An Analysis of the Characteristics and Trends in Practicing Plastic Surgeons in California.

BACKGROUND: Studies suggest an increasing trend of plastic surgeons choosing private practice after training, with up to 90% pursuing private practice without future fellowships.1 Previous data showed that 66.7% of graduates from plastic surgery residency programs chose to pursue private practice without future fellowship, while more recent studies estimate this statistic has risen close to 90%.1,2 The literature has yet to characterize the current plastic surgery workforce and changes in its composition over time. This study aims to analyze the characteristics and training of plastic surgeons in California through a comparative study with general surgeons. METHODS: Surgeon demographics were extracted from the Centers for Medicare and Medicaid Services open database. Urban/rural classification and academic affiliation were crosslinked from the Inpatient Prospective System database and sole proprietorship status was cross-linked from the NPI Registry. Summary statistics and logistic regressions with chi-squared analysis were analyzed using STATA/MP17. RESULTS: Our analysis consisted of 3871 plastic and general surgeons in California. Compared to general surgeons, plastic surgeons were less likely to be females (P < 0.000), and more likely to be sole proprietors (P < 0.000), and affiliated with a teaching hospital (P < 0.005). There was no statistically significant difference in the percentage of rural-practicing plastic and general surgeons (P = 0.590). More recent plastic surgery graduates were more likely to be affiliated with an academic hospital (P < 0.0000). The composition of females significantly increased from the older graduated cohort to the most recent one. There was no significant difference in sole proprietorship and rural practice status between the oldest and youngest graduating cohorts. CONCLUSIONS: Although the California plastic surgery workforce is gaining female plastic surgeons and shifting to academic institutions, significant progress in serving rural communities is yet to be made. Our study suggests that there may be a shift in the trend of plastic surgeons opting for private practice, possibly driven by a desire for more stable positions in academia. Continued improvement in diversity and training of future plastic surgeons is needed to alleviate the rural care gap.

Robotic and Plastic Surgery: actuality and prospects for the near future, a scoping review.

OBJECTIVE: This work aims to review the existing use of robotics in plastic surgery. METHODS: A meticulous selection process identified 22 articles relevant to this scoping review. RESULTS: The literature on the use of robotics in plastic surgery is sparse. Nonetheless, this review highlights emerging benefits in microsurgery, breast reconstruction, and transoral surgery. CONCLUSION: This scoping review identifies critical articles reporting the emerging use of robotics in plastic surgery. While the scientific medical community has yet to extensively document its use, the available evidence suggests a promising future for robotics in this field.

Trends in American Plastic Surgery Procedures (2005-2019): Observing the Growth Rate of Maxillofacial Surgery and Cosmetic Minimally Invasive Procedures in ASPS Data.

BACKGROUND: This study explores the dynamic changes in plastic surgery practices, focusing on the growth rates across different subcategories, particularly highlighting the trends in the United States. OBJECTIVES: To analyze evolving trends in plastic surgery using statistical methods, providing insights into the changes and growth patterns in various segments over time. MATERIALS AND METHODS: Utilizing data from 2005 to 2019 from the American Society of Plastic Surgeons, the authors, conducted a comprehensive statistical analysis using the SPSS program to investigate trends in plastic surgery procedures. RESULTS: Our analysis revealed no significant differences in year-on-year growth rates between cosmetic and reconstructive surgery. However, in reconstructive surgery subcategories, maxillofacial surgery showed the highest mean growth rate at 11.61%, though this was not statistically significant. In cosmetic minimally invasive procedures, soft tissue filler injections and botulinum toxin A injections experienced notably higher growth trends compared with microdermabrasion. CONCLUSION: The findings suggest that practitioners considering a career in plastic surgery should not focus solely on choosing between reconstructive and cosmetic surgery. Recognizing substantial growth in cosmetic minimally invasive procedures, especially botulinum toxin A injections and fillers, is vital for making informed career decisions.

Current trends in retraction of plastic surgery and reconstruction research.

BACKGROUND: Various studies regarding retractions of publications have determined the rate of retraction has increased in recent years. Although this trend may apply to any field, there is a paucity of literature exploring the publication of erroneous studies within plastic and reconstructive surgery. The present study aims to identify trends in frequency and reasons for retraction of plastic and reconstructive surgery studies, with analysis of subspecialty and journals. METHODS: A database search was conducted for retracted papers within plastic and reconstructive surgery. The initial search yielded 2347 results, which were analyzed by two independent reviewers. 77 studies were jointly identified for data collection. RESULTS: The most common reasons for retractions were duplication (n = 20, 25.9 %), request of author (n = 15, 19.5 %), plagiarism (n = 9, 11.6 %), error (n = 9, 11.6 %), fraud (n = 2, 2.6 %), and conflict of interest (n = 1, 1.3 %). 15 were basic science studies (19.4 %), 58 were clinical science studies (75.3 %), and 4 were not categorized (5.2 %). Subspecialties of retracted papers were maxillofacial (n = 29, 37.7 %), reconstructive (n = 17, 22.0 %), wound healing (n = 8, 10.4 %), burn (n = 6, 7.8 %), esthetics (n = 5, 6.5 %), breast (n = 3, 3.9 %), and trauma (n = 1, 1.3 %). Mean impact factor was 2.9 and average time from publication to retraction was 32 months. CONCLUSION: Analysis of retracted plastic surgery studies revealed a recent rise in frequency of retractions, spanning a wide spectrum of journals and subspecialties.

A Comparison of Plastic Surgery Authorship Trends Under Single Versus Double-Blinded Review.

INTRODUCTION: Research is key to academic advancement in plastic surgery. However, access to publication opportunities may be inequitable as seen in other fields. We compared authorship trends of plastic surgery manuscripts that underwent single-blinded review (SBR) versus double-blinded review (DBR) to identify potential disparities in publication opportunities. METHODS: Publications from two plastic surgery journals using SBR and two using DBR from September 2019 to September 2021 were evaluated. Name and institution of the article's first and senior author and journal's editor-in-chief (EIC) were recorded. Chi-squared and Fisher's exact analyses were used to compare author characteristics between SBR and DBR articles. RESULTS: Of 2500 manuscripts, 65.7% underwent SBR and 34.3% underwent DBR. SBR articles had higher percentages of women as first authors (31.9% versus 24.3%, P < 0.001) but lower percentages of first (50.7% versus 71.2%, P < 0.001) and senior (49.6% versus 70.3%, P < 0.001) authors from international institutions. First (26.0% versus 12.9%, P < 0.001) and senior (27.9% versus 18.0%, P = 0.007) authors of SBR articles tended to have more plastic surgery National Institutes of Health funding. Journals using SBR tended to have higher rates of authorship by EICs or authors sharing institutions with the EIC (P ≤ 0.005). CONCLUSIONS: While associated with greater female first authorship suggesting potential efforts toward gender equity in academia, SBR of plastic surgery articles tends to favor authors from institutions with higher National Institutes of Health funding and disadvantage authors from international or lower-resourced programs. Careful consideration of current peer-review proceedings may make publication opportunities more equitable.

Uneven Progress in Gender Equality at Plastic Surgery Conferences: Lessons from a Decade of Meetings.

BACKGROUND: The demographics of plastic surgeons and plastic surgery trainees are changing, reflecting an increase in the diversity of medical school graduates. The authors investigated the gender diversity of speakers at several plastic surgery conferences and evaluated temporal trends over a 10-year period. METHODS: The following societies' conferences and years were included based on the conference agendas available for review: American Society for Aesthetic Plastic Surgery, Plastic Surgery Research Council, American Association of Plastic Surgeons, Northeastern Society of Plastic Surgeons, and American Society for Reconstructive Microsurgery. Differences in the average amount of time spoken were analyzed using an independent one-tailed t test. RESULTS: The number of female speakers and the time allotted to speak increased for all conferences. There was not a consistent difference in the amount of time individual men and women were allotted to speak. Across the five conferences, there was no consistent relationship found between years since board certification and female participation in conference. Gender diversity among speakers at plastic surgery conferences has not kept pace with the increase in female plastic surgery trainees because those who are selected to speak are overwhelmingly men. The hypothesis that a paucity of female speakers reflects the relatively shorter duration of career experience of female plastic surgeons was not supported by these findings. CONCLUSION: It is imperative that conferences increase the participation of women and strive toward more accurately reflecting the burgeoning role that female surgeons have in the field at present and will have in the future.