussed, it is unclear if we have seen significant improvement. We sought to analyze the gender and diversity trends between surgical specialties.

METHODS

Publicly available data from the Association of American Medical Colleges, National Board of Medical Examiners, and Accreditation Council for Graduate Medical Education were extracted to determine total number, gender, and diversity of surgery applicants and active residents from the years 2018 to 2021. Surgical specialties within the main match were compared through an analysis completed through Microsoft Excel.

RESULTS

Between the years from 2018 to 2021, there was a rise in diversity representation among all surgical residents except for orthopedics which remained less than 30%. Orthopedics, Neurosurgery, and Thoracic Integrated training programs have the lowest rates of female representation among current residents at 16.72%, 20.37%, and 30.05%, respectively. General surgery demonstrates the greatest increase of female residents with a positive 6% change over this recent four-year time period.

CONCLUSIONS

There has been minimal positive progress in gender and diversity representation in surgical subspecialties overall in recent years. Continued advocacy through mentorship and scholarship programs is recommended to achieve greater gender and diversity representation in general surgery and surgical subspecialties.

Comparing Match Outcomes in a Surgical Subspecialty: Independent Versus Integrated Training Pathways

OBJECTIVE

In recent years, the Thoracic Surgery Match (TSM) has become increasingly competitive. The purpose of this study was to compare recent trends in application and match rates in the TSM by training pathway.

DESIGN

This was a retrospective cohort study of all applicants to Integrated and Independent pathways for Thoracic Surgery training (2008-2021). Chi square tests were used to elucidate temporal trends and make comparisons by training pathway.

SETTING

Accreditation Council for Graduate Medical Education (ACGME)-accredited Thoracic Surgery training programs in the United States.

PARTICIPANTS

1500 Independent and 1242 Integrated pathway applicants for Thoracic Surgery training.

RESULTS

From 2008 to 2021, the annual match rate decreased from 91% to 71% in the Independent pathway (p < 0.001). This was driven by a decrease in the number of training positions (130-101, 22% decrease) and increase in number of applicants (96-140, 46% increase). In the Integrated pathway, the annual match rate increased from 33% to 35% (p < 0.001) as did the number of training positions (3 to 46, 1430% increase) and applicants (9-129, 1333% increase). During each year, match rates in the Independent pathway exceeded those in the Integrated pathway (p < 0.001). U.S. Allopathic graduates had higher match rates than non-U.S. Allopathic graduates for both Integrated and Independent training pathways. The percentage of applicants in the Independent pathway matching at one of their top 3 choices decreased from 73% to 40% (p < 0.001). The percentage of Independent thoracic surgery training positions that went unmatched decreased from 28% to 2% (p < 0.001). This percentage was stable at an average of 1% in the Integrated pathway (p > 0.05).

CONCLUSIONS

The TSM has become increasingly competitive for Independent pathway applicants and remains ultracompetitive for Integrated pathway applicants. More research is needed to understand disparities in match rates by Thoracic Surgery training pathway.