Factors used in Applicant Ranking of Orthopedic Foot and Ankle Fellowships and the Availability of Online Information

Background: The Internet is often the first resource used by applicants to evaluate fellowship programs. However, information on these websites can be often incomplete, inaccessible, and/or inaccurate. The primary objective of this study was to examine key factors that orthopedic foot and ankle fellowship applicants use to rank programs. The secondary objective was to assess both the accessibility and availability of the information on orthopedic foot and ankle fellowship program websites. Methods: A Qualtrics survey was distributed via e-mail to those who matched into an orthopedic foot and ankle fellowship position from years 2008-2020. A comprehensive list of orthopedic foot and ankle fellowship programs was created. Program websites were evaluated for accessibility as well as the quality of recruitment and educational content. Results: There were a total of 114 survey responses out of 644 invites (17.7%). The most important factors for establishing a rank list were operative experience, current faculty, and program reputation. Eighty-five percent (41/48) of orthopedic foot and ankle fellowship websites were directly accessible using Google. On average, accessible orthopedic foot and ankle fellowship websites contained only 57% (11.5/20) of the content deemed desirable. Conclusion: Orthopedic foot and ankle websites are widely accessible and have higher recruitment and educational quality content scores compared with previously published data. The most important factors for establishing a rank list are consistent with previous literature. Those who ranked operative experience as one of the most important factors when establishing a rank list did not complete more operative cases than those who did not. Level of Evidence: Level IV.

Trends in Ophthalmology Resident Operative Experience and the Early Impact of the COVID-19 Pandemic

Purpose This study aimed to evaluate trends in ophthalmology resident operative experience and the early impact of the novel coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) pandemic. Design Present study is a retrospective analysis of the Accreditation Council for Graduate Medical Education (ACGME) Case Log System. Participants Anonymized graduating resident case logs from 2011 to 2020 academic years (AYs) were examined for this study. Methods Regression analysis for each procedure category was performed to identify trends between 2011 and 2019 AYs. Unpaired two-tailed t-test compared 2018 to 2019 and 2019 to 2020 AY's for each category surgeon (S) and as surgeon and assistant (S + A). Main Outcome Measures Mean and median cases as (S) and (S + A) during 2011 to 2019 AYs. Comparison between 2018 to 2019 and 2019 to 2020 AY's for each category as (S) and (S + A) to evaluate the impact of the COVID-19 pandemic. Results Total ophthalmology procedures as (S) rose from a mean of 479.6 to 601.3 (p < 0.001; R 2 = 0.96; Δ/year = 16.9) and a median of 444 to 537 (p < 0.001; R 2 = 0.97; Δ/year = 13.1). Total procedures as (S + A) rose from a mean of 698.1 to 768 (p < 0.01; R 2 = 0.83; Δ/year = 9.07) and a median of 677 to 734 (p < 0.05; R 2 = 0.61; Δ/year = 6.64). Cataract procedures as (S) rose from a mean of 152.8 to 208 (p < 0.001; R 2 = 0.99; Δ/year = 7.98) and a median of 146 to 197 (p < 0.001; R 2 = 0.97; Δ/year = 7.87). Cataract procedures as both (S + A) rose from a mean 231.4 to 268.7 (p < 0.001; R 2 = 0.95; Δ/year = 5.5) and a median of 213 to 254 (p < 0.001; R 2 = 0.93; Δ/year = 5.33). Between 2018 to 2019 and 2019 to 2020 AYs, the first pandemic year was associated with significant reductions in total procedures (601.3–533.7 [p < 0.0001]) as (S) and 768.0 to 694.4 (p < 0.0001) as (S + A), cataract surgery (208–162.2 [p < 0.0001]) as (S) and 268.7 to 219.1 (p < 0.0001) as (S + A), and glaucoma surgery (16.3–14.2 [p = 0.0068]) as (S) and 25.6 to 22.6 (p = 0.0063) as (S + A). Conclusion During 2011 to 2019 AYs, cataract, intravitreal injections, glaucoma, and total procedures increased significantly. During the early period of the COVID-19 pandemic (2019–2020 AY), national halting of elective procedures had a precipitous effect on resident cataract surgery experience to volumes similar to 2013 to 2014 AY where the mean was twice the current required minimum number. With few exceptions, other procedure volumes remained stable.