Factors Important in the Selection of a Rhinology/Skull Base Surgery Fellow: A National Survey of Fellowship Directors.

BACKGROUND: The numbers of Rhinology/Skull Base Surgery fellowship programs and applicants have been increasing in recent years. However, little information is currently available with regards to the most important aspects of the application process. OBJECTIVE: The goal of this study was to determine the factors that Rhinology/Skull Base Surgery fellowship directors consider most important when selecting a fellow. METHODS: An anonymous, online survey was distributed to current Rhinology/Skull Base Surgery fellowship directors. 28 of 31 fellowship directors (90%) completed the survey. Respondents were asked to provide basic information regarding the program and to rank various selection factors they deem most important. RESULTS: For assessing the quality of an application, fellowship directors placed the highest value on LORs. Research experience and publications were also important considerations. The traditional strength of an applicant's residency program was a factor, while medical school performance, USMLE scores, and OTE score did not play a significant role in the selection process. For subjective assessment of applicants, the most value was placed on faculty assessment of the applicant during their interview. Attention was also given to personality fit with the program and the perceived maturity and initiative of the applicant. CONCLUSION: Numerous academic achievements and personal characteristics are given consideration in the Rhinology/Skull Base Surgery fellowship selection process, but recommendation from a trusted colleague and performance on interviews were viewed to be the most critical factors for fellowship programs in selecting applicants. This is consistent with studies that have explored the selection process for other otolaryngology fellowship programs.

Fellow selection protocols in sleep surgery: a national survey of sleep surgery program directors.

PURPOSE: To determine the factors that sleep medicine/surgery fellowship program directors look for in applicants. METHODS: Program directors from 9 sleep medicine/surgery fellowship programs in the USA were sent an anonymous online survey. They were asked to select the five most important academic factors (of a list of 17) when evaluating potential fellowship candidates, then rank those five in order of importance. They were then asked to do the same for the most important subjective criteria (of a list of 12). RESULTS: Eight of 10 survey responses met inclusion criteria. Of the academic factors, strength of letters of recommendation, reputation of letter writer, and letters from sleep surgeons ranked highest. As for the subjective criteria, faculty assessment of the applicant on interview was ranked highest, followed by initiative and personality "fit" with the program. The reputation of an applicant's residency was ranked as more important than the reputation of their medical school. An applicant's performance in residency was assessed as more predictive of their performance in fellowship than performance during the interview process or position on the rank order list for the match. Only one program has a United States Medical Licensing Examination (USMLE) Step, and a different program has an Otolaryngology Training Examination (OTE) score cutoff. CONCLUSION: Letters of recommendation and interview are the most important factors in the selection process for hybrid sleep medicine and surgery fellowship programs, followed by research and residency program reputation. Sleep surgery-specific experience is helpful.

The impact of the COVID-19 pandemic on fellowship training: A national survey of pediatric otolaryngology fellowship directors.

OBJECTIVES: To gain a better understanding of the effects the COVID-19 pandemic has had on current and future pediatric otolaryngology fellowship training, as well as how the application process was impacted this past year. METHODS: An anonymous web-based survey consisting of 24 questions was sent to all fellowship directors. The survey questions were designed to gain a better understanding of the effects of the current COVID-19 pandemic on the surgical and clinical experience of current, to characterize the types of supplemental educational experiences that fellowship directors had incorporated into the curriculum to compensate for the decreased surgical and clinical workload, and highlight differences based on geographic location. RESULTS: Overall, 22 of 36 fellowship directors responded to our survey, for a total response rate of 61%. The Midwest had the highest response rate at 72.7%, followed by the Northeast (71.4%), the West (50%), and the South (50%). The vast majority of fellowship directors (77.2%) reported the COVID-19 pandemic had a "significant impact" on overall pediatric otolaryngology fellowship training. 86.3% of fellowship directors reported that their programs were still performing some surgical operations, but with decreased overall volume. Interestingly, 13.6% of fellowship directors reported that their fellows had been pulled to medicine or ICU services to assist with the COVID-19 pandemic. Of these programs that had a fellow pulled to the ICU or medicine service, 2 out of 3 were located in the Northeast, with the remaining fellow being from a program in the South. CONCLUSION: Overall, pediatric otolaryngology fellowship directors reported the COVID-19 pandemic has had a significant impact on the overall fellowship experience within the field of pediatric otolaryngology, with the majority feeling that both their fellows surgical and clinical experience have been significantly impacted.

Perioperative Analgesia for Patients Undergoing Thyroidectomy and Parathyroidectomy: An Evidence-Based Review.

OBJECTIVE: To perform an evidence-based systematic review evaluating perioperative analgesia, including opioid alternatives, used for patients undergoing thyroidectomy and parathyroidectomy. METHODS: A comprehensive literature search from 1997 to January 2018 of Pubmed, Cochrane, and EmBase libraries was performed for studies reporting analgesic administration following thyroid or parathyroid surgery. This systematic review was based on the Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analysis (PRISMA) guidelines. Studies were evaluated for level of evidence and given a Jadad score to assess for risk of bias. Outcomes gathered included postoperative pain scores, time to rescue analgesia, rescue analgesic consumption, and adverse events. RESULTS: Thirty-eight randomized controlled trials met inclusion criteria. The GRADE criteria determined the overall evidence to be moderate-high. Studies utilizing NSAIDs reported reduced requirements for rescue analgesics. Acetaminophen studies presented with conflicting data on effectiveness. Gabapentinoid studies demonstrated lower pain scores and an increased time to rescue analgesic. Local anesthetics were effective at decreasing Visual Analogue Scale (VAS) and Numeric Rating Scale (NRS) pain scores while also reducing rescue analgesic consumption. Ketamine was shown to increased postoperative nausea and vomiting. NSAIDs and local anesthetic studies had an aggregate grade of evidence A, while all others had grade B evidence. CONCLUSION: There is significant evidence supporting the use of NSAIDs and local anesthetics in the perioperative period for pain management for thyroid and parathyroid surgeries. Acetaminophen, gabapentinoid and ketamine have some supporting evidence and may serve as adequate alternatives. Further multi-institutional RCTs are warranted to delineate optimal analgesic regimens. LEVEL OF EVIDENCE: NA.