Nationwide Bibliometric Analysis of Integrated Plastic Surgery Program Directors.

Studies have linked bibliometric indices with the academic level of plastic surgeons, but this relationship has not been explored with residency program directors (PDs). As teachers of the next generation, PDs' academic performance is an important component of residency program success. We sought to identify distinguishing characteristics of integrated plastic surgery programs, focusing on their PD bibliometric indices. Methods: We identified plastic surgery programs based on 2021 Doximity reputation and research output rankings, respectively, and then divided them into four quartiles (Q1-Q4). PD academic history and bibliometric indices (h-index, the number of publications, and citations) were collected through Doximity profiles and program websites: PubMed, Scopus, Google Scholar, American Society of Plastic Surgeons, and Accreditation Council for Graduate Medical Education. Results: Eighty-four programs were identified. There was a significant positive relationship between h-index, the number of publications, and type of research with reputation ranking (P < 0.05). After adjusting for years of experience post-training, h-index (OR = 1.24; P < 0.001) and the number of publications (OR = 1.05, P < 0.001) were significantly associated with reputation ranking. There was a statistically significant relationship between PD research fellowship completion and research output ranking (P < 0.01). After adjusting for years of experience post-training, h-index (OR = 1.05; P = 0.047) and the number of publications (OR = 1.01; P = 0.04) were significantly associated with research output ranking. Conclusion: Higher ranked programs tend to have PDs who have a strong record of scholarly activity, as evidenced by certain bibliometric indices.

Iatrogenic Immunodeficiency Associated Lymphoproliferative Disorder in a Patient With Inflammatory Bowel Disease.

Primary colorectal lymphoma is incredibly rare and cases of iatrogenic immunodeficiency associated lymphoproliferative disorder (IILPD) isolated to colorectal area are even more uncommon. Immunodeficiency associated lymphoproliferative disorders can occur in association with primary immune disorders such as inflammatory bowel diseases (IBDs) which are often treated with various immunomodulatory drugs. Of the immunomodulatory drugs, thiopurines, in particular, are known to have a significantly increased relative risk for development of IILPDs. Here we present the case of a 43-year-old Caucasian man with a 22-year history of IBD treated with longstanding immunomodulatory therapy who presented with severe rectal pain and drainage. He underwent an examination under anesthesia with rigid proctoscopy and biopsies were taken of a hard exophytic appearing tissue along the posterior wall of the rectosigmoid junction. Pathological investigation of the samples revealed IILPD. He underwent treatment with rituximab, cyclophosphamide, doxorubicin, vincristine, prednisone (R-CHOP) and achieved complete remission. Literature demonstrates that the use of immunomodulators such as azathioprine has been shown to significantly improve the quality of life in patients with IBD. However, while the absolute risk of lymphoma for any given patient remains quite low, the relative risk of lymphoma in patients who are actively treated with thiopurines is moderate. Therefore, the decision to proceed with thiopurine treatment, especially in the setting of long-term therapy, requires extensive discussion and patient education of the risks/benefits along with closer monitoring of new or uncharacteristic symptoms.

Examination of current available methods for pain management after vaginoplasty procedures.

Tweetable abstract As vaginoplasties become increasingly prevalent, it is imperative to develop efficient techniques to achieve adequate postoperative pain control. Currently available pain management methods following vaginoplasties are briefly discussed.

Program Directors Research Productivity and Other Factors of Anesthesiology Residency Programs That Relate to Program Doximity Ranking.

BACKGROUND: Program directors (PDs) play a crucial role in the competitiveness of the residency selection process and in mentoring the next generation of physicians. With this mandate comes the need to evaluate PDs on their own academic performance. We aimed to evaluate the distinguishing characteristics of anesthesiology residency programs with a focus on academic productivity of PDs and to investigate how these characteristics affect the Doximity program rank. METHODS: We identified anesthesiology program rankings from 2019 Doximity standings and divided them into quartiles (Q1-Q4). PD academic history and bibliometric indices (H-index, number of publications and citations) were collected through program websites, PubMed, Scopus, Google Scholar, and Accreditation Council for Graduate Medical Education (ACGME) websites. RESULTS: A total of 152 active anesthesiology programs and PDs were identified across the United States. Among the 152 PDs, 32% (n = 49) were women and 68% (n = 103) were men. There were differences between the Q1 versus Q2 programs in all of the variables other than PDs' number of fellowships. However, Q2 versus Q3 and Q3 versus Q4 programs had fewer identified differences. Each of the assessed PDs' bibliometric indices showed weak correlation with the program rank; however, there were stronger correlated factors of program rank, such as the program's original ACGME accreditation date (rs = 0.5, P < .0001) and female resident percentage (rs = 0.36, P < .0001) with moderate positive correlation. Additionally, the program size (rs = 0.77, P < .0001) and the number of ACGME-approved fellowships provided by the program (rs = 0.75, P < .0001) had a very strong positive correlation. CONCLUSION: This study shows that program rank in the growing field of anesthesiology correlates with program size, female residents' percentage, ACGME approval date, number of ACGME-approved fellowships, as well as PDs' research productivity.

We're Stronger Together: A Collaboration to Support Military Families During the COVID-19 Pandemic.

INTRODUCTION: The COVID-19 pandemic has created challenges for every segment of the U.S. population, including military personnel and their families. The TriService Nursing Research Program's Military Family Research Interest Group (FIG) formed a collaboration with Blue Star Families, a civilian non-profit organization, to identify potential issues faced by military families during the pandemic. DATA COLLECTION METHODS: The Pain Points Poll was introduced online by Blue Star Families, and findings were aggregated weekly between March 18 and May 26, 2020. Volunteer poll respondents were mainly recruited through social media outreach. FIG-informed questions were incorporated in week 4 of polling and focused on workplace environment, financial health, social support, physical and mental health, child behavior, utilization of family care plans, and general well-being. Data were collected to gain real-time insights into the major challenges posed by the pandemic. Findings from FIG-informed questions were collaboratively reviewed and analyzed by FIG and BSF teams. Data-driven recommendations were made to stakeholders to improve processes and reprioritize investments for services that aim to alleviate the impact of COVID-19 on military families. FINDINGS: A total of 2,895 military family units (i.e., service members and spouses) responded to the poll, a majority of which (88%) represented active duty family units. Although the majority of families (range: 59%-69%) noted no impact to their finances, approximately one in five families endorsed dipping into their savings during the pandemic. A majority of respondents (69.5%) reported taking active measures to support their mental health, endorsing various strategies. Among parents of special needs children, 45% of active duty families and 60% of single-parent service members reported the inability to maintain continued services for their children. A majority of parents with school-aged children (65%) reported child behavioral changes due to their child's inability to socialize with peers. Among military service members, 41% were concerned about obtaining fair performance evaluations during the crisis. CONCLUSIONS: The COVID-19 pandemic produced significant challenges for military families. Collaboration between military and civilian partners can inform policies and appropriate strategies to mitigate the impact of COVID-19 for military families. The findings presented here provide insight into areas where military families can be supported for optimal outcomes during unprecedented times.

The 100 Most-disruptive Articles in Plastic and Reconstructive Surgery and Sub-specialties (1954-2014).

Alternative bibliometrics have recently been the subject of significantly increased interest. The disruption index is a new bibliometric that was recently applied to surgery and urology and identifies papers that shift paradigms and eclipse previous research in a given field. METHODS: The 100 most-disruptive publications in the 14 most prominent plastic and reconstructive surgery and subspecialty journals were identified. RESULTS: We present the 100 most-disruptive studies as well as the 100 most-cited studies for comparison in n=14 of the most popular plastic and reconstructive surgery (and subspecialty) journals between 1954 and 2014. The 100 most-disruptive publications in these journals were more disruptive than 99.8% of all PubMed papers. Plastic and Reconstructive Surgery (PRS) had the most papers in the top 100 (n=64) followed by British Journal of Plastic Surgery (currently Journal of Plastic, Reconstructive & Aesthetic Surgery, n=15), and Journal of Oral and Maxillofacial Surgery (n=7). PRS had 9 of the top 10 papers. However, Clinics in Plastic Surgery had the highest average disruption score for all its published papers (0.0029). The correlation coefficient linking disruption scores and citation counts was 0.01 and 0.11, respectively. The most common decade represented in the top 100 was the 1980's (n=31) and the least common was the 2000's (n=9). CONCLUSIONS: This is the first application of the disruption index to plastic and reconstructive surgery. The disruption score provides a unique ability to identify research that has shifted paradigms and driven the innovation that defines our specialty.

Global Contributions and Trends in Research within the Top-ranked Plastic Surgery Journal.

BACKGROUND: We aimed to longitudinally study the relative research contributions of US and international plastic surgeons by evaluating publications within the premier plastic surgery journal over the last 2 decades. We hypothesized that even with an increased pressure to publish in this journal, the relative research contributions from American plastic surgeons will continue to be the largest overall and in all subspecialties. METHODS: Data for the surgical subspecialty, corresponding author's country of origin, and region were extracted from all original articles in 2 randomly selected monthly issues of Plastic & Reconstructive Surgery (PRS) from the last 2 decades to evaluate longitudinal trends. Data were also extracted from all of the original articles published in PRS for the last 3 years to analyze the recent distribution of research output. RESULTS: During the last 2 decades, the relative proportion of total original articles written by US authors has increased. They have published proportionally more articles in the Reconstructive and Breast field while publishing relatively less in the hand/peripheral nerve field. From the first decade of analysis, US authors wrote relatively fewer articles in the hand/peripheral nerve field, whereas in the second decade, the US authors wrote relatively fewer articles in the Experimental field. In the last 3 years, US authors published relatively fewer articles in the Experimental and Cosmetic fields. CONCLUSIONS: Each country's scientific productivity in PRS is related to funding, interest, patients' demand, and healthcare market pressure. In this study, we see that these factors influence trends within research publications over the last 2 decades.

Group Prenatal Care Compared With Traditional Prenatal Care: A Systematic Review and Meta-analysis.

OBJECTIVE: To estimate the effect of group prenatal care on perinatal outcomes compared with traditional prenatal care. DATA SOURCES: We searched MEDLINE through PubMed, EMBASE, Scopus, Cumulative Index of Nursing and Allied Health literature, the Cochrane Database of Systematic Reviews, the Database of Abstracts of Reviews of Effects, the Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials, and ClinicalTrials.gov. METHODS OF STUDY SELECTION: We searched electronic databases for randomized controlled trials and observational studies comparing group care with traditional prenatal care. The primary outcome was preterm birth. Secondary outcomes were low birth weight, neonatal intensive care unit admission, and breastfeeding initiation. Heterogeneity was assessed using the Q test and I statistic. Pooled relative risks (RRs) and weighted mean differences were calculated using random-effects models. TABULATIONS, INTEGRATION, AND RESULTS: Four randomized controlled trials and 10 observational studies met inclusion criteria. The rate of preterm birth was not significantly different with group care compared with traditional care (11 studies: pooled rates 7.9% compared with 9.3%, pooled RR 0.87, 95% confidence interval [CI] 0.70-1.09). Group care was associated with a decreased rate of low birth weight overall (nine studies: pooled rate 7.5% group care compared with 9.5% traditional care; pooled RR 0.81, 95% CI 0.69-0.96), but not among randomized controlled trials (four studies: 7.9% group care compared with 8.7% traditional care, pooled RR 0.92, 95% CI 0.73-1.16). There were no significant differences in neonatal intensive care unit admission or breastfeeding initiation. CONCLUSION: Available data suggest that women who participate in group care have similar rates of preterm birth, neonatal intensive care unit admission, and breastfeeding.