Applicant and Program Director Perceptions of a Virtual Format for Craniofacial Surgery Fellowship Interviews

FACE ◽  
2021 ◽  
pp. 273250162110675
Author(s):  
Sara A. Neimanis ◽  
Joseph K. Williams ◽  
Colin M. Brady
1986 ◽  
Vol 13 (3) ◽  
pp. 441-448 ◽  
Author(s):  
Jeffrey L. Marsh ◽  
Michael W. Vannier ◽  
Stephen Bresina ◽  
Kaye M. Hemmer

Skull Base ◽  
2007 ◽  
Vol 17 (S 2) ◽  
Author(s):  
Garth Essig ◽  
Steven Newman ◽  
Paul Levin

2019 ◽  
Vol 19 (1) ◽  
Author(s):  
L. Bank ◽  
M. Jippes ◽  
T. R. van Rossum ◽  
C. den Rooyen ◽  
A. J. J. A. Scherpbier ◽  
...  

Abstract Background In postgraduate medical education, program directors are in the lead of educational change within clinical teaching teams. As change is part of a social process, it is important to not only focus on the program director but take their other team members into account. The purpose of this study is to provide an in-depth insight into how clinical teaching teams manage and organize curriculum change processes, and implement curriculum change in daily practice. Methods An explorative qualitative semi-structured interview study was conducted between October 2016 and March 2017. A total of six clinical teaching teams (n = 6) participated in this study, i.e. one program director, one clinical staff member, and one trainee from each clinical teaching team (n = 18). Data were analysed and structured by means of thematic analysis. Results The analysis yielded to five factors that positively impact change: shared commitment, reinvention, ownership, supportive structure and open culture. Factors that negatively impact change were: resistance, behaviour change, balance between different tasks, lack of involvement, lack of consensus, and unsafe culture and hierarchy. Overall, no clear change strategy could be recognized. Conclusions Insight was gathered in factors facilitating and hindering the implementation of change. It seems particularly important for clinical teaching teams to be able to create a sense of ownership among all team members by making a proposed change valuable for their local context as well as to be capable of working together as a team. Cultural factors seem to be particularly relevant in a team’s ability to accomplish this.


2021 ◽  
Vol 21 (1) ◽  
Author(s):  
Frederick Mun ◽  
Alyssa R. Scott ◽  
David Cui ◽  
Erik B. Lehman ◽  
Seong Ho Jeong ◽  
...  

Abstract Background United States Medical Licensing Examination Step 1 will transition from numeric grading to pass/fail, sometime after January 2022. The aim of this study was to compare how program directors in orthopaedics and internal medicine perceive a pass/fail Step 1 will impact the residency application process. Methods A 27-item survey was distributed through REDCap to 161 U.S. orthopaedic residency program directors and 548 U.S. internal medicine residency program directors. Program director emails were obtained from the American Medical Association’s Fellowship and Residency Electronic Interactive Database. Results We received 58 (36.0%) orthopaedic and 125 (22.8%) internal medicine program director responses. The majority of both groups disagree with the change to pass/fail, and felt that the decision was not transparent. Both groups believe that the Step 2 Clinical Knowledge exam and clerkship grades will take on more importance. Compared to internal medicine PDs, orthopaedic PDs were significantly more likely to emphasize research, letters of recommendation from known faculty, Alpha Omega Alpha membership, leadership/extracurricular activities, audition elective rotations, and personal knowledge of the applicant. Both groups believe that allopathic students from less prestigious medical schools, osteopathic students, and international medical graduates will be disadvantaged. Orthopaedic and internal medicine program directors agree that medical schools should adopt a graded pre-clinical curriculum, and that there should be a cap on the number of residency applications a student can submit. Conclusion Orthopaedic and internal medicine program directors disagree with the change of Step 1 to pass/fail. They also believe that this transition will make the match process more difficult, and disadvantage students from less highly-regarded medical schools. Both groups will rely more heavily on the Step 2 clinical knowledge exam score, but orthopaedics will place more importance on research, letters of recommendation, Alpha Omega Alpha membership, leadership/extracurricular activities, personal knowledge of the applicant, and audition electives.


OTO Open ◽  
2021 ◽  
Vol 5 (2) ◽  
pp. 2473974X2110141
Author(s):  
Parsa P. Salehi ◽  
Sina J. Torabi ◽  
Yan Ho Lee ◽  
Babak Azizzadeh

Objectives The objectives of this study include characterizing the practice patterns and testing strategies of facial plastic and reconstructive surgery (FPRS) fellowship directors (FDs) secondary to COVID-19 and to quantify the impact of COVID-19 on FPRS fellowship training. Study Design Cross-sectional survey. Setting Online. Methods A survey was sent to all American Academy of Facial Plastic and Reconstructive Surgery FDs and co-FDs in September 2020. Descriptive analyses were performed. Results Of 77 eligible FDs, 45 responded (58.4%) representing a diverse group across the United States. All but 1 FD routinely screened patients for COVID-19 in the preoperative setting. FDs largely believed that universal preoperative testing was cost-effective (66.7%), improved patient safety (80.0%) and health care worker safety (95.6%), and was not burdensome for patients (53.3%). With regard to volume of cosmetic/aesthetic, reconstructive, facial nerve, and trauma surgery, FDs indicated largely no change in volume (34.9%, 71.0%, 68.4%, and 80.0%, respectively) or fellow experience (67.4%, 80.6%, 84.2%, and 80.0%). Half (50.0%) of the FDs reported decreased volume of congenital/craniofacial surgery, but 75.0% did not believe that there was a change in fellow experience. Overall, of the 15 responses indicating “worsened training” across all domains of FPRS, 14 were located in the Northeast (93.33%). Conclusions The COVID-19 pandemic has had the least impact on the volume of reconstructive procedures, facial nerve operations, and trauma surgery and a negative impact on congenital/craniofacial surgery volume, and it has accelerated the demand for cosmetic/aesthetic operations. Overall, the majority of FDs did not feel as though their fellows’ trainings would be adversely affected by the ongoing pandemic.


2020 ◽  
Vol 7 (Supplement_1) ◽  
pp. S587-S587
Author(s):  
David J Riedel ◽  
Rana Malek

Abstract Background Trainees may not always be comfortable providing frank feedback or constructive criticism to their Program Director (PD) due to fears of negative repercussions. PDs likewise may lack the means to obtain high quality feedback from trainees, particularly among smaller training programs, e.g. fellowships. An ombudsperson is defined as an independent appointee whose task is to investigate and attempt to resolve complaints and problems. Methods The PDs from Infectious Disease (ID) and Endocrinology fellowships partnered to meet with fellows from the opposite program. Meetings were held with fellows in December and June of the academic year. Each PD started their meeting with 2 questions on a 1-10 scale: How do you rate the fellowship program? How do you rate the job the PD and program leadership are doing? Additional questions covered the fellow evaluation process, faculty feedback, education vs. service balance, and gaps in training. Additional time was allotted for fellow-raised concerns. Meeting notes were summarized anonymously and returned to the PD of the other program. Fellows were asked to complete a brief questionnaire about their experience. Results A total of 15 fellows completed the survey (6 Endocrinology, 9 ID; Table). All 15 fellows agreed that the goal of the ombudsperson review meeting (i.e. to address fellow concerns in a more confidential setting) was achieved and were comfortable sharing concerns and feedback to the ombudsperson. The majority of fellows (53%) was more comfortable sharing concerns regarding the fellowship to the ombudsperson than directly to the PD. Thirteen (87%) agreed that concerns raised during the first ombudsperson meeting were addressed by the Program in subsequent months. All fellows (100%) found it helpful that the ombudsperson was another PD and recommended that the ombudsperson review meetings should continue in the fellowship. Table. Characteristics of participants and outcomes of questions about fellowship ombudsperson program Conclusion The fellowship PD ombudsperson meeting is a novel means for soliciting constructive feedback from trainees at small training programs. Fellows were comfortable with the ombudsperson arrangement, felt the meetings achieved their goal, and recommended that the meetings continue in the future. Disclosures All Authors: No reported disclosures


Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document