Surgical and non-surgical education practices in female pelvic medicine and reconstructive surgery fellowships within the United States

Educational objectives: To understand the general principles of biocompatability along with the effect that a synthetic implant has on would healing and to appropriately match an implant to its proposed site of implantation and be familiar with those implants currently approved for use in the United States.

Download Full-text

Isolated Orbital Floor Fracture Management: A Survey and Comparison of American Oculofacial and Facial Plastic Surgeon Preferences

Craniomaxillofacial Trauma & Reconstruction ◽

10.1055/s-0038-1639350 ◽

2019 ◽

Vol 12 (2) ◽

pp. 112-121 ◽

Cited By ~ 1

Author(s):

Liza M. Cohen ◽

David A. Shaye ◽

Michael K. Yoon

Keyword(s):

United States ◽

Reconstructive Surgery ◽

The United States ◽

Orbital Floor ◽

Porous Polyethylene ◽

Plastic And Reconstructive Surgery ◽

Orbital Floor Fracture ◽

Fracture Management ◽

Orbital Floor Fractures ◽

Facial Plastic

This article aimed to characterize, compare, and contrast the management of isolated orbital floor fractures among oculofacial and facial plastic surgeons in the United States. An anonymous 17-question multiple-choice web-based survey was distributed to all 590 members of the American Society of Ophthalmic Plastic and Reconstructive Surgery (ASOPRS) and all 1,300 members of the American Academy of Facial Plastic and Reconstructive Surgery (AAFPRS) using each society's email database from November 2016 to January 2017. Two-hundred twenty-five oculofacial and 135 facial plastic surgeons completed the survey. The most important indications for surgery among both oculofacial and facial plastic surgeons were motility restriction, enophthalmos, and diplopia at 2 weeks. The most common preferred time to surgical intervention was 8 to 14 days; however, facial plastic surgeons were more likely to operate after 4 to 7 days ( p < 0.001). The most common choices of orbital implant material were porous polyethylene and porous polyethylene plus titanium for both oculofacial and facial plastic surgeons, nylon for oculofacial surgeons, and titanium for facial plastic surgeons. The majority rarely/never used intraoperative computed tomography imaging or navigation. Facial plastic surgeons were more likely to perform postoperative imaging ( p < 0.001). We report results of the first survey of isolated orbital floor fracture management among oculofacial and facial plastic surgeons in the United States. This survey characterizes practice patterns and areas of similarities/differences among oculofacial and facial plastic surgeons in the management of isolated orbital floor fractures, which may help define the current standard of care.

Download Full-text

REPORT OK VISIT TO THE UNITED STATES SPONSORED BY THE FOUNDATION OF THE AMERICAN SOCIETY OF PLASTIC AND RECONSTRUCTIVE SURGERY, 1962

Plastic & Reconstructive Surgery ◽

10.1097/00006534-196303000-00003 ◽

1963 ◽

Vol 31 (6) ◽

pp. 236-238

Author(s):

B W FRANKLIN BISHOP

Keyword(s):

United States ◽

Reconstructive Surgery ◽

The United States ◽

Plastic And Reconstructive Surgery ◽

American Society

Download Full-text

Deep Venous Thrombosis Prophylaxis in Anterior Cruciate Ligament Reconstructive Surgery: What Is the Current State of Practice?

Sports Health A Multidisciplinary Approach ◽

10.1177/1941738117730576 ◽

2017 ◽

Vol 10 (2) ◽

pp. 156-159 ◽

Cited By ~ 8

Author(s):

Robert A. Keller ◽

Vasilios Moutzouros ◽

Joshua S. Dines ◽

Charles A. Bush-Joseph ◽

Orr Limpisvasti

Keyword(s):

United States ◽

Anterior Cruciate Ligament ◽

Acl Reconstruction ◽

Reconstructive Surgery ◽

Sports Medicine ◽

Cruciate Ligament ◽

The United States ◽

Vte Prophylaxis ◽

Anterior Cruciate ◽

Chemical Prophylaxis

Background: Venous thromboembolism (VTE) is a significant perioperative risk with many common orthopaedic procedures. Currently, there is no standardized recommendation for the use of VTE prophylaxis during anterior cruciate ligament (ACL) reconstruction. This study sought to evaluate the current prophylactic practices of fellowship-trained sports medicine orthopaedic surgeons in the United States. Hypothesis: Very few surgeons use perioperative VTE prophylaxis for ACL reconstructive surgery. Study Design: Survey. Methods: Surveys were emailed to the alumni networks of 4 large ACGME-accredited sports medicine fellowship programs. Questions were focused on their current use of chemical and nonchemical VTE prophylaxis. Results: Surveys were completed by 142 surgeons in the United States, yielding a response rate of 32%. Of those who responded, 50.7% stated that they routinely use chemical prophylaxis, with 95.5% of those using aspirin (acetylsalicylic acid [ASA]). There was no standardized dosing protocol, with respondents using ASA 325 mg once (46%) or twice daily (26%) or ASA 81 mg once (18%) or twice (10%) daily. The most common reason for not including chemical prophylaxis within the reconstruction procedure was that it is unnecessary given the low risk of VTE. Physicians also based their prophylaxis regimen more on their own clinical experience than concern for litigation. Conclusion: Half of all sports medicine fellowship–trained surgeons surveyed routinely use chemical VTE prophylaxis after ACL reconstruction, with more than 90% of those using ASA. Of those using ASA, there was no prevailing dosing protocol. For those not using chemical prophylaxis, the most important reason was that it was felt to be unnecessary due to the risks outweighing the benefits. Those who do not regularly use chemical prophylaxis would be willing to, however, if a patient had a personal or family history of clotting disorder or is currently on birth control. Additionally, clinical experience was the primary driver for a current prophylaxis protocol. Clinical Relevance: This survey study evaluating the use of VTE prophylaxis with ACL reconstruction lends clinical insight to the current practice of a large, geographically diverse group of fellowship-trained sports medicine orthopaedic surgeons in the United States.

Download Full-text

Factors Affecting Attrition in Graduate Surgical Education

The American Surgeon ◽

10.1177/000313480707301006 ◽

2007 ◽

Vol 73 (10) ◽

pp. 963-966 ◽

Cited By ~ 2

Author(s):

Som Kohanzadeh ◽

Yukiharu Hayase ◽

Maarten K. Lefor ◽

Yasuhiro Nagata ◽

Alan T. Lefor

Keyword(s):

United States ◽

Training Program ◽

Surgical Education ◽

Program Directors ◽

The United States ◽

Counseling Services ◽

Factors Affecting ◽

Institutional Review ◽

Work Hour

This study was undertaken to identify characteristics of residents who left their training program before the end of the program. A survey was sent to 248 Program Directors in the United States, after institutional review. Anonymous responses were received from 27 (11%) programs. Data was received on 166 residents, including 111 males and 55 females. The group included 146 categorical residents and 20 preliminary residents. Of these, 60 residents left in the middle of the year and 105 left at the end of the year. Of the 164 residents for whom data was reported, 30 (21%) used counseling services. Of 110 residents who left before 2004, 54 (49%) left to choose another specialty. In 2004, of 25 residents who left, 13 (52%, P > 0.05) pursued training in another specialty, and in 2005 of 31 residents who left, 23 (74%, P < 0.025) chose another specialty. Significantly more residents who started a career in surgery after 2004 left to train in another specialty. This may be due to implementation of work hour restrictions in 2003 leading residents to enter surgery who would not have done so previously. Strategies for better retention of matched residents are necessary to reverse this worrisome trend.

Download Full-text