Fifty Years of Innovation in Plastic Surgery

Women in Plastic Surgery Innovation: A 10-Year Review of Gender Representation in Mammary Device Patents

BACKGROUND

This study aims to pioneer in evaluating women's representation in plastic surgery innovations, focusing on mammary prosthesis devices' inventorship. Despite growing gender parity in the field, women's involvement in innovation remains underexplored. This is especially crucial, as the predominant recipients of these innovative technologies are women, urging a necessity for broader female engagement in pioneering surgical advancements.

METHOD

Patents under the "A61F2/12: Mammary prostheses and implants" classification between the dates January 1, 2011, to December 31, 2020, were identified using Google Patents Advanced. Inclusion criteria included patents (not designs) in English and applications (not grants), with no litigation limitations. Data collected included ID, title, assignee (categorized as industry, academic, private, individual), inventors, and dates (priority, filing, and publication). Sex of inventors was identified with the literature validated gender API, with manual resolution of unresolved genders or with ga_accuracy scores of less than 75%. Data were analyzed using 2-tailed Student t tests, χ2 analysis, and Pearson correlation coefficient (significance set at P ≤ 0.05).

RESULTS

Of the more than 130,000 plastic surgery patents in English identified between the 10-year period, 1355 were classified as A61F2/12. A total of 374 unique patents were included for analysis (841 duplicates were removed, and 140 patents were excluded because of non-English character author names). There was a significant increase in patents over the decade (from 15 in 2011 to 88 in 2020, R2 = 0.74, P < 0.05), with a decrease in number of inventors per patent (R2 = 0.12, P < 0.05). Of the 1102 total inventors, 138 were female (11.2%), with a 4-fold increase in representation over the decade (R2 = 0.58, P < 0.05), including increase in patents filed with a woman first inventor (0%-14.8%). Women were equally likely to be first 3 inventors versus middle to last inventors (12.8% vs 11.1%, respectively).

CONCLUSIONS

Over a decade, mammary device innovations rose significantly. Although women inventors' representation improved, it remains disproportionate compared with women in residency/practice. Hence, interventions should aim to align inventor representation with training ratios, through institutional optimization, reducing gender segmentation, and enhancing funding opportunities.

Game Changers: Plastic and Reconstructive Surgery Innovations of the Last 100 Years

Background

Innovation is an essential aspect of plastic and reconstructive surgery (PRS), whether it involves improving current processes or implementing radical change that disrupts the status quo. Collaborating and sharing innovations help advance the field of PRS as a whole.

Methods

An anonymous survey was administered to members of the American Association of Plastic Surgeons on their opinions of the top five innovations in PRS of the last 100 years.

Results

A list of 69 unique innovations were compiled; the top five innovations overall were microsurgery, myocutaneous flaps, craniofacial surgery, negative pressure wound therapy, and organ transplantation. This list was reviewed by the American Association of Plastic Surgeons Technology Committee, and expanded to 100 unique innovations.

Conclusions

We discuss why the above innovations were essential to the development of PRS, as well as the unique factors that can make a new product or procedure into something that remodels the field of PRS.

Dynamic assessment of the upper extremity: a review of available and emerging technologies

The purpose of this review article is to provide an update on the realm of emerging technology available for the assessment of dynamic functional movement of the hand and upper limb. A critical overview of the literature and a conceptual framework for use of such technologies is proposed. The framework explores three broad purpose categories including customization of care, functional surveillance and interventions through biofeedback strategies. State-of-the-art technologies are described, from basic activity monitors to feedback-enabled robotic gloves, along with exemplar trials and clinical applications. The future of technologies innovation in hand pathology is proposed in the context of the current obstacles and opportunities for hand surgeons and therapists.

Business of Medicine in the Academic Plastic Surgery Community: A Survey of American Council of Academic Plastic Surgeons Members

PURPOSE

Business fundamentals, such as leadership, negotiations, and personal finance, remain as an overlooked component of residency education. It remains unclear how faculty members in academic plastic surgery particularly view the integration of a business curriculum within plastic surgery residency curriculum and how one's personal exposure to business concepts may impact their perception on the importance of learning such concepts in surgical training.

METHODS

A 15-question survey was distributed through the American College of Academic Plastic Surgeons members in order to assess how academic plastic surgeons perceived the importance of a business curriculum and, if applicable, how the formalized study of these concepts were incorporated within plastic surgery residency programs. Surgeons were also queried about barriers toward organizing and executing such a curriculum and about the importance of certain topics for education.

RESULTS

Fifty-five academic plastic surgeons, representing 25 institutions, completed the survey. More than 60% of academic plastic surgeons either strongly agreed or agreed to a formalized business curriculum being a necessary component of residency curriculum, and more than 70% either strongly agreed or agreed to wishing for more instruction in such concepts.

CONCLUSION

This study elucidates how academic plastic surgeons perceive the education of business fundamentals during plastic surgery training. Although the majority of respondents found such teachings as valuable, our findings suggest limited resources allocated to these important concepts. Future efforts should incentivize plastic surgery programs to provide formal instruction within the business of medicine and, in doing so, position trainees for success in their careers.

Patents for the Plastic Surgeon: A Primer

ABSTRACT

Although innovation and entrepreneurship are complementary in the process of creating new products, plastic surgeons are frequently discouraged by the challenges associated with the regulatory and administrative environments in patent filing. The following primer provides a step-by-step guide for understanding patents and outlines the steps and costs involved in patent filing. To improve opportunities for successful patent filing, we elaborate on some of the common pitfalls in the process, including the timing of public disclosure, conducting a private art search, selecting a patent attorney or agent, determining the level of inventor involvement, and navigating academic and employment contracts. The innovative drive in plastic surgery provides a strong impetus for strengthening knowledge about patents and patent filing in order to support efforts for providing high-value patient care.

Pushing the Needle of Entrepreneurship and Innovation: Where Do Plastic and Reconstructive Surgeons Stand?

Background:

Plastic and reconstructive surgery has a well-recognized history of disruption and innovation. It remains unclear, however, how the specialty’s priority on innovation materializes into commercialization or bench to bedside led by plastic surgeons.

Methods:

Our analysis utilized Pitchbook (Seattle, Wash.), a market database of companies and investors, for ventures that have designed innovations related to plastic and reconstructive surgery. Companies were categorized into 5 focus areas: provider (outpatient surgical or hospital entity), aesthetics (cosmetics/injectables), devices (instrumentation, lasers, implants), regenerative medicine (tissue engineering/wound healing), and software (digital solutions). Company websites, LinkedIn (Sunnyvale, Calif.) profiles, and Crunchbase (San Francisco, Calif.) were reviewed to determine the leadership roles of plastic surgeons.

Results:

Plastic surgeons primarily serve as advisors, as opposed to founders or chief executive officers (CEOs). Our analysis additionally found that provider and software solutions had a greater degree of plastic surgeon-led leadership, whereas regenerative medicine and device innovation remains less frequented. There was a relatively balanced representation of academic and private plastic surgeons in entrepreneurial pursuits.

Conclusions:

Plastic surgeons typically serve as board advisors, as opposed to founders and CEOs. Reasons for disengagement from leadership roles may include satisfaction with clinical work, time constraint, lack of business knowledge, financial constraint, and opportunity cost associated with starting a venture. To promote participation in innovation, future studies should explore tangible ways to engage in such opportunities. In doing so, plastic surgeons can own the “organ” of innovation, and continue to contribute to the legacy and the advancement of the specialty.