Doctors of Osteopathic Medicine as Plastic Surgery Residents: Demographics, Credentials, and Pathways to Residency.

OBJECTIVE: Doctors of Osteopathic Medicine (DOs) are sparsely represented within plastic and reconstructive surgery (PRS) and recent changes including the elimination of step 1 scoring have further disadvantaged DO applicants. The demographics, degrees, and scholarly output of DO PRS trainees were compared to that of Doctors of Medicine (MDs) to identify areas of focus which could be used to increase competitiveness of DO applications. DESIGN: A cross-sectional study was created, including ACGME-accredited PRS program trainees during the 2020 to 2021 academic year. DO and MD trainee demographics and scholarly accomplishments were compared using t-test and chi-squared analysis. SETTING: Web-based publicly available information was collected for subjects. PARTICIPANTS: A total of 1092 PRS MD and DO trainees were identified. DOs made up only 2.7% (n = 30) and MDs made up 97.3% (n = 1062). RESULTS: More DOs trained in independent programs (63.3%) than integrated (36.7%) compared to MDs (88.2% v. 11.8%, p < 0.001) and more DOs trained at lower ranked PRS programs (60.0% of DOs and 18.1% of MDs trained at Q4 programs, p < 0.001). DOs had fewer publications (median, IQR: 1, [0-2]) compared to MDs (3, [1-8]), fewer citations (0, [0-6]) vs. (10, [1-56]) and lower H-index (1, [0-1]) vs. (1, [1-3]). CONCLUSION: DO candidates should consider research years in the field of PRS and optimize clinical experience opportunities to increase the competitiveness of their PRS applications. Special attention should be paid to providing networking and research opportunities to DOs who lack home institutions.

Interdisciplinary Representation of Burn Surgery Journal and Society Leadership.

Burn care is a complex craft that requires an interdisciplinary approach. It includes a diverse array of specialty providers to provide holistic, specialized care to burn victims. This study aims to evaluate the diverse array of subspecialties involved in burn surgery journal and society leadership. A cross-sectional study was conducted in July 2019 by examining the characteristics of society and journal leaders. Current governance and committee members of the American Burn Association (ABA) and International Society of Burn Injuries (ISBI) were determined, as well as the editors of five major burn journals. Information gathered included occupation, advanced degrees obtained, and type of residency training. Of 384 editorial board members identified, 76% were physicians (n = 291), with specialties including burn surgery (n = 208, 54%) and anesthesiology (n = 22, 6%). Among nonphysicians (n = 78, 20%), 76% were medical researchers (n = 59), 8% physical therapists (n = 6), and 5% nurses (n = 4). Looking at ABA and ISBI governance (n = 29), 82% were physicians (n = 24). Nonphysician ABA and ISBI leaders were nurses (n = 2, 7%) and occupational therapists (n = 2, 7%). Of 467 identified ABA and ISBI committee members, half were physicians (n = 244, 52%). There was a wide array of nonphysician occupations among committee members, from nurses (n = 99, 21%), to occupational therapists (n = 25, 5%), and even firefighters (n = 6, 1%). Burn surgery journal and society leadership reflect the interdisciplinary nature of burn care by including an array of subspecialties. Yet, physicians tend to dominate academic burn leadership in comparison to other disciplines, highlighting the need for more nonphysician representation in leadership positions.