Virtual versus In-Person Ophthalmology Interviews: Perceptions of U.S. Ophthalmology Fellowship Applicants in 2022-2023.

Purpose Despite easing restrictions on social distancing and travel since the beginning of coronavirus disease 2019 pandemic, virtual interviews remain a widely used format for ophthalmology fellowship interviews. This study aims to evaluate the relative benefits and drawbacks of in-person versus virtual interviews during a cycle where both formats were prevalent. Methods A prospective cross-sectional study surveyed all fellowship applicants ( N = 311) who applied to Wills Eye Hospital and Bascom Palmer Eye Institute during the 2022 to 2023 application cycle. Results A total of 59 (19%) applicants responded to the survey, with the majority being male (53.0%) and between the ages of 20 and 35 (91.3%). There was no statistically significant difference between the number of virtual and in-person interviews attended or the total number of interviews attended. The highest ranked limitations of the virtual interview process were limited exposure to details of the program structure, limited opportunity to exhibit applicants' strengths to the program, and limited exposure to the fellows. The highest ranked strengths were less pressure during interviews, greater scheduling flexibility, and ability to interview at more fellowship programs. The highest ranked limitations of the in-person interview process were more pressure during interviews, inability to interview at all desired fellowship programs, and decreased scheduling flexibility. The highest ranked strengths based on median rankings were greater exposure to details of the program structure, greater ability to exhibit an applicant's strengths to the program, and greater exposure to the geographic location/city. Conclusion While both in-person and virtual interviews have their own benefits and limitations, virtual interviews appear to be more cost-effective and time-efficient while in-person interviews provide better opportunities to assess program fit and culture. A hybrid format that combines the ideal aspects of both formats may be an optimal solution.

Barriers to Follow-Up Retinal Care During the COVID-19 Pandemic: A Survey Study.

BACKGROUND AND OBJECTIVE: To characterize patient-identified barriers to care in those non-compliant with retina appointments during the coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) pandemic. PATIENTS AND METHODS: Inclusion criteria included non-compliant patients from March 1, 2020 to May 1, 2020. Ultimately, 1,345 patients were invited to complete a 14-question survey. A retrospective chart review correlated clinical and demographic information. Univariate logistic regression, independent-samples t-test, and Pearson correlation coefficient identified differences among subgroups. RESULTS: Of the 1,345 patients, 181 (13.5%) completed the survey. The most significant barriers to care included fear of COVID (76/181; 42.0%), wait times (21/181; 11.6%), and costs (11/181; 6.1%). Patients who got their COVID information from the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention (7.8 ± 2.4) and televised news (8.0 ± 2.0) had higher levels of fear. Finally, patients with diabetic retinopathy and higher Charlson Comorbidity Index scores had greater concerns of COVID (P = .034 and P = .047, respectively). CONCLUSION: This survey study suggests fear of COVID-19 is a prominent new barrier to retinal care. Identifying those at risk for loss to follow-up can guide practices as the pandemic continues. [Ophthalmic Surg Lasers Imaging Retina. 2021;52:526-533.].

Virtual Ophthalmology Fellowship Interviews: Perceptions of U.S. Ophthalmology Fellowship Applicants in 2020.

Objective This study aimed to evaluate the experiences and preferences of ophthalmology fellowship applicants utilizing a virtual interview format. Design Present study is a cross-sectional study. Subjects All fellowship applicants to Wills Eye Hospital during 2020 to 2021 application cycle were included. Methods A nonvalidated, online survey was conducted, and surveys were distributed at the conclusion of the interview process after rank list submission. Main Outcome Measures Applicant demographics, application submissions, interview experiences, financial considerations, and suggestions for improvement of the virtual interview process were the primary outcomes of this cross-sectional study. Results Survey responses were received from 68 fellowship applicants (34% response rate). Thirty (44%) applicants preferred in-person interviews, 25 (36%) preferred virtual interviews, and 13 (19%) would like to prefer the option to choose either. Fifty-five of 68 (80%) applicants attended the same range of interviews for which they received interview invitations. Reduced costs were reported as the highest ranked strength of virtual interviews in 44 (65%) applicants, with a majority of respondents (68%) spending less than U.S. $250 throughout the entire process. The highest ranked limitation for virtual interviews was limited exposure to the culture/environment of the program in 20 (29%) respondents. On a scale of 0 to 100, the mean (standard deviation [SD]) satisfaction level with the fellowship application process was 74.6 (18.3) and mean (SD) perceived effectiveness levels of virtual interviews was 67.4 (20.4). Conclusion Respondents were generally satisfied with virtual interviews and noted reduced costs and increased ability to attend more fellowship interviews as the strengths of the virtual interview format. Limited exposure to the culture/environment of the program was cited as the most important limitation.