Money Matters: Anticipated Expense of In-Person Obstetrics and Gynecology Fellowship Interviews Has Greater Impact for Underrepresented in Medicine and Women Applicants.

Background: Much of the expense of pursuing subspecialty training in obstetrics and gynecology (ObGyn) is due to in-person fellowship interviews. Although interviews were converted to a virtual platform for the 2020 fellowship interview season in response to the COVID-19 pandemic, candidates anticipated in-person interview expenses at the time of their application. It is unknown whether financial considerations influenced candidates' decision to pursue fellowship training. This study aimed to evaluate the financial impact of anticipated in-person fellowship interviews among applicants of ObGyn subspecialties. Materials and Methods: This was a planned secondary analysis of a survey administered during the 2020 interview season to evaluate the effectiveness of virtual ObGyn fellowship subspecialty interviews in creating a rank list. Information was obtained about anticipated and actual interview costs, the need for securing additional funding and whether financial considerations influenced the decision to apply for fellowship. Results: In total, 158 participants enrolled in the 2020 National Resident Matching Program for ObGyn fellowship programs (48%) completed the web-based survey. Women and Black fellowship applicants were more likely than men (p = 0.044) and White applicants (p = 0.014) to endorse a need to secure additional funding for in-person fellowship interviews. In addition, Hispanic and Black applicants were more likely than White applicants to report that the financial impact of fellowship interviews influenced the decision to apply "somewhat" or "to a great extent" (p = 0.025 and p < 0.001, respectively). Conclusions: The costs of applying to ObGyn fellowship programs may disproportionately affect women and underrepresented in medicine applicants. By reducing a financial barrier, virtual interviews may help promote greater gender and racial and ethnic diversity in ObGyn subspecialty pursuit.

Virtual Interviews Improve Equity and Wellbeing: Results of a Survey of Applicants to Obstetrics and Gynecology Subspecialty Fellowships.

BACKGROUND: Nationwide restrictions and recommendations from the Association of American Medical Colleges mandated program directors to conduct all graduate medical education interviews virtually in the Spring of 2020 in response to the COVID-19 pandemic. This study was conducted to assess the impact of virtual interviews on a candidates' ability to effectively create a rank list. OBJECTIVE: The primary objective of this study was to evaluate Obstetrics and Gynecology (ObGyn) subspecialty fellowship applicants' perspectives regarding the effectiveness of virtual interviews for creating a rank list. Secondary outcomes included perceived advantages and disadvantages of the process and costs of the process. METHODS: This was a cross-sectional IRB-exempt study, using an electronic survey administered to a convenience sample of applicants to ObGyn subspecialty fellowship programs. The survey was administered via RedCap between the rank list submission deadline and the Match. Descriptive statistics were used. RESULTS: Response rate was 158/330 (48%). Overall, 129/158 (82%) percent of respondents felt confident in making their rank list based on the virtual interviews, and 146/158 (92%) were "very satisfied" or "somewhat satisfied" with the process. Of those who expressed an interview style preference, 65/149(44%) of respondents preferred virtual interviews; 49/149(33%) had no preference or were not sure. Nearly all 146/148(99%) applicants cited cost-savings as a distinct advantage of virtual interviews. CONCLUSION: Applicants to ObGyn subspecialty fellowships felt comfortable to create a rank list based on the virtual interview. This study indicates that the virtual format is effective, less stressful and less costly for ObGyn subspecialty interviews and should be considered beyond the pandemic to remove barriers and burdens for applicants.

A Cost-Effectiveness Analysis of Post-Void Residual Bladder Scan Thresholds in the Postoperative Setting.

INTRODUCTION AND HYPOTHESIS: To identify the optimal cost-effectiveness threshold of post-void residual (PVR) by bladder scan in postoperative urogynecologic patients. METHODS: A cost-effectiveness analysis was performed as a secondary analysis of a previously published study of patients undergoing urogynecologic procedures with planned voiding trials, setting thresholds for postoperative PVR bladder scan volumes at 100 ml, 150 ml, and 200 ml. Patient-based scenarios were modeled for ambulatory office or emergency department (ED) resource utilization and to determine the cost-effectiveness of each threshold. Costs were obtained from a southeastern academic medical center, only utilizing direct medical costs and hospital costs, not including societal costs. Quality-adjusted life years (QALY's) were used as health outcomes determining the incremental cost-effectiveness ratio (ICER). RESULTS: A total of 151 patients from the original study were included. A willingness to pay threshold of $100,000 per QALY was assumed. A PVR of 100 ml exceeded this at $373,824. A PVR threshold of 150 ml was dominant (-$1,211,716), while minimizing ED visits for postoperative urinary retention (POUR) and unnecessary clinic appointments. While a PVR of 200 ml appeared a cost-effective strategy (-$488,389), there was increased ED utilization and under-detection of postoperative urinary retention (POUR). CONCLUSION: A PVR threshold of 100 ml created a healthcare system burden due to increased office voiding trials. Both PVR thresholds of 150 ml and 200 ml were cost-effective strategies; however, ED utilization for POUR increased with 200 ml. Utilizing 150 ml as the PVR cut-off proved the most cost-effective strategy, avoiding POUR under-detection and undue health costs.

Leading from Behind: Paucity of gender equity statements and policies among professional surgical societies.

BACKGROUND: The availability and utility of public statements and policies on gender equity from professional surgical societies has not been studied. METHODS: Professional surgical society websites were searched for publicly available statements and policies related to gender equity. These were compiled and assessed for critical components. RESULTS: Publicly available statements/policies were published in every surgical society, though few pertained specifically to gender. Nearly all were recently written or revised. The most common statement/policy addressed discrimination and harassment. The only policies/statements that reliably contained all four key components pertained to professional conduct at national meetings. All policies that provided consequences also contained specific reporting processes. CONCLUSIONS: Gender equity statements and policies are deficient among professional surgical societies. Prioritization of publicizing statements/policies that describe the challenges and provide potential solutions to well-documented gender inequities within surgical fields allows professional societies to promote a diverse and equitable workforce.

Has a critical mass of women resulted in gender equity in gynecologic surgery?

Gender equity in medicine and surgery has recently received widespread attention. Unlike surgical specialties that remain predominantly male, the majority of obstetrician-gynecologists have been women for nearly a decade, and women have composed the majority of trainees since the 1990s. Despite a critical mass of women, biases related to gender persist in the field. Professional and behavioral expectations of men and women gynecologists remain different for patients and workplace colleagues. Gender discrimination and sexual harassment are still experienced at high rates by both trainees and obstetrician-gynecologists in practice. In addition, in other surgical fields, women gynecologic surgeons face a gender wage gap that is unexplained by differences in experience, hours worked, or subspecialty training. Academic advancement and the attainment of leadership positions remain a challenge for many women. Policies related to pregnancy and parenting may disproportionately affect the careers of women gynecologists. This article presents peer-reviewed evidence relevant to gender equity in the workplace and suggests proactive interventions to ensure diversity and inclusion for gynecologic surgeons.

Take me to your leader: Reporting structures and equity in academic gynecologic oncology.

OBJECTIVE: Gynecologic oncology includes increasing percentages of women. This study characterizes representation of faculty by gender and subspecialty in academic department leadership roles relevant to the specialty. METHODS: The American Association of Medical Colleges accredited schools of medicine were identified. Observational data was obtained through institutional websites in 2019. RESULTS: 144 accredited medical schools contained a department of obstetrics and gynecology with a chair; 101 a gynecologic oncology division with a director; 98 a clinical cancer center with a director. Women were overrepresented in academic faculty roles compared to the US workforce (66 vs 57%, p < 0.01) but underrepresented in all leadership roles (p < 0.01). Departments with women chairs were more likely to have >50% women faculty (90.2 vs 9.8%, p < 0.01); and have larger faculties (80.4 vs 19.6% >20 faculty, p = 0.02). The cancer center director gender did not correlate to departmental characteristics. A surgically focused chair was also associated with >50% women faculty (85.7 vs 68.3%, p = 0.03); faculty size >20 (85.7 vs 61.4%, p < 0.01); and a woman gynecologic oncology division director (57.6 vs 29.4%, p < 0.01; 68.4 vs 31.7%, p < 0.01) and gynecologic oncology fellowship (50 vs 30.4%, p < 0.01; 59.1 vs 32%, p < 0.01). Gynecologic oncology leadership within cancer centers was below expected when incidence and mortality to leadership ratios were examined (p < 0.01, p < 0.01). CONCLUSION: Within academic medical schools, women remain under-represented in obstetrics and gynecology departmental and cancer center leadership. Potential benefits to gynecologic oncology divisions of inclusion women and surgically focused leadership were identified.

Utility of intraoperative cystoscopy in detecting ureteral injury during vaginal hysterectomy.

OBJECTIVES: The aim of this study was to determine the utility of intraoperative cystoscopy in detecting and managing ureteral injury among women undergoing vaginal hysterectomy. METHODS: We performed a secondary analysis of a retrospective cohort study of 593 patients who underwent vaginal hysterectomy for benign indications, with or without additional pelvic floor reconstructive surgery, from January 2, 2004, through December 30, 2005. A logistic regression model determining the propensity to undergo intraoperative cystoscopy was constructed. Comparisons of ureteral injury and cost between patients with and without cystoscopy were adjusted for the cystoscopy propensity score. We further explored the feasibility of using perioperative change in creatinine level to detect ureteral injury. RESULTS: In total, 230 (38.8%) of 593 patients underwent cystoscopy. Six patients (2.6%) in the cystoscopy group and 5 (1.4%) in the no-cystoscopy group had ureteral injuries (odds ratio, 1.92; 95% confidence interval [CI], 0.58-6.36). This association was further attenuated after adjusting for the propensity to undergo cystoscopy (odds ratio, 1.31; 95% CI, 0.19-9.09). Four injuries detected cystoscopically were managed intraoperatively. Adjusted mean-predicted costs for patients undergoing cystoscopy were $10,686 (95% CI, $7500-$13,872) versus $10,217 (95% CI, $6894-$13,540). In the no-cystoscopy group, patients with ureteral injury had a median increase in creatinine level of 0.2 mg/dL, whereas patients without injury had a median decrease of 0.1 mg/dL (P < 0.001). CONCLUSIONS: The level of selection for cystoscopy did not significantly increase the mean predicted costs for patients. Reliance on postoperative creatinine level to detect ureteral injury, while highly sensitive, is limited by a low positive predictive value and variable range.

Complication rates between local and referral patients undergoing vaginal hysterectomy at an academic medical center.

OBJECTIVE: To explore the influence of referral bias on complication rates after vaginal hysterectomy. PATIENTS AND METHODS: Community-based (local) and referral patients had benign indications and underwent vaginal hysterectomy from January 1, 2004, through December 31, 2005. We retrospectively evaluated patient characteristics, surgical procedures, and complications that occurred within 9 weeks after the index surgery. Complications were defined as admission to the intensive care unit, reoperation, hospital readmission, or medical intervention. RESULTS: Of 736 patients, 361 (49.0%) were referred from outside the immediate 7-county area. Compared with local patients, referral patients were older (mean age, 54.5 vs 49.3 years; P<.001) and had lower body mass index (mean, 27.6 vs 28.7 kg/m2; P=.02). More referral patients had cardiovascular disease (4.2% vs 0.5%; P=.001) and prior myocardial infarctions (1.9% vs 0%; P=.007). Referral patients also had higher American Society of Anesthesiologists scores (score of 3 or 4, 12.6% vs 7.0%; P=.01) and longer length of hospitalization (mean, 2.6 vs 2.2 days; P<.001), and more underwent pelvic reconstruction (52.1% vs 41.3%; P=.004). Fewer referral patients had private insurance (74.5% vs 89.6%; P<.001). Despite these differences, overall complication rates were similar for referral and local patients (33.4% vs 29.7%; P=.28). CONCLUSION: Although referral patients had more comorbid conditions than local patients, the groups had similar complication rates after vaginal hysterectomy.