Subscribe to RSS
Download PDF
DOI: 10.5999/aps.2017.44.5.428
Hand Surgery Fellowship Selection Criteria: A National Fellowship Director Survey
Authors
Minor parts of the contents presented in this article were presented at the following conferences: American Association for Hand Surgery Annual Meeting, Scottsdale, AZ, January 2016; Plastic Surgery The Meeting, Boston, MA, October 2015; American Council of Academic Plastic Surgeons (ACAPS) Winter Retreat, Chicago, IL, February 2016. The abstract presented at the meeting was included in the PRS Global Open ACAPS Winter Retreat booklet.
Background Candidate characteristics for hand surgery fellowship training remains unknown, as very little data is available in the literature. This study aims to provide information on the criteria that are employed to select candidates for the hand surgery fellowship match.
Methods A 38-question survey was sent in April 2015 to all Accreditation Council for Graduate Medical Education recognized hand surgery fellowship program directors (n=81) involved in the U.S. match. The survey investigated factors used for the selection of applicants, including medical school, residency training, research experience, fellowship interview, and candidate characteristics. A 5-point Likert scale was used to grade 33 factors from “not at all important” (1) to “essential in making my decision” (5); or for five controversial factors from “very negative impact” (1) to “very positive impact in making my decision” (5).
Results A total of 52% (42 out of 81) of responses were received from hand surgery fellowship program directors. The most important influential factors were interactions with faculty during interview and visit (4.6±0.6), interpersonal skills (4.6±0.5), overall interview performance in the selection process (4.6±0.6), professionalism and ethics (4.6±0.7), and letters of recommendation from hand surgeons (4.5±0.7). Factors that have a negative impact on the selection process include visa requirement (2.1±1.2), graduate of non-plastic surgery residency program (2.4±1.3), and graduate of a foreign medical school (2.4±1.1).
Conclusions This study provides data on hand surgery fellowship directors’ perception on the criteria important for fellowship applicant selection, and showed that interview-related criteria and letters of recommendation are the important factors.
Publication History
Received: 19 January 2017
Accepted: 13 June 2017
Article published online:
20 April 2022
© 2017. The Korean Society of Plastic and Reconstructive Surgeons. This is an open access article published by Thieme under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution-NonCommercial License, permitting unrestricted noncommercial use, distribution, and reproduction so long as the original work is given appropriate credit. Contents may not be used for commercial purposes. (https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc/4.0/)
Thieme Medical Publishers, Inc.
333 Seventh Avenue, 18th Floor, New York, NY 10001, USA
-
REFERENCES
- 1 Yung KC, Courey MS. Factors important in laryngology fellow and laryngology fellowship selection. Laryngoscope 2015; 125: 2543-6
- 2 Natt N, Chang AY, Berbari EF. et al. Selection of endocrinology subspecialty trainees: which applicant characteristics are associated with performance during fellowship training?. Endocr Pract 2016; 22: 45-50
- 3 Grabowski G, Walker JW. Orthopaedic fellowship selection criteria: a survey of fellowship directors. J Bone Joint Surg Am 2013; 95: e154
- 4 Benzon HA, De Oliveira Jr GS, Jagannathan N. et al. Selection of subspecialty fellows in anesthesia for pediatric anesthesia: a national survey of program directors in the United States. Paediatr Anaesth 2015; 25: 487-91
- 5 Meyer DR, Dewan MA. Fellowship selection criteria in ophthalmic plastic and reconstructive surgery. Ophthal Plast Reconstr Surg 2010; 26: 357-9
- 6 Chun R, Preciado D, Brown DJ. et al. Choosing a fellow or fellowship: a survey of pediatric otolaryngologists. JAMA Otolaryngol Head Neck Surg 2014; 140: 102-5
- 7 Muffly TM, Gibson K, Barber MD. et al. Factors used by minimally invasive gynecologic surgery fellowship directors to select their fellows. J Minim Invasive Gynecol 2011; 18 6 Suppl S65
- 8 The Match [Internet]. Washington, DC: National Resident Matching Program; 2017 [cited 2017 Jun 2]. Available from: http://www.nrmp.org/about/
- 9 Rohrich RJ, Rodriguez ED, Unger JG. How to put your best self forward in plastic surgery residency interviews. Plast Reconstr Surg 2016; 137: 379-82
- 10 Janis JE, Hatef DA. Resident selection protocols in plastic surgery: a national survey of plastic surgery program directors. Plast Reconstr Surg 2008; 122: 1929-39
- 11 Harper JG, Given KS, Pettitt B. et al. The independent plastic surgery match: an in-depth analysis of the applicants and process. Ann Plast Surg 2011; 66: 568-71
- 12 Nguyen AT, Janis JE. Resident selection protocols in plastic surgery: a national survey of plastic surgery independent program directors. Plast Reconstr Surg 2012; 130: 459-69
- 13 Gauer JL, Wolff JM, Jackson JB. Do MCAT scores predict USMLE scores? An analysis on 5 years of medical student data. Med Educ Online 2016; 21: 31795
- 14 Dunleavy D, Sondheimer H, Castillo-Page L. et al. Medical school admissions: more than grades and test scores. AAMC Anal Brief 2011; 11: 1-2
- 15 Go PH, Klaassen Z, Chamberlain RS. An ERAS-based survey evaluating demographics, United States Medical Licensing Examination Performance, and research experience between American medical graduates and United States citizen international medical graduates: is the bar higher on the continent?. J Surg Educ 2012; 69: 143-8