Online educational resources for orthopaedic residency-a narrative review.

PURPOSE: Residency programs in the medical education field are considered the keystone in the development of aptitude and skills required for practice. With the worldwide current scenario of the COVID-19 pandemic, there has been a shift in the paradigm especially in the teaching of the residents from face-to-face classes to more and more online sessions. The purpose of this study is to present a compendium of knowledge-providing sites, smartphone applications (apps), YouTube channels, and podcasts that can provide better online resource management for students in the field of orthopaedics. METHODS: Search terms were used for making a list of various online resources which can be of help during orthopaedic residency. An initial list of the selected websites, smartphone apps, podcasts, and YouTube channels was made. The corresponding author with years of teaching experience and faculty for post-graduate and fellowship training programs then selected the final list. RESULTS: A list of 16 websites with brief points on their content and online address along with the availability of free or paid content was identified as being appropriate. A total of 39 apps available for android/apple smartphones, nine podcasts, and 11 YouTube channels were also identified as being extremely useful and have been discussed elaborately in this article. CONCLUSION: Online educational tools are of immense importance in imparting adequate knowledge to an orthopaedic resident and act as an adjunct to conventional teaching methods. This article focuses on presenting various online educational resources in a simple yet concise way, which may be beneficial for the current generation of residents especially in this current time of unprecedented COVID-19 pandemic.

A Survey of Post-Graduate Satisfaction With Orthopaedic Residency Training at a Single Institution.

Background: The Accreditation Council for Graduate Medical Education (ACGME) has called for self-study within residency programs. Post-graduate surveys allow the graduate to reflect upon their residency experience after years of autonomous practice. Despite their potential utility, a standardized assessment of residency training from the perspective of orthopaedic alumni does not exist. In this study, we aimed to create, analyze, and share with our alumni a post-graduate survey based on ACGME core competencies. Methods: The survey was developed by full-time orthopaedic faculty and reviewed by a survey methodologist to ensure clarity and an ideal survey format. In May 2020, the survey was emailed to all 90 graduates from 2000 to 2019. Respondents were polled on current clinical practice and satisfaction with program-specific initiatives, residency requirements, and learning environment issues based on a 7-point Likert scale. Respondents were also given the opportunity to provide open-ended responses. Data were collected within the survey platform and subdivided into 3 cohorts based on years since graduation. Results: The response rate was 71% (64/90). The likelihood of fellowship training increased with recency since graduation. Most respondents are in either private or health-system-owned practice but 23% work in an academic center.The oldest cohort had greater variability in clinical practice. Most program-specific initiatives received high satisfaction scores, but graduates within the past 5 years had the lowest satisfaction scores. Instruction of skills included in ACGME competencies received generally favorable reviews, but professional development skills, such as starting a practice and evaluating job opportunities, received low marks.The overall satisfaction with the program was high (86%) but was lowest among most recent graduates. Conclusion: The post-graduate survey demonstrates areas of strength and weakness and highlights dissatisfaction among recent graduates. The data will drive specific curricular changes within our program. The survey will be shared to promote self-study within other programs.

Effects of the Covid-19 Pandemic on the Orthopaedic Surgery Residency Application Match Patterns.

Background: The COVID-19 pandemic and its effects on the orthopaedic match process are yet to be fully understood and should be explored. We hypothesize that the cancellation of away rotations due to the COVID-19 pandemic would decrease the variability of where students matched into orthopaedic residency compared to pre-pandemic years. Methods: Accredited orthopaedic programs were collected from the Accreditation Council for Graduate Medical Education (ACGME) database. Rosters of orthopaedic residency classes for the years 2019, 2020, and 2021 were compiled across all orthopaedic programs in the United States. Data collection for the incoming 2021 orthopaedic surgery residents was carried out by reviewing each program's website, Instagram, and Twitter. Results: Data for the incoming orthopaedic surgery residents from the 2021 National Residency Match Program (NRMP) were collected. 25.7% of incoming residents matched at their home institution. Data collection for the 2020 and 2019 orthopaedic residency classes yielded 19.2% and 19.5% home institution match rates, respectively. When examining likelihood to match into an orthopaedic residency program in ones own's state, we found that in the 2021 match cycle, 39.3% of applicants matched within their state, while 34.3% and 33.4% of incoming residents matched in 2020 and 2019, respectively. Conclusion: To keep our patients and staff safe, visiting externship rotations were suspended in the 2021 Match cycle. As we continue to navigate the shifting waters of the COVID-19 pandemic, it is important to understand how our choices affect the dynamics of applying into residency training and beyond. This study demonstrates that a higher percentage of applicants that matched into orthopaedic residency remained at their home program compared to the previous two years before the pandemic. This indicates that programs tended to rank their home applicants, and that applicants tended to rank their home programs, higher than those that were less familiar. Level of Evidence: IV.

Resident Impact on Primary Total Knee Arthroplasty: A Consecutive Series Under a Single Surgeon.

Background: The literature has displayed conflicting evidence on resident involvement in surgical procedures. The goal of this study was to assess the impact of resident involvement on primary total knee arthroplasty (TKA) under a single fellowship-trained adult reconstruction surgeon. Methods: Two hundred sequential patients were retrospectively reviewed by a single surgeon: the first cohort represented the final 100 TKAs performed by the surgeon without resident involvement (NRI), serving as the control group, and the second cohort represented the initial 100 TKAs performed by the same surgeon with resident involvement (RI), serving as the experimental group. Perioperative variables such as number of people in operating room (OR), surgical time, and tourniquet time, and postoperative variables such as infection, minor complications, medial distal femoral angle, medial proximal tibia angle, and total angulation were assessed. Results: The rate of infection was significantly lower in the RI group (0%) compared to the NRI group (1%) (P = .043). The number of staff in the OR (P < .001), the tourniquet time (P < .001), and OR time (P < .001) were significantly higher in the RI group compared to the NRI group. There was no difference in coronal plane radiographic measurements: medial distal femoral angle (P = .10), medial proximal tibia angle (P = .19), or total angulation (P = .27). Conclusions: Resident involvement in primary TKA neither demonstrated any significant difference in coronal plane radiographic alignment of the prosthesis nor an increased risk of infection despite increased operative time, tourniquet time, and number of people in OR. Level of evidence: Level 3 - Therapeutic retrospective cohort study.

Orthopaedic Surgery Residency Program Websites: A Five-Year Update and the Rise of Social Media.

Objective  The importance of online information in the form of residency program websites has been well documented. With the rise of popularity of social media, another potential vital source of online information distribution exists. We aimed to examine the changes in orthopaedic surgery residency program websites and determine the use of social media by these programs. Methods A list of orthopaedic residency programs was obtained. Websites were then assessed for presence of numerous criteria. The presence of a social media account on Instagram, Twitter, and Facebook platforms was then determined. Results One hundred ninety-five websites out of 197 programs were identified. The most commonly present criterion was resident rotation schedule with 187 (96%) listings. Meanwhile, information on virtual sessions for prospective applicants was the least present at 26 (13%). Out of the 33 criteria assessed, websites contained an average of 20.4 criteria. Approximately half of the programs were noted to have a social media presence. Conclusion Website utilization and accessibility have improved over time as the importance of online information has continued to grow in the orthopaedic surgery residency application process. In order to increase their online presence, numerous programs have recently created or enhanced the profiles on social media platforms which may reach more users than websites alone.

Social Media and the Orthopaedic Surgery Residency Application Process.

INTRODUCTION: Social media use in the residency application process has been on the rise, yet applicant and program director (PD) perspectives in orthopaedic residency have not been explored in depth. Our objective is to evaluate perspectives of orthopaedic residency applicants and PDs on social media usage and its impact on the residency application process. METHODS: Cross-sectional survey study conducted in 2021 with two related, anonymous surveys sent to residency applicants and PDs. One hundred thirteen of 562 (20.1%) applicants to our institution and 29 of 148 (19.6%) PDs listed on the Accreditation Council for Graduate Medical Education (ACGME) website responded to our survey and were included in the analysis. RESULTS: Applicants reported learning about residency programs through Instagram (69.2%), the program website (58.9%), and Doximity (29.9%). Thirty-four percent of applicants reported social media influencing their rank list, with non-training-related posts being the most impactful. PDs reported that 97% of their programs have an official web page, 41% have an active Instagram site, 27% have a Twitter account but none regularly update Doximity. Just over 48% of PDs reported institutional support for online content creation. Financial investment varied, with 35% reporting no spending, and 24% spending over $2501. In response to coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) restrictions, 79% of PDs reported generating increased social media content. DISCUSSION: Social media provides a low-cost but far-reaching opportunity for PDs to recruit residents and highlight their respective programs. Social media content should display the culture and lifestyle of the program, with consistency in content creation. PDs should also ensure accuracy on external sites such as Doximity.

Orthopaedic In-training Exam Preparation among Orthopaedic Surgery Residency Programs.

OBJECTIVE: The Orthopaedic In-Training Examination (OITE) is given annually to residents to assess their knowledge of clinical orthopaedics and orthopaedic basic science. This study sought to determine what resources orthopaedic residency programs recommend and/or require for residents as preparative tools for the OITE and to understand which resources are most beneficial. DESIGN: An anonymous electronic survey was distributed to program directors of orthopaedic surgery residency programs. It included questions about resources that program directors recommended or required residents to use when preparing for the OITE. SETTING: The survey was prepared and the results analyzed at two academic medical institutions in Louisiana. The survey was available to respondents in December 2019 and January 2020. PARTICIPANTS: The survey was delivered to program directors of 148 ACGME accredited orthopaedic surgery residency programs in the United States. RESULTS: 148 orthopaedic surgery residency program directors received the survey and 44 responded (response rate: 29.7%). Twenty-nine programs (73.2%) reported that practice tests/review of old OITE exams positively correlated with better scores. The most recommended resources for OITE preparation were Orthobullets (35 programs; 85%) and Res Study (AAOS) (27 programs; 67.5%). Programs having formal/required preparation programs had lower mean overall scores on the OITE than programs that did not. Those without a formal/required program scored in the 60th percentile, while those with a formal/required program scored in the 53.3rd percentile, a difference of 6.7 percentile points (p = 0.049). The mean overall percentiles were significantly higher for programs that reported having a threshold/goal OITE score for residents compared to those that didn't. Programs with a threshold/goal score scored in the 60.6th percentile on average, while those without a threshold/goal score scored in the 51.7th percentile on average, a difference of 8.9 percentile points (p = 0.0095). CONCLUSIONS: There is substantial variability in the resources that are utilized in preparation for the OITE, with the most commonly recommended resource being Orthobullets. The study method most cited as having a positive impact on scores was practice tests/review of old OITE exams. Having a formal/required program resulted in programs having lower OITE scores. Setting a goal/threshold score correlates positively with an increase in OITE score. Encouraging residents to use practice questions/old OITE tests, setting a goal/threshold score and avoiding formal/required preparation programs may improve resident performance on the OITE.

Medical Student Research Productivity: Which Variables are Associated with Matching to a Highly Ranked Orthopaedic Residency Program?

OBJECTIVE: Little is known about the importance of an applicant's research productivity in terms of matching into a highly-ranked orthopaedic residency. We characterized the research of orthopaedic residents who matched in 2017 to determine whether 1) program tiers differed by their residents' research; and 2) discrete increases in applicants' research were associated with matching into higher-ranked programs. DESIGN: We searched Scopus for resident publications accepted before 2017 or published through January 2017. Using an established ranking system, programs were ranked (tier-1, highest; tier-5, lowest) by their department's number of citations from 2005 to 2015. We compared resident research productivity among these 5 tiers. We then categorized residents by discrete levels of research productivity (0, 1, or ≥2 publications) and compared the differences in matched program rank. SETTING: Data collection and analysis performed at Johns Hopkins Hospital, a tertiary care center in Baltimore, MD. PARTICIPANTS: We obtained our sample from allopathic orthopaedic program websites, excluding military programs and international students, for a total of 111 programs (565 of 726 matched residents [78%]). RESULTS: Tier-1 and tier-2 programs differed significantly in their residents' publications, h-index, and citations. Programs of other tiers did not differ significantly. Applicants with 1 publication matched to higher-ranked residency programs than those with 0 publications. When comparing residents with 1 publication versus residents with more than 1 publication, we found no significant differences in program rank matched. CONCLUSIONS: Our results suggest that higher-tier orthopaedic residency programs match residents with greater research productivity than do lower-tier programs. Having 1 publication was associated with matching into a higher-ranked program but no significant associations were observed beyond the first publication.

The Impact of COVID-19 on the Orthopaedic Surgery Residency Experience.

INTRODUCTION: The rapid spread of the COVID-19 virus led to dramatic changes in graduate medical education and surgical practice. The purpose of this study was to evaluate the effects of the COVID-19 pandemic on Orthopaedic Surgery residency education in the United States. METHODS: A survey sent to all residents of the 201 ACGME-accredited Orthopaedic Surgery programs in the United States. RESULTS: A total of 309 Orthopaedic surgery residents responded to our survey. A subset of 283 (91.6%) residents surveyed reported decreased Orthopaedic-related clinical duty hours due to the COVID-19 pandemic, and 300/309 (97.1%) reported a decrease in surgical case volume. 298 (96.4%) residents reported that their program had scheduled activities or made changes to supplement their education, most common being virtual and video conferences 296/309 (95.5%), required practice questions 132/309 (42.7%), required reading or pre-recorded lectures 122/309 (39.5%), in-person small group meetings or lectures 24/309 (7.77%), and surgical simulation activities 17/309 (5.50%). Almost half (152/309 (48.9%)) of respondents reported their overall resident education was somewhat or much worse due to the impact of COVID-19. Over a quarter (81 (26.2%)) of residents reported their well-being was negatively impacted by residency-related changes due to COVID-19. CONCLUSIONS: Based on these results, the COVID-19 pandemic has brought about significant changes to the training experience of Orthopaedic surgery residents in the United States. Although the majority of residents in this sample had favorable opinions of the educational changes their programs have instituted in light of the pandemic, clinical duty hours and case volume were reported to have substantially decreased, with a large portion of residents viewing their overall resident education as worsened and reporting negative impacts on their overall well-being.

Motivations and impact of international rotations in low- and middle-income countries for orthopaedic surgery residents: Are we on the same page?

BACKGROUND: Despite interest among North American orthopaedic residents to pursue rotations in resource-limited settings, little is known regarding resident motivations and impact on host surgeons. METHODS: Surveys were distributed to North American orthopaedic surgeons and trainees who participated in international rotations during residency to assess motivations for participation and to orthopaedic surgeons at partnering low- and middle-income country (LMIC) institutions to assess impact of visiting trainees. RESULTS: Responses were received from 136 North American resident rotators and 51 LMIC host surgeons and trainees. North American respondents were motivated by a desire to increase surgical capacity at the LMIC while host surgeons reported a greater impact from learning from residents than on surgical capacity. Negative aspects reported by hosts included selfishness, lack of reciprocity, racial discrimination, competition for surgical experience, and resource burdens. CONCLUSIONS: The motivations and impact of orthopaedic resident rotations in LMICs need to be aligned. Host perceptions and bidirectional educational exchange should be incorporated into partnership guidelines.

Current practice of orthopaedic surgical skills training raises performance of supervised residents in total knee arthroplasty to levels equal to those of orthopaedic surgeons.

AIM: To investigate whether the current, generally accepted practice of orthopaedic surgical skills training can raise the performance of supervised residents to levels equal to those of experienced orthopaedic surgeons when it comes to clinical outcomes or implant position after total knee arthroplasty. METHODS: In a retrospective analysis of primary total knee arthroplasty outcomes (minimum follow-up of 12 months) procedures were split into two groups: supervised orthopaedic residents as first surgeon (group R), and experienced senior orthopaedic surgeons as first surgeon (group S). Outcome data that were compared 1 year postoperatively were operation times, complications, revisions, Knee Society Scores (KSS) and radiological implant positions. RESULTS: Of 642 included procedures, 220 were assigned to group R and 422 to group S. No statistically significant differences between the two groups were found in patient demographics. Operation time differed significantly (group R: 81.3 min vs. group S: 71.3 min (p = 0.000)). No statistically significant differences were found for complications (p = 0.659), revision rate (p = 0.722), femoral angle (p = 0.871), tibial angle (p = 0.804), femoral slope (p = 0.779), tibial slope (p = 0.765) and KSS (p = 0.148). DISCUSSION AND CONCLUSION: Supervised residents needed 10 minutes extra operation time, but they provided the same quality of care in primary total knee arthroplasty as experienced orthopaedic surgeons concerning complication rates, revisions, implant position on radiographs and KSS. The currently used training procedure in which the supervising surgeon and the resident decide if the resident is ready to be first surgeon is safe for patients.

The Effect of Applicant Publication Volume on the Orthopaedic Residency Match.

BACKGROUND: Research is an important factor used in evaluating applicants to orthopaedic training programs. Current reports regarding the publication rate among prospective residents are likely inaccurate. It is unknown whether research productivity is weighted more heavily at programs affiliated with research-driven institutions. OBJECTIVE: To establish accurate baseline data on publication rate among matched applicants to orthopaedic residency programs and to compare publication rates between applicants who matched at research-focused institutions and those who matched elsewhere. DESIGN: We performed a literature search for each U.S. resident in the 2013-2014 intern class. Number of publications: (1) in total, (2) in orthopaedic journals, and (3) as first/last author were recorded. Publication rate at the top 25 programs (according to medical school and departmental National Institutes of Health [NIH] funding and U.S. News ranking) was compared statistically against all others. RESULTS: Average number of publications per intern for all programs was 1.28 ± 0.15. Number of total and first/last author publications was significantly greater for programs affiliated with medical schools and departments in the top 25 for NIH funding, and at schools in the top 25 U.S. News rankings. Publication rate in orthopaedic journals was significantly higher for programs affiliated with departments in the top 25 for NIH funding and at top 25 U.S. News medical schools. CONCLUSIONS: The average matched applicant to an orthopaedic residency program publishes in the peer-reviewed literature less frequently than previously reported. Matched applicants at research-focused institutions tended to have more publications than those who matched at other programs.

The Internet as a communication tool for orthopedic spine fellowships in the United States.

BACKGROUND CONTEXT: Orthopedic residents seeking additional training in spine surgery commonly use the Internet to manage their fellowship applications. Although studies have assessed the accessibility and content of Web sites in other medical specialties, none have looked at orthopedic spine fellowship Web sites (SFWs). PURPOSE: The purpose of this study was to evaluate the accessibility of information from commonly used databases and assess the content of SFWs. STUDY DESIGN: This was a Web site accessibility and content evaluation study. METHODS: A comprehensive list of available orthopedic spine fellowship programs was compiled by accessing program lists from the SF Match, North American Spine Society, Fellowship and Residency Electronic Interactive Database (FREIDA), and Orthopaedicsone.com (Ortho1). These databases were assessed for accessibility of information including viable links to SFWs and responsive program contacts. A Google search was used to identify SFWs not readily available on these national databases. SFWs were evaluated based on online education and recruitment content. RESULTS: Evaluators found 45 SFWs of 63 active programs (71%). Available SFWs were often not readily accessible from national program lists, and no program afforded a direct link to their SFW from SF Match. Approximately half of all programs responded via e-mail. Although many programs described surgical experience (91%) and research requirements (87%) during the fellowship, less than half mentioned didactic instruction (46%), journal clubs (41%), and national meetings or courses attended (28%). Evaluators found an average 45% of fellow recruitment content. Comparison of SFWs by program characteristics revealed three significant differences. Programs with greater than one fellowship position had greater online education content than programs with a single fellow (p=.022). Spine fellowships affiliated with an orthopedic residency program maintained greater education (p=.006) and recruitment (p=.046) content on their SFWs. CONCLUSIONS: Most orthopedic spine surgery programs underuse the Internet for fellow education and recruitment. The inaccessibility of information and paucity of content on SFWs allow for future opportunity to optimize these resources.