Gender, Race, Age, Allopathic Degree, Board Score, and Research Experience Among Applicants Matching to General and Orthopedic Surgery Residencies, 2015-2019

Gender Distribution of First and Senior Authorship Across Most Cited Studies Within the Top Ten Surgical Journals From 2015-2020: Cementing Women Academic Surgery Representation

INTRODUCTION

The aim of this study is to investigate the gender distribution of first and senior authors in the most highly cited original research studies published in the top 10 surgical journals from 2015 to 2020 to identify disparities and changes over time.

METHODS

A retrospective study analyzing the gender distribution of first and senior authors in the top 10 most cited studies from the top 10 surgical journals from 2015 to 2020. The genders of the first and senior authors of each study were assessed using National Provider Identifier (NPI) numbers or pronouns from institutional biographies or news articles.

RESULTS

The genders of 1200 first and senior authors from 600 original research studies were assessed. First author gender distribution consisted of 71.8% men, 22.3% women, 0% non-binary, and 5.8% unknown. Senior author gender distribution was 82.3% men, 14.3% women, 0% non-binary, and 3.3% unknown. Studies published by first authors who are women received more citations than those published by first authors that are men in 2015 (169.1 versus 112.9, P = 0.002) and 2016 (144.2 versus 101.5, P = 0.011). There was an increase in first authorship among men from 2015 to 2020 (P = 0.035).

CONCLUSIONS

Men represent a significantly higher proportion of both first and senior authorships in top surgical research and the gap has widened from 2015 to 2020. However, studies written by women first authors received significantly more citations than those written by men.

What is the Trend in Representation of Women and Under-represented Minorities in Orthopaedic Surgery Residency?

BACKGROUND

Orthopaedic surgery training programs have lagged behind other surgical specialties in increasing their representation of women and people from under-represented minority (URM) groups. Comparative data between orthopaedic surgery and other specialties are needed to help identify solutions to closing the diversity gap.

QUESTIONS/PURPOSES

(1) Which surgical specialties have the greatest representation of women residents and residents from URM groups? (2) How have the proportions of women residents and residents from URM groups changed across the surgical specialties during the past decade?

METHODS

This was a retrospective evaluation of a large, longitudinally maintained survey database. Resident data by gender and ethnicity were retrieved from the Accreditation Council for Graduate Medical Education Data Resource Books for the 2011 to 2012 through 2019 to 2020 academic years. The Accreditation Council for Graduate Medical Education database is updated annually; thus, it is the most up-to-date and complete database available for gender and ethnicity data for all surgical residents. Data were obtained and analyzed for seven different surgical specialties: orthopaedic surgery, neurosurgery, ophthalmology, otolaryngology, plastic surgery, general surgery, and urology. No sampling was necessary, and thus descriptive statistics of the data were completed. Because the entire population of residents was included for the period of time in question, no statistical comparisons were made, and the reported differences represent absolute differences between the groups for these periods. Linear regression analyses were performed to estimate the annual growth rates of women residents and residents from URM groups in each specialty.

RESULTS

Among the seven surgical specialties, representation of women residents increased from 28% (4640 of 16,854) of residents in 2012 to 33% (6879 of 20,788) in 2020. Orthopaedic surgery had the lowest representation of women residents every year, with women residents comprising 16% of residents (700 of 4342) in 2020. Among the seven surgical specialties, representation of residents from URM groups increased from 8.1% (1362 of 16,854) in 2012 to 9.7% (2013 of 20,788) in 2020. In 2020, the representation of residents from URM groups in orthopaedic surgery was 7.7% (333 of 4342). In 2020, general surgery had the highest representation of women residents (42%; 3696 of 8809) as well as residents from URM groups (12%; 1065 of 8809). Plastic surgery (1.46% per year) and general surgery (0.95% per year) had larger annual growth rates of women residents than the other specialties did. In each surgical specialty, the annual growth rate of residents from URM groups was insignificant.

CONCLUSION

During the past decade, there was only a small increase in the representation of women in orthopaedic surgery, while the representation of people from URM groups did not change. In contrast, by 2020, general surgery had become the most diverse among the seven surgical specialties. To increase diversity in our field, we need to evaluate and implement some of the effective interventions that have helped general surgery become the diverse surgical specialty that it is today.

CLINICAL RELEVANCE

General surgery has substantially reduced gender and ethnic disparities that existed in the past, while those in orthopaedic surgery still persist. General surgery residencies have implemented a holistic review of resident applications and longitudinal mentoring programs to successfully address these disparities. Orthopaedic surgery programs should consider placing less emphasis on United States Medical Licensing Examination score thresholds and more weight on applicants' non-academic attributes, and put more efforts into targeted longitudinal mentorship programs, some of which should be led by non-minority faculty.

Shifting the Surgical Residency Match to a 100% Virtual Interview Format During the COVID-19 Pandemic, How has It Affected Placement Into Surgical Training Programs?

INTRODUCTION

The AAMC transitioned to virtual interview formats for the 2020-2021 residency match. This study aims to examine the impact of the 100% virtual interview format for the 2020-2021 residency match on both application and match changes for multiple surgical specialties, including neurosurgery (NS), orthopedic surgery (OS), plastic surgery (PS), general surgery (GS), thoracic surgery (TS), and vascular surgery (VS).

METHODS

Cross-sectional study comparing application and match changes between the in-person 2019-2020 and virtual 2020-2021 residency match cycles for different surgical specialties.

RESULTS

There was an overall increase in the number of applicants for 5 of the surgery specialties but not VS, and an overall increase in the number of applications per residency program across all specialties. The average number of applications per applicant also increased, except in TS. There were no major match changes except in TS, which saw an increase in number of spots filled by MDs to nearly 100% from 84.2% in the previous cycle.

CONCLUSION

The switch to the 100% virtual 2020-2021 residency match interview format was associated with an overall increase in the number of applications per program and number of applications per applicant across multiple surgical specialties. There was a decrease in the number of applicants to VS and an increase in the number of applications per applicant. The switch to a virtual interview format in 2020-2021 was also associated with an increase in TS spots filled by MDs to almost 98%, increasing the already concerning TS match disparity for DO and IMG applicants.

Trends in Leadership Within Orthopedic Foot and Ankle Fellowships

Background:

No study in the orthopedic literature has analyzed the demographic characteristics or surgical training of foot and ankle fellowship directors (FDs). Our group sought to illustrate demographic trends among foot and ankle fellowship leaders.

Methods:

The American Orthopaedic Foot & Ankle Society (AOFAS) Fellowship Directory for the 2021 to 2022 program year was queried in order to identify all foot and ankle fellowship leaders at programs currently offering positions in the United States and Canada. Data points gathered included age, sex, race/ethnicity, location of surgical training, time since training completion until FD appointment, length in FD role, and individual research H-index.

Results:

We identified 68 fellowship leaders, which consisted of 48 FDs and 19 co-FDs. Sixty-five individuals (95.6%) were male, and 3 (4.4%) were female. As regards race/ethnicity, 88.2% of the leadership was Caucasian (n = 60), 7.4% was Asian American (n = 5), 1.5% was Hispanic/Latino (n = 1), and 1.5% was African American (n = 1). The average age was 51.5 years, and the calculated mean Scopus H-index was 15.28. The mean duration from fellowship training to fellowship leader position was 11.23 years.

Conclusion:

Leaders within foot and ankle orthopedic surgery are characterized by research prowess and experience, but demographic diversity is lacking.

Level of Evidence:

Level III.

Regional Population-Based Workforce Shortages in General Surgery by Practicing Surgeon and Resident Trainee

BACKGROUND

The physician shortage in the United States (US) continues to become more apparent. We aimed to evaluate the relationship between the US physician distribution from 2012-2019 by specialty at the state/regional level relative to the corresponding population growth.

METHODS

US matched residents and practicing physicians from 2012-2019 were extracted from the National Resident Matching Program and Association of American Medical College databases, respectively. Residents and practicing physicians were divided by geographic regions (West, Midwest, South, Northeast), states, and specialties (anesthesiology, emergency medicine, family medicine, general surgery (GS), internal medicine, obstetrics/gynecology and pediatrics).

RESULTS

Entering residents and physicians increased across 7 specialties from 2012-2019 with the exception of GS, which showed .2% decrease in practicing physicians. GS experienced decreases in entering residents in all US regions except the South. All specialties showed a decrease in the people-per-physician (PPP) except GS and pediatrics, which had a 4.1% and 71.3% increase, respectively. EM showed the largest growth overall, both in entering residents and overall workforce.

CONCLUSION

GS experienced slow growth of residents, decreases in practicing physicians and workforce overall, and an increase in PPP from 2012-2019. Our findings suggest that current population growth rate is exceeding the rate of physicians entering the field of GS and highlights the need for interventions to promote the recruitment of GS residents and retainment of attending physicians, particularly for rural areas. Future research to measure surgeon distribution in relation to patient outcomes and the efficacy of recent policy to address shortages can help define additional interventions to address physician shortages moving forward.