Academic careers and lifestyle characteristics of 171 transplant surgeons in the ASTS

Representation of Women Authorship in the Top 5 Transplantation Journals in the United States

BACKGROUND

In the United States, only 13% of transplant surgeons are women. We evaluated gender distribution and trends of American authorship over the past 10 y in high-impact solid organ transplantation journals to gain insight into the current status of women authorship in transplantation.

METHODS

Original articles from 2012 to 2021 from the 5 highest-impact solid organ transplantation journals were extracted from Scopus. First and last author's gender was predicted using Genderize.io. Data of first and last authors, article type and topic, location, citation, and funding metrics were analyzed. Chi-square, logistic regression, and trend tests were performed where appropriate. Statistical significance was set at <0.05.

RESULTS

Women's first and last authorship increased over time among all journals. There was an increase in women first authors in the American Journal of Transplantation and in senior women authors in Liver Transplantation and Transplantation . Significant differences in gender authorship in lung, intestine, pancreas, general, and islet cell transplantation were found. Women's last authorship was associated with 1.69 higher odds of having a woman first author when adjusting for year and journal. There was an increase in the rate of women's first and last author collaborations over the years. Women last authors had 1.5 higher odds of being funded by the National Institutes of Health over the years.

CONCLUSIONS

Despite an increase in women transplant surgeons and physicians, the gap in women authorship in transplantation persists. Women's last authorship was associated with higher odds of having a woman first author, pointing to the importance of mentorship for women joining the transplant academia.

Sex Disparities in Academic Productivity and Rank Among Abdominal Transplant Faculty in the United States

BACKGROUND

The aim of this study was to examine sex differences in academic rank and productivity among members of the American Society of Transplant Surgeons in the United States.

METHODS

Cross-sectional, focusing on current board-certified abdominal transplant surgeons in the United States. Demographic factors such as sex, region, and faculty rank were collected from institutional websites. Academic metrics, including H-index, total publications, and relative citation ratio, were collected from Scopus and iCite.

RESULTS

We identified 536 surgeon members of the American Society of Transplant Surgeons with an academic institution. The majority were men (83%). Men were in practice longer than women (17.9 ± 11 vs 11.7 ± 9 years, P < .0001) and had higher academic metrics, including H-index (25.6 ± 20 vs16.4 ± 14, P < .0001) and total publications (110 ± 145 vs 58.8 ± 69, P < .0001). There was a significant difference in faculty appointments by sex (P < .05), with men showing evidence of increased academic advancement. After adjusting for academic rank, PhD status, and location of medical school and residency, women remained associated with a lower H-index on multivariate analysis (P < .01).

CONCLUSION

Sex disparities in academic rank and achievement are present among transplant surgical faculty in the United States, and future efforts are needed to promote sex equity in transplant surgery academia.

Incidence of attrition among early-career abdominal transplant surgeons

BACKGROUND

The prevalence of burnout and depression among abdominal transplant surgeons has been well described. However, the incidence of early-career transplant surgeons leaving the field is unknown. The objective of this study was to quantify the incidence of attrition among early-career abdominal transplant surgeons.

METHODS

A custom database from the Organ Procurement and Transplantation Network with encrypted surgeon-specific identifiers was queried for transplant surgeons who entered the field between 2008 and 2019. Surgeons who experienced attrition, defined as not completing a subsequent transplant after a minimum of 5, were identified. Surgeon-specific case volumes, case mix, and recipient outcomes were modeled to describe their association with attrition.

RESULTS

Between 2008 and 2018, 496 abdominal transplant surgeons entered the field and performed 76,465 transplant procedures. A total of 24.4% (n = 121) experienced attrition, with a median time to attrition of 2.75 years. Attrition surgeons completed fewer kidney (7 vs 21, P < .01), pancreas (0.52 vs 1.43, P < .01), and liver transplants (1 vs 4, P < .01) in their first year of practice. Attrition surgeons completed a smaller proportion of their transplant center's volume (9% vs 18%, P < .01) and were less likely to participate in pediatric transplants (26.5% vs 52.5%, P < .01) and living donor kidney transplants (64.5% vs 84.5%, P < .01). On multivariable analysis, performing fewer kidney (odds ratio: 0.98, 95% confidence interval: 0.98-0.99) and liver transplants (odds ratio: 0.98, 95% confidence interval: 0.97-0.98) by year 5 and completing a smaller proportion of their centers' volume (odds ratio: 0.96, 95% confidence interval: 0.94-0.98) were associated with attrition. Furthermore, attrition surgeons had worse allograft and patient survival for liver transplant recipients (both log-rank P < .01).

CONCLUSION

This investigation was the first to quantify the high incidence of attrition experienced by early-career abdominal transplant surgeons and its association with surgeon-specific case volumes, case mix, and worse recipient outcomes. These findings suggested the abdominal transplant workforce is struggling to retain their fellowship-trained surgeons.

Diversity in American Society of Transplant Surgeons Governance: Equitable but Unequal

OBJECTIVES

The diversity in the governance of the American Society of Transplant Surgeons has not been described. We aimed to quantify the present state of its leadership as a baseline to inform future research.

MATERIALS AND METHODS

Lists of leaders on the American Society of Transplant Surgeons Council, the COVID-19 Strike Force, and 20 different American Society of Transplant Surgeons committees were obtained from the Society's website. Demographic and training information for the members were compiled through internet searches and analyzed.

RESULTS

The American Society of Transplant Surgeons Council included 15 members, with 20% women. It was 93.3% non-Hispanic White. The COVID-19 Strike Force included 12 surgeons, 16.7% of whom were female, with 75% non-Hispanic White. Of the 198 committee members, 23.7% were women, 68.7% were nonHispanic White, 16.6% were Asian, 8.1% were Hispanic, and 6.6% were Black. Among female committee members, underrepresented minorities comprised 23.6%. Committee chairs included 23% women, 23% underrepresented minorities, and 2.3% minority women. International medical graduates were more likely men (P = .02).

CONCLUSIONS

Representation of women in the American Society of Transplant Surgeons leadership has kept pace with their membership in the transplant surgery workforce. There is a deficiency of female under - represented minorities in leadership positions at the Society. Further interventions are required to recruit underrepresented minorities to transplant surgery, catalog their footprint in the workforce, and champion their role as leaders within the American Society of Transplant Surgeons.

Diversity among transplant surgery fellowship program directors: a call to action

BACKGROUND

The diversity among general surgery residency, HPB and other fellowship program directors has been previously analyzed. However, the diversity in abdominal transplant surgery fellowship program directors remains unknown.

METHODS

Abdominal transplant fellowship programs and the corresponding program directors were identified from the American Society of Transplant Surgeons website. Demographic and training information for the members was compiled through internet searches and analyzed.

RESULTS

72 program directors were included. 83.33% were male. 63.9% were non-Hispanic White, 25% were Asian, along with 5.56% Hispanic and Black each. Male program directors were more likely to be Associate Professor (p = 0.041), while females were more likely to be Assistant Professor (p = 0.021). 66% of female program directors were non-Hispanic White.

CONCLUSION

Transplant surgery fellowship programs are primarily led by male and non-Hispanic White surgeons. Female representation as leaders is on par with their membership in the transplant surgery workforce. There is a deficiency of both male and female underrepresented minorities in program director positions.

Transplant surgery departmental leaders do not represent workforce demographics especially among women and underrepresented minorities - A retrospective analysis

INTRODUCTION

The diversity among surgical directors for liver, kidney, and pancreas transplant departments has not been previously evaluated. We aim to quantify the sex and racial demographics of transplant department leaders and assess the impact on patient outcomes.

METHODS

Demographics were collected for 116 liver, 192 kidney, and 113 pancreas transplant directors using Organ Procurement and Transplantation Network (OPTN) directory and program websites. Scientific Registry of Transplant Recipients (SRTR) 5-tier program outcomes rankings were obtained for each program and matched to leader demographics. A retrospective analysis of transplant recipients from 2010 to 2019 was performed using the United Network for Organ Sharing (UNOS) database.

RESULTS

91.5% of transplant surgical directors were male. 55% of departments had a Non-Hispanic White leader. Asian, Hispanic and Black transplant chiefs were at the helm of 23.3%, 9%, and 5% of divisions respectively. Multivariate cox regression analysis did not identify any differences in patient outcomes by transplant director demographics.

CONCLUSION

There is a paucity of female and URM leaders in transplant surgery. Initiatives to promote research, mentorship, and career advancement opportunities for women and URM are necessary to address the current leadership disparity.

Gender and racial disparities in the transplant surgery workforce

PURPOSE OF REVIEW

This review explores trends in the United States (US) transplant surgery workforce with a focus on historical demographics, post-fellowship job market, and quality of life reported by transplant surgeons. Ongoing efforts to improve women and racial/ethnic minority representation in transplant surgery are highlighted. Future directions to create a transplant workforce that reflects the diversity of the US population are discussed.

RECENT FINDINGS

Representation of women and racial and ethnic minorities among transplant surgeons is minimal. Although recent data shows an improvement in the number of Black transplant surgeons from 2% to 5.5% and an increase in women to 12%, the White to Non-White transplant workforce ratio has increased 35% from 2000 to 2013. Transplant surgeons report an average of 4.3 call nights per week and less than five leisure days a month. Transplant ranks 1st among surgical sub-specialties in the prevalence of three well-studied facets of burnout. Concerns about lifestyle may contribute to the decreasing demand for advanced training in abdominal transplantation by US graduates.

SUMMARY

Minimal improvements have been made in transplant surgery workforce diversity. Sustained and intentional recruitment and promotion efforts are needed to improve the representation of women and minority physicians and advanced practice providers in the field.

Transplant Surgery Pipeline: A Report from the American Society of Transplant Surgeons Pipeline Taskforce

BACKGROUND

Transplant surgery fellowship has evolved over the years and today there are 66 accredited training programs in the US and Canada. There is growing concern, however, about the number of US-trained general surgery residents pursuing transplant surgery. In this study, we examined the transplant surgery pipeline, comparing it with other surgical subspecialty fellowships, and characterized the resident transplantation experience.

METHODS

Datasets were compiled and analyzed from surgical fellowship match data obtained from the National Resident Matching Program and ACGME reports and relative fellowship competitiveness was assessed. The surgical resident training experience in transplantation was evaluated.

RESULTS

From 2006 to 2018, a total of 1,094 applicants have applied for 946 transplant surgery fellowship positions; 299 (27.3%) were US graduates. During this period, there was a 0.8% decrease per year in US-trained surgical residents matching into transplant surgery (p = 0.042). In addition, transplant surgery was one of the least competitive fellowships compared with other National Resident Matching Program surgical subspeciality fellowships, as measured by the number of US applicants per available fellowship position, average number of fellowship programs listed on each applicant's rank list, and proportion of unfilled fellowship positions (each, p < 0.05). Finally, from 2015 to 2017, there were 57 general surgery residency programs that produced 77 transplant surgery fellows, but nearly one-half of the fellows (n = 36 [46.8%]) came from 16 (28.1%) programs.

CONCLUSIONS

Transplant surgery is one of the least competitive and sought after surgical fellowships for US-trained residents. These findings highlight the need for dedicated efforts to increase exposure, mentorship, and interest in transplantation to recruit strong US graduates.

Gender Disparities in Authorships and Citations in Transplantation Research

Background.

Over the past decades, there has been a rapid change in the gender ratio of medical doctors, whereas gender differences in academia remain apparent. In transplantation research, a field already understaffed with female doctors and researchers, there is little published data on the development in proportion, citations, and funding of female researchers over the past years.

Methods.

To evaluate the academic impact of female doctors in transplantation research, we conducted a bibliometric analysis (01 January 1999 to 31 December 2018) of high-impact scientific publications, subsequent citations, and funding in this field. Web of Science data was used in combination with software R-Package “Gender,” to predict gender by first names.

Results.

For this study, 15 498 (36.2% female; 63.8% male) first and 13 345 (30.2% female; 69.8% male) last author gender matches were identified. An increase in the percentage of female first and last authors is seen in the period 1999–2018, with clear differences between countries (55.1% female authors in The Netherlands versus 13.1% in Japan, for example). When stratifying publications based on the number of citations, a decline was seen in the percentage of female authors, from 34.6%–30.7% in the first group (≤10 citations) to 20.8%–23.2% in the fifth group (>200 citations), for first (P < 0.001) and last (P = 0.014) authors, respectively. From all first author name-gender matches, 6574 (41.6% female; 58.4% male, P < 0.001) publications reported external funding, with 823 (35.5% female; 64.5% male, P = 0.701) reported funding by pharmaceutical companies and 1266 (36.6% female; 63.4% male, P < 0.001) reporting funding by the National Institutes of Health.

Conclusions.

This is the first analysis of gender bias in scientific publications, subsequent citations, and funding in transplantation research. We show ongoing differences between male and female authors in citation rates and rewarded funding in this field. This requires an active approach to increase female representation in research reporting and funding rewarding.

Transplant physician and surgeon compensation: A sample framework accounting for nonbillable and value-based work

Work relative value unit (wRVU)-based fee schedules are predominantly used by both the Centers for Medicare & Medicaid Services (CMS) and private payers to determine the payments for physicians' clinical productivity. However, under the Affordable Care Act, CMS is transitioning into a value-based payment structure that rewards patient-oriented outcomes and cost savings. Moreover, in the context of solid organ transplantation, physicians and surgeons conduct many activities that are neither billable nor accounted for in the wRVU models. New compensation models for transplant professionals must (1) justify payments for nonbillable work related to transplant activity/procedures; (2) capture the entire academic, clinical, and relationship-building work effort as part of RVU determination; and (3) move toward a value-based compensation scheme that aligns the incentives for physicians, surgeons, transplant center, payers, and patients. In this review, we provide an example of redesigning RVUs to address these challenges in compensating transplant physicians and surgeons. We define a customized RVU (cRVU) for activities that typically do not generate wRVUs and create an outcome value unit (OVU) measure that incorporates outcomes and cost savings into RVUs to include value-based compensation.

Association of sociocultural factors with initiation of the kidney transplant evaluation process

Although research shows that minorities exhibit higher levels of medical mistrust, perceived racism, and discrimination in healthcare settings, the degree to which these underlying sociocultural factors preclude end-stage renal disease (ESRD) patients from initiating kidney transplant evaluation is unknown. We telephone surveyed 528 adult ESRD patients of black or white race referred for evaluation to a Georgia transplant center (N = 3) in 2014-2016. We used multivariable logistic regression to examine associations between sociocultural factors and evaluation initiation, adjusting for demographic, clinical, and socioeconomic characteristics. Despite blacks (n = 407) reporting higher levels of medical mistrust (40.0% vs 26.4%, P < .01), perceived racism (55.5% vs 18.2%, P < .01), and experienced discrimination (29.0% vs 15.7%, P < .01) than whites (n = 121), blacks were only slightly less likely than whites to initiate evaluation (49.6% vs 57.9%, P = .11). However, after adjustment, medical mistrust (odds ratio [OR]: 0.59; 95% confidence interval [CI]: 0.39, 0.91), experienced discrimination (OR: 0.62, 95% CI: 0.41, 0.95), and perceived racism (OR: 0.61; 95% CI: 0.40, 0.92) were associated with lower evaluation initiation. Results suggest that sociocultural disparities exist in early kidney transplant access and occur despite the absence of a significant racial disparity in evaluation initiation. Interventions to reduce disparities in transplantation access should target underlying sociocultural factors, not just race.

Acute Care Surgery for Transplant Recipients: A National Survey of Surgeon Perspectives and Practices

BACKGROUND

Transplant recipients are living longer than ever before, and occasionally require acute care surgery for nontransplant-related issues. We hypothesized that while both acute care surgeons (ACS) and transplant surgeons would feel comfortable operating on this unique patient population, both would believe transplant centers provide superior care.

METHODS

To characterize surgeon perspectives, we conducted a national survey of ACS and transplant surgeons. Surgeon- and center-specific demographics were collected; surgeon preferences were compared using χ2, Fisher's exact, and Kruskal-Wallis tests.

RESULTS

We obtained 230 responses from ACS and 204 from transplant surgeons. ACS and transplant surgeons believed care is better at transplant centers (78% and 100%), and transplant recipients requiring acute care surgery should be transferred to a transplant center (80.2% and 87.2%). ACS felt comfortable operating (97.5%) and performing laparoscopy (94.0%) on transplant recipients. ACS cited transplant medication use as the most important underlying cause of increased surgical complications for transplant recipients. Transplant surgeons felt it was their responsibility to perform acute care surgery on transplant recipients (67.3%), but less so if patient underwent transplant at a different institution (26.5%). Transplant surgeons cited poor transplanted organ resiliency as the most important underlying cause of increased surgical complications for transplant recipients.

CONCLUSIONS

ACS and transplant surgeons feel comfortable performing laparoscopic and open acute care surgery on transplant recipients, and recommend treating transplant recipients at transplant centers, despite the lack of supportive evidence. Elucidating common goals allows surgeons to provide optimal care for this unique patient population.

A survey of Heads of Surgery and Residents on accessibility and employment in liver transplant teams in Spain

INTRODUCTION

The access of surgeons to liver transplant teams in Spain is heterogeneous. This study aims to portray the current human resources of Spanish transplant teams, distribution of transplant duties among team members, how transplant team members acquire their skills, their leaders' view of their future, as well the motivations of Spanish General Surgery residents to choose transplantation as their future career choice.

METHODS

Two different surveys were created, one for head surgeons and one for residents, about the number of team members and their training, recruitment, organization of tasks and motivation to work in transplantation. The questionnaires were e-mailed to both the transplant program directors and the surgical residents.

RESULTS

There are on average 8 surgeons in each transplant unit. More than four surgeons perform the hepatectomy in 54.2% of the groups, while the graft implantation is performed by more than 4 surgeons at just 25% of the centers. Forty-two percent of the transplant chiefs advocated a fellowship training system, and 87.5% believe that generational turnover is guaranteed. Out of 525 residents, 101 responded. Regarding training, 12.8% had no interest in transplantation. Concerning their work preferences, 37.6% were not interested in transplantation because it is excessively demanding, and 52.5% would not like to be part of a liver transplant team in the future.

CONCLUSIONS

The generational turnover seems to be guaranteed according to liver transplant program directors. The new generations of surgeons generally opt for other areas of surgery other than transplantation. Studies with a greater number of responses are necessary to validate these results.

Transplant community perceptions of the benefits and drawbacks of alternative quality metrics for regulation

BACKGROUND

There is concern that the metrics currently used to regulate transplant centers, one-year patient and graft survival, may have adverse consequences including decreasing higher risk donor organ acceptance and transplant volume. This raises questions about whether alternative measures would be more appropriate.

METHODS

We surveyed American Society of Transplant Surgeons (ASTS) and American Society of Transplantation (AST) members (n = 270) to characterize perceptions of several metrics that are used for regulation, are publicly reported, or have been suggested elsewhere, regarding their effectiveness, amenability to risk adjustment, and predicted effects on volume, mortality, and waitlist size.

RESULTS

Respondents rated one-year patient and graft survival the most effective measure of quality of care (mean scores = 7.44, 7.31, respectively, out of 10) and most amenable to risk adjustment (mean scores = 6.26, 6.13, respectively). Most respondents believed alternative metrics would not impact their center's volume, waitlist size, or one-year transplant mortality. However, some did predict unintended consequences; for example, some believed using one-year waitlist mortality, one-year mortality of patients listed, or one-year mortality of patients referred for transplant would decrease the number of transplants performed (48.6%, 46.7%, and 48.3% of respondents, respectively).

DISCUSSION

Despite previously published concerns with existing regulatory metrics, most participants did not believe any metrics would outperform one-year patient and graft survival.

Planning Generational Change in a Liver Transplant Team

Liver transplantation (LT) is a demanding and stressful practice. It requires full dedication and great personal sacrifice. It carries with it a long, difficult learning curve. We present the current situation with one LT team and carried out a critical analysis on the current problems in LT units with regard to access to leadership the future generational changes. An LT team has several similarities with a family-owned company. A generation change planning in liver transplantation may address 3 important aspects: the succession of the leader; establishment and reinforcement of the talent pool; and accessibility to the working group. An LT team is manned by highly qualified personnel. The ideal scenario is when the successor surgeon is accepted by every member in a joint agreement; all the surgeons on the team have the potential to be the next team leader; and the working group presents a high level of personal effort and a motivated attitude. There is an ongoing problem in LT units, however-the growing lack of interest from young surgeons to be part of a transplant team. There are many reasons for this, but it primarily involves the high level of dedication required. The formation of a good transplant team, with a pool of high-quality young surgeons and the realization of a proper generational change, could improve its operation and its results in the future.

Reported effects of the Scientific Registry of Transplant Recipients 5-tier rating system on US transplant centers: results of a national survey

In the United States, the Scientific Registry of Transplant Recipients (SRTR) provides publicly available quality report cards. These reports have historically rated transplant programs using a 3-tier system. In 2016, the SRTR temporarily transitioned to a 5-tier system, which classified more programs as under-performing. As part of a larger survey about transplant quality metrics, we surveyed members of the American Society of Transplant Surgeons and American Society of Transplantation (N = 280 respondents) on transplant center experiences with patient and payer responses to the 5-tier SRTR ratings. Over half of respondents (n = 137, 52.1%) reported ≥1 negative effect of the new 5-tier ranking system, including losing patients, losing insurers, increased concern among patients, and increased concern among referring providers. Few respondents (n = 35, 13.7%) reported any positive effects of the 5-tier ranking system. Lower SRTR-reported scores on the 5-tier scale were associated with increased risk of reporting at least one negative effect in a logistic model (P < 0.01). The change to a more granular rating system provoked an immediate response in the transplant community that may have long-term implications for transplant hospital finances and patient options for transplantation.

Establishing the Number of Procedures for Optimal Renal Transplantation Training With the Use of a Canine Model

BACKGROUND

The training of surgeons that perform renal transplantations can be diverse. For example, the training profile can vary greatly, involving urologists to general surgeons. The efficacy of training programs directed at transplantation surgeons is influenced by numerous factors, including the specialist profile who is trained, the number of procedures available to trainees in a given teaching hospital, and the duration of training. Here we determine the number of procedures necessary to consolidate and contribute to proficiency in renal transplantation technique.

METHODS

We used a canine model, comparing 32 renal transplantations performed by a urologist and by a general surgeon who had completed their respective training in renal transplantation.

RESULTS

Our results demonstrated that with 12 surgical procedures, surgeons were able to consolidate their skills in renal transplantation, regardless of their educational background.

CONCLUSIONS

This is an initial effort in the establishment of a system for targeted training of transplantation surgeons directed specifically at correcting deficiencies and consolidating skills acquired during training programs. These efforts should contribute to the improvement of patient safety in public and private health systems.

A systematic review of physician retirement planning

BACKGROUND

Physician retirement planning and timing have important implications for patients, hospitals, and healthcare systems. Unplanned early or late physician retirement can have dire consequences in terms of both patient safety and human resource allocations. This systematic review examined existing evidence on the timing and process of retirement of physicians. Four questions were addressed: (1) When do physicians retire? (2) Why do some physicians retire early? (3) Why do some physicians delay their retirement? (4) What strategies facilitate physician retention and/or retirement planning?

METHODS

English-language studies were searched in electronic databases MEDLINE, Web of Science, Scopus, CINAHL, AgeLine, Embase, HealthSTAR, ASSA, and PsycINFO, from inception up to and including March 2016. Included studies were peer-reviewed primary journal articles with quantitative and/or qualitative analyses of physicians' plans for, and opinions about, retirement. Three reviewers independently assessed each study for methodological quality using the Newcastle-Ottawa Scale for quantitative studies and Critical Appraisal Tool for qualitative studies, and a fourth reviewer resolved inconsistencies.

RESULTS

In all, 65 studies were included and analyzed, of which the majority were cross-sectional in design. Qualitative studies were found to be methodologically strong, with credible results deemed relevant to practice. The majority of quantitative studies had adequate sample representativeness, had justified and satisfactory sample size, used appropriate statistical tests, and collected primary data by self-reported survey methods. Physicians commonly reported retiring between 60 and 69 years of age. Excessive workload and burnout were frequently cited reasons for early retirement. Ongoing financial obligations delayed retirement, while strategies to mitigate career dissatisfaction, workplace frustration, and workload pressure supported continuing practice.

CONCLUSIONS

Knowledge of when physicians plan to retire and how they can transition out of practice has been shown to aid succession planning. Healthcare organizations might consider promoting retirement mentorship programs, resource toolkits, education sessions, and guidance around financial planning for physicians throughout their careers, as well as creating post-retirement opportunities that maintain institutional ties through teaching, mentoring, and peer support.

Training, work, and lifestyle of transplant physicians and surgeons in Germany

BACKGROUND

International data on training, work, and lifestyle of transplant physicians and surgeons are scarce. Such data might help in development of uniform education paths and provide insights for young clinicians interested in this field. This study aimed at the evaluation of these data in all transplant-associated medical disciplines.

METHODS

A survey on professional and academic training, workload, and lifestyle was generated. The questionnaire was distributed to all members of the German Transplant Association (DTG), utilizing the tool SurveyMonkey(®) .

RESULTS

A total of 127 members of the DTG responded (male/female 66.1%/33.9%, 45.8±10.3 years). The majority had been working in transplant medicine for more than 10 years (61.9%). Fifteen respondents (11.8%) obtained an official European certification (European Union of Medical Specialists). A total of 57 (48.3%) respondents worked full time on research during training. The research focus was clinical for most respondents (n=72, 61.5%). An average working time of 62±1.5 h/wk was reported. Fifty-eight percent of all respondents complained of inadequate remuneration and 50% reported inadequate acknowledgment of their professional performance.

CONCLUSION

This is the first study reporting characteristics of training, work, and lifestyle in an interdisciplinary cohort of German transplant physicians and surgeons. Enormous efforts in clinical and research work were reported, associated with high rates of professional and financial dissatisfaction.

Residency in urology and training in kidney transplantation. Results of a national survey

OBJECTIVES

To determine the current state of kidney transplantation (KT) training in a country that is leader in organ donation and transplantation.

MATERIAL AND METHODS

We conducted an online survey by e-mail to 138 urology residents. The survey contained 5 sections: affiliation, training in KT, interest in KT, residents of transplant centers and residents of nontransplant centers.

RESULTS

Sixty-five residents responded, 47.1% of the urologists in training surveyed, representing 28 cities and 15 provinces. Fifty-five percent (n=36) of the respondents deemed the KT training offered during their residency as insufficient, and 85% (n=55) demanded more resources. More than half were not confident in their abilities to perform transplantation surgery over the course of their residency (n=35). Nineteen percent of the residents considered KT an important discipline in their residency, with a mean score of 56.2 (1-100). Among the residents of the transplant centers (69.2%, n=45), 73% (n=33) considered KT when choosing a center for their residency. Of the surveyed residents from nontransplant centers (30.7%, n=20), 45% (n=9) do not perform an external rotation in KT.

CONCLUSIONS

The surveyed residents demand more training in KT. The most common situation is to end a residency without having performed a complete KT. KT is considered an asset when selecting a resident medical intern position and commonly they are part of the transplantation team. The majority of residents are trained in centers with less than 75 transplants/year. External rotations in KT are not the rule in centers where transplantation is not performed.

A German survey of the abdominal transplantation surgical work force

This manuscript reports the results of a nationwide survey of transplant surgeons in Germany, including the demographics, training, position, individual case loads, center volumes, program structure, professional practice, grade of specialization, workload, work hours, salary, and career expectations. We contacted all 32 German transplant centers that perform liver, kidney, and pancreas transplantation. Surgeons engaged in transplantation were asked to reply to the survey. Eighty-five surgeons responded, with a mean age of 44 ± 8 years, 13% of whom were female. The median transplant frequency per active transplant surgeon was relatively low, with 16 liver transplants, 15 kidney transplants, and three pancreas transplants. The median reported center volumes were 45 liver transplants, 90 kidney transplants, and five pancreas transplants per year. Most of the surgeons reported a primary focus on hepato-pancreato-biliary surgery, and only 10% of effective work time was actually dedicated to perform transplant surgeries. The majority of respondents estimated their weekly work hours to be between 55 and 66 h. When asked about their career satisfaction and expectations, most respondents characterized their salaries as inappropriately low and their career prospects as inadequate. This survey provides a first impression of the transplant surgery work force in Germany.

Time-trends in publication productivity of young transplant surgeons in the United States

To further clarify whether the transplant surgical research workforce is adequately poised to further scientific achievement, we have investigated the publication productivity of young transplant surgeons. Our hypothesis is that recent young transplant surgeons write fewer academic manuscripts than their senior colleagues did when they were young surgeons. We compared the number of first and senior author publications in the first 5 years after completion of fellowship among recent transplant surgeons (completed fellowship 2000-2004) and former young surgeons (completed fellowship 1990-1994). Recent young surgeons wrote fewer overall manuscripts (0.94 vs. 1.67, p < 0.05), as well as basic science manuscripts (0.21 vs. 0.54, p < 0.05) and clinical manuscripts (0.73 vs. 1.14, p < 0.05). Adjusting for the number of trainees, we note that recent young surgeons published 59% fewer basic science publications (IRR 0.41, 95% CI 0.29-0.57, p < 0.001) and 33% fewer clinical publications (IRR 0.67, 95% CI 0.56-0.82, p < 0.001). Among fellows in the 2000-2004 cohort, there was a 32% lower chance of publishing at least one paper compared with fellows in the 1990-1994 cohort (IRR 0.68, 95% CI 0.51-0.89, p = 0.006). These findings raise concerns about the future place of transplant surgeons within the science that shapes our own field.