Identifying US Plastic Surgery Training Programs that Effectively Establish Gender and Ethnically Diverse Faculty

Diversity, Equity, and Inclusion in Plastic Surgery: A Systematic Review

BACKGROUND

The number of publications on the subject of diversity, equity, and inclusion has surged in the last 5 years. However, a systematic review of this topic has not been published.

METHOD

Six top plastic surgery journals were queried from 2018 to 2023 using the search term "diversity." Methods, conclusions, and recommendations were tabulated.

RESULTS

A total of 138 publications were identified; 68 studies presented data suitable for analysis. All studies were retrospective. Currently, over 40% of plastic surgery residency applicants are women. The proportion of women in integrated plastic surgery residents is now 43%. In 2021 and 2022, the percentage of female first-year residents exceeded men. The percentage of female presenters at meetings (34%) is double the number in the workforce (17%). Twenty-five percent of academic faculty positions and 22% of program director positions are now held by women. Underrepresented minorities account for fewer than 10% of applicants to integrated plastic surgery residencies.

DISCUSSION

The proportion of Black and Hispanic applicants to integrated plastic surgery residencies (6% and 8%, respectively) mirrors the proportion of Black and Hispanic medical students (7% and 6%, respectively). Numerous recommendations have been made to increase the proportion of underrepresented minorities in plastic surgery programs.

CONCLUSIONS

The representation of women in plastic surgery has increased dramatically. A lack of Hispanics and Blacks reflects a small pool of applicants, as opposed to a "leaky pipeline."

Exploring Trends in Immediate Postresidency Career Paths: A Multi-year Analysis of Plastic Surgery Resident Graduates Across the United States

Background

Plastic surgery is one of the most diverse specialties in medicine. Because of the competitiveness of plastic surgery residency, applicants are entering the field with increased experience and more developed interests in specific specialties. Programs and prospective applicants may find it beneficial to know trends in the career paths of recent graduates.

Objectives

To identify trends in postresidency career paths for plastic surgery graduates.

Methods

Data from all integrated plastic surgery residency programs were analyzed from 2013 to 2022. Eighty-eight residency programs were analyzed for review. Residency websites were the primary source of data. Postresidency career paths were categorized into subspecialty fellowships, academic practice, or private practice. Secondary data included program rank, size of the program, associated fellowship program, associated independent program, and program location.

Results

Seventy-three programs met the inclusion criteria. Private practice was the most common immediate postgraduation path. Microvascular and aesthetic fellowships demonstrated maximum growth in the last 10 years, followed by hand fellowships. Programs ranked in the top 25 by Doximity reputation were significantly associated with graduates going into craniofacial (P = .05) and microvascular fellowship (P = .021), and immediate academic practice (P = .011). Lower-ranked programs were correlated with higher levels of graduates entering directly into private/community hospital practice (ρ = 0.327).

Conclusions

Life after residency is a necessary consideration for training physicians. Understanding trends in postresidency career paths could help programs and prospective applicants make more informed decisions on what programs may offer the best opportunities to pursue their desired career path.

Level of Evidence 5

Article Factors Influencing Gender Disparities in Senior Authorship of Plastic Surgery Publications

INTRODUCTION

Female plastic surgeons publish fewer and lower impact articles. To better understand how to address this gender gap, we explored the temporal trends in female senior authorship and evaluated predictive factors for female senior authorship.

METHODS

A retrospective review of articles published in the 3 highest impact plastic surgery journals published from 2010 to 2020 was conducted. Trends with female senior authorship across time were analyzed with respect to study type, subspeciality, and geographical origin.

RESULTS

Of the 5425 articles included, 13% (n = 720) had a female senior author, and female senior authorship increased across time ( R = 0.84, P = 0.033). Over the decade, an increased proportion of cohort studies ( R = 0.82, P = 0.045), systematic reviews ( R = 0.96, P = 0.003), breast-related articles ( R = 0.88, P = 0.022), and reconstruction-related articles ( R = 0.83, P = 0.039) were published by female senior authors. Subspecialty and geography predicted female senior authorship; articles focused on aesthetic (odds ratio [OR] = 1.3, P = 0.046) and breast (OR = 1.7, P < 0.001) subspecialties or those originating from Canada (OR = 1.7 P = 0.019), Europe (OR = 1.5, P < 0.001), and Latin America (OR = 3.0, P < 0.001) were more likely to have a female senior author. Articles from East Asia were less likely to have female senior authors (OR = 0.7, P = 0.005).

CONCLUSION

Female senior authorship in plastic surgery has increased over the last decade, and the proportion of female plastic surgeons leading cohort studies and systematic reviews is increasing. Sex of the senior author is influenced by plastic surgery subspecialty and geographical origin, but article type did not impact the odds of female senior authorship.

Ethnic and Sex Diversity in Academic Plastic Surgery: A Cross-sectional Study

Ethnic, racial, and sex disparities continue to persist in medicine despite efforts to diversify the profession. In competitive surgical specialties such as plastic surgery, those disparities are particularly pronounced. This study aims to evaluate racial, ethnic, and sex diversity in academic plastic surgery.

Methods

We compiled a list of major plastic surgery professional societies, plastic surgery journal editorial boards, and plastic surgery accreditation boards to evaluate ethnic and sex diversity in society, research, and accreditation domains, respectively. Demographic data were collected and analyzed using the Mann-Whitney U test and the Kruskal-Wallis test.

Results

White individuals are significantly overrepresented across the professional and research domains, and Asian individuals are overrepresented in the professional domain when compared to non-white races. White individuals make up a total of 74% of the society domain, 67% of the research domain, and 86% of the accreditation domain when compared to all non-white surgeons. Male surgeons made up 79% of the society domain, 83% of the research domain, and 77% of the accreditation domain when compared to all non-male surgeons.

Conclusions

Ethnic, racial, and sex disparities persist in academic plastic surgery. This study, which looked at societies, editorial boards, and accreditation boards, demonstrated a persistent ethnic, racial, and sex homogeneity among leadership. Changes are required to continue to diversify the field and provide women and underrepresented minorities the tools needed to succeed.

Racial/Ethnic and Gender Disparities Over the Last Decade Within Microsurgery and Craniofacial Fellowship Training

BACKGROUND

Racial/ethnic and gender disparities persist in plastic surgery at nearly all levels of training, becoming more pronounced at each stage. Recent studies have demonstrated that the proportion of female plastic surgery residents has increased to nearly 40%, yet only 11% of full professors of plastic surgery are female. Other studies have identified severe declines in underrepresented minority plastic surgery representation between plastic surgery residents and academicians with only 1.6% of Black/African American and 4.9% of Hispanic/Latinx full professors of plastic surgery. Often, residents seek fellowship for advanced training before seeking an academic professorship. This study aims to describe the racial/ethnic and gender representation of microsurgery and craniofacial fellows.

METHODS

Names and photos of graduated fellows for the past 10 years (2012-2021) were extracted from microsurgery and craniofacial fellowship Web sites. Using a 2-person evaluation method, race/ethnicity and gender were primarily determined by photographic and surname and verified, when possible, through online confirmation methods (articles, social media). Distributions were analyzed with descriptive statistics and compared with the US population.

RESULTS

Among 30 microsurgery fellowships, 180 graduated fellows (52.7%) were identified, resulting in 66 female fellows (36.7%) and the following racial/ethnic distribution: 113 (62.8%) White, 49 (27.2%) Asian, 12 (6.7%) Hispanic/Latinx, and 6 (3.3%) Black/African American. Among 31 craniofacial fellowships, 136 graduated fellows (45.0%) were identified, resulting in 38 female fellows (27.9%) and the following racial/ethnic distribution: 75 (55.1%) White, 45 (33.1%) Asian, 8 (5.9%) Hispanic/Latinx, and 8 (5.9%) Black/African American. The intersection between race/ethnicity and gender revealed the most disproportionately low representation among Black women. Relative to the US population, Hispanic/Latinx (0.31-fold) and Black/African American (0.48-fold) fellows were underrepresented, White (0.90-fold) fellows were nearly equally represented, and Asian (5.42-fold) fellows are overrepresented relative to the US population. Furthermore, despite pursuing fellowships at a greater rate, Asian and Black fellows are not reaching adequate representation among academic plastic surgeons.

CONCLUSION

This study demonstrates that female racial/ethnic minorities are disproportionately underrepresented among microsurgery and craniofacial fellowships. Efforts should be made to improve the recruitment of fellows of underrepresented backgrounds and thus improve the pipeline into academic careers.

Is Plastic Surgery Training Equitable? An Analysis of Health Equity across US Plastic Surgery Residency Programs

Achieving health equity includes training surgeons in environments exemplifying access, treatment, and outcomes across the racial, ethnic, and socioeconomic spectrum. Increased attention on health equity has generated metrics comparing hospitals. To establish the quality of health equity in plastic and reconstructive surgery (PRS) residency training, we determined the mean equity score (MES) across training hospitals of US PRS residencies.

Methods

The 2021 Lown Institute Hospital Index database was merged with affiliated training hospitals of US integrated PRS residency programs. The Lown equity category is composed of three domains (community benefit, inclusivity, pay equity) generating a health equity grade. MES (standard deviation) was calculated and reported for residency programs (higher MES represented greater health equity). Linear regression modeled the effects of a program's number of training hospitals, safety net hospitals, and geographical region on MES.

Results

The MES was 2.64 (0.62). An estimated 5.9% of programs had an MES between 1-2. In total, 56.5% of programs had an MES between 2 and 3, and 37.7% had an MES of 3 or more. The southern region was associated with a higher MES compared with the reference group (Northeast) (P = 0.03). The number of safety net hospitals per program was associated with higher MES (P = 0.02).

Conclusions

Two out of three programs train residents in facilities failing to demonstrate high equity healthcare. Programs should promote health equity by diversifying care delivery through affiliated hospitals. This will aid in the creation of a PRS workforce trained to provide care for a socioeconomically, racially, and ethnically diverse population.