Digital vs Conventional OSCE in Orthopedic Surgery: A Feasibility Cross-Sectional Study.

OBJECTIVE: Remote OSCEs (Objective Structured Clinical Examination) are an alternative evaluation method during pandemic periods but they have never been evaluated in orthopedic surgery. We aimed to evaluate whether remote OSCEs would be feasible, and efficient for assessment of undergraduate medical students. METHODS: A cross-sectional study was performed. Thirty-four students were randomly assigned into 2 equal groups, either the conventional OSCE group or the digital OSCE group. Three types of skills were assessed: technical procedure, clinical examination, and radiographic analysis. Students were graded and they filled in a satisfaction questionnaire for both types of OSCEs. RESULTS: The mean score, out of 20, was 14.3 ± 2.5 (range 9.3-19) for the digital sessions, versus 14.4 ± 2.3 (range 10-18.6) for conventional sessions (p = 0.81). Bland Altman Plot showed that 88% of students scored within agreement. The average global feedback was different for item repeatability, relevance, and OSCEs preference (p < 0.0001, p = 0.0001, and p < 0.0001 respectively). However, they did not report differences for the item concerning the organization (p = 0.2). CONCLUSION: The results of this comparative study between digital and conventional OSCEs showed comparable distance learning scores between the 2 groups, whatever the skill assessed. However, the student's evaluation showed some reticence to conduct again OSCEs remotely.

Immersive virtual reality in orthopedic surgery as elective subject for medical students : First experiences in curricular teaching.

BACKGROUND: Virtual reality (VR) simulators have been introduced for skills training in various medical disciplines to create an approximately realistic environment without the risk of patient harm and have improved to more immersive VR (iVR) simulators at affordable costs. There is evidence that training on VR simulators improves technical skills but its use in orthopedic training programs and especially in curricular teaching sessions for medical students are currently not well established. The aim of this study was to describe the implementation of a VR operating theater as an elective course for undergraduate medical students and to evaluate its effect on student learning. METHODS: An elective course for 12 students was implemented during the summer semester of 2023. Using Oculus Quest 2 headsets (Reality Labs, Meta Platforms, USA) and controllers and the PrecisionOS platform, they were able to train five different surgical procedures. The courses were accompanied by weekly topic discussions and instructional videos. Students were assigned to two groups: group VR vs. group non-VR. The groups were switched after 5 weeks. User feedback and performance development (theoretical and procedural surgical knowledge) after VR training were assessed using three questionnaires. RESULTS: The students highly appreciated the implementation of VR training into their curriculum and 91% stated that they would opt for further VR training. All students stated that VR training improved their understanding of surgical procedures and that it should be obligatory in surgical training for undergraduate medical students. After 5 weeks of training, students in the VR group achieved significantly better results (100 out of maximum 180 points) than the non-VR group (70 points, p = 0.0495) in procedural surgical knowledge. After completion of the VR training the VR group achieved 106 points and the non-VR group 104 points (p = 0.8564). The procedural knowledge for non-VR group after 5 weeks significantly improved after VR training from 70 to 106 points (p = 0.0087). CONCLUSION: The iVR can be easily integrated into the curriculum of medical students and is highly appreciated by the participants. The iVR statistically improves the procedural knowledge of surgical steps compared to conventional teaching methods. Further implementation of iVR training in curricular teaching of medical students should be considered.

[Orthopedics and trauma surgery in the digital age]. / Orthopädie und Unfallchirurgie im digitalen Zeitalter.

BACKGROUND: Digital transformation is shaping the future of orthopedics and trauma surgery. Telemedicine, digital health applications, electronic patient records and artificial intelligence play a central role in this. These technologies have the potential to improve medical care, enable individualized patient treatment plans and reduce the burden on the treatment process. However, there are currently challenges in the areas of infrastructure, regulation, reimbursement and data protection. REALISING THE TRANSFORMATION: Effective transformation requires a deep understanding of both technology and clinical practice. Orthopedic and trauma surgeons need to take a leadership role by actively engaging with new technologies, designing new treatment processes and enhancing their medical skills with digital and AI competencies. The integration of digital skills into medical education and specialist training will be crucial for actively shaping the digital transformation and exploiting its full potential.

Mental Skills for Orthopaedic Surgery.

Orthopaedic surgery training focuses primarily on the knowledge base and surgical techniques that comprise the fundamental and physical pillars of performance. It also pays much less attention to the mental pillar of performance than does the training of other specialists such as aviators, elite athletes, musicians, and Special Forces operators. However, mental skills optimize the ability to achieve the ideal state during surgery that includes absolute focus with the right amount of confidence and stress. The path to this state begins before surgery with visualization of the surgical steps and potential complications. On the day of surgery, the use of compartmentalization, performance aspirations, performance breathing, and keeping the team focused facilitates achieving and maintaining the proper mental state. Considering the similarities between surgery and other fields of expertise that do emphasize the mental pillar, including this training in orthopaedic residencies, is likely beneficial.

The Development And Applications Of Augmented And Virtual Reality Technology In Spine Surgery Training: A Systematic Review.

BACKGROUND: The COVID-19 pandemic has accelerated the growing global interest in the role of augmented and virtual reality in surgical training. While this technology grows at a rapid rate, its efficacy remains unclear. To that end, we offer a systematic review of the literature summarizing the role of virtual and augmented reality on spine surgery training. METHODS: A systematic review of the literature was conducted on May 13th, 2022. PubMed, Web of Science, Medline, and Embase were reviewed for relevant studies. Studies from both orthopedic and neurosurgical spine programs were considered. There were no restrictions placed on the type of study, virtual/augmented reality modality, nor type of procedure. Qualitative data analysis was performed, and all studies were assigned a Medical Education Research Study Quality Instrument (MERSQI) score. RESULTS: The initial review identified 6752 studies, of which 16 were deemed relevant and included in the final review, examining a total of nine unique augmented/virtual reality systems. These studies had a moderate methodological quality with a MERSQI score of 12.1 + 1.8; most studies were conducted at single-center institutions, and unclear response rates. Statistical pooling of the data was limited by the heterogeneity of the study designs. CONCLUSION: This review examined the applications of augmented and virtual reality systems for training residents in various spine procedures. As this technology continues to advance, higher-quality, multi-center, and long-term studies are required to further the adaptation of VR/AR technologies in spine surgery training programs.

Perceptions of Preference Signaling in Orthopaedic Surgery: A Survey of Applicants and Program Directors.

INTRODUCTION: To improve transparency between candidates and training programs, a preference signaling program (PSP) was implemented before the 2022 to 2023 orthopaedic surgery match. The PSP allows applicants to 'signal' up to 30 programs, informing the program of the applicant's particular interest in interviewing for their available position(s). This study reports the perspectives of orthopaedic surgery residency applicants and program directors (PDs) on the effects of preference signaling on the orthopaedic match. METHODS: Electronic surveys were distributed to PDs and applicants. RESULTS: Almost all programs participated in the PSP (90%), and most of the applicants (97.6%) used 25 to 30 of their allotted preference signals. Most of the applicants (67.2%) thought that their likelihood of obtaining an interview was improved at 'signaled' programs but decreased at programs without a 'signal' designation (85.3%). Both applicants and PDs considered preference signaling to be one of the three most important factors for interview selection, along with Step 2 CK score and letters of recommendation. The applicants did not think that their likelihood of matching would improve with fewer allotted signaling tokens (35.2%), and 55.2% of PDs believed 21 to 30 tokens were optimal. CONCLUSION: Preference signaling is highly regarded by applicants and PDs. Signaling a program will likely improve an applicant's chance to interview. The optimal number of signaling tokens remains unknown, although both groups favored a larger allotment of tokens than has been seen in other specialties. Universal guidelines and recommendations for applicants and PDs would improve the utility of preference signaling.

The Utility of the Standardized Letter of Recommendation for Orthopedic Surgery Residency Applicants: A Systematic Review.

Despite widespread adoption for evaluating residency candidates, few studies have evaluated the orthopedic standardized letter of recommendation (SLOR). A systematic review using PubMed, Embase, and Web of Science was performed in June 2022. Study design and results from SLOR investigations were compiled. Common outcomes studied were summative rank statement scores and SLOR individual domains. Applicants were rated ranked to match or in the top one-third of rank lists in non-normally distributed frequencies. The association of summative rank statement score with match outcome was rarely studied. Applicants' ratings skew positively, the utility is reportedly limited, and influence on match outcome has been inadequately studied. [Orthopedics. 2024;47(1):e1-e5.].

Workplace Based Learning (WBL): An Effective Learning Modality during Orthopaedics Surgical Clerkship: Students' Perspective.

OBJECTIVE: To evaluate the student's perspective about educational and training efficacy of workplace based learning (WBL) during surgical clerkship in Orthopaedics amongst 4th and 5th year medical students. STUDY DESIGN: Cross-sectional study. Place and Duration of the Study: Department of General Surgery, Shifa Tameer-e-Millat University, Islamabad, from September 2020 to December 2021. METHODOLOGY: The inclusion criteria was fourth and final year MBBS students who had completed their orthopaedic surgery mini-clerkship. The exclusion criteria was medical students who did not attend the orthopaedics clerkship in the study period. The research instrument was a questionnaire based on the principles of experiential based learning. The participants were sent an online questionnaire as well as a consent form through e-mail. The responses were recorded and analysed for descriptive statistics. RESULTS: From the target group, 140 responses were received, 94 students (67%) expressed that workplace environment was conducive to learning and 98 (70%) agreed that their diagnostic and management skills further developed following exposure to the orthopaedic workplace. A short duration of 2 weeks served as a hindrance with 53 (38%) of students expressing that they were not able to effectively inculcate all concepts within that limited time-frame. Moreover, 52 (37.5%) students described limited patient's clerking time. CONCLUSION: Though majority of students were satisfied with teaching and learning strategies, design and implementation of the curriculum at the orthopaedics department; yet, there were significant limitations requiring further evaluation and cooperation by both students and faculty in order to establish ecosystem focusing on experiential learning. KEY WORDS: Orthopaedics, Workplace based learning (WBL), Student, Clerkship, Learning environment.

Comparisons of Procedures Performed in Training vs in Early Practice by Orthopaedic Trauma Surgeons.

INTRODUCTION: The Orthopaedic Trauma Association (OTA) has maintained an accreditation process of orthopaedic trauma fellowships with various requirements including an annually reviewed list of qualifying trauma cases in the form of American Medical Association Current Procedural Terminology (CPT) codes. The correlation between these established and monitored CPTs and the actual practices of orthopaedic trauma surgeons has not been studied. METHODS: American Board of Orthopaedic Surgery part II case logs (trauma subspecialty) (2012 to 2018) were compared with OTA fellowship case logs (2015 to 2019). Case logs from 447 surgeons and 166 trauma fellowship programs were compared. Four CPT code categories were defined: complex trauma (OTA required CPT codes, excluding Accreditation Council for Graduate Medical Education [ACGME] orthopaedic residency requirements), general trauma (ACGME residency required trauma codes), general orthopaedics (nontrauma ACGME residency requirements), and others (codes not included in residency or trauma fellowship requirements). RESULTS: OTA fellows performed a higher median percentage of complex trauma compared with American Board of Orthopaedic Surgery candidates (34% vs. 21%, P < 0.001): Both cohorts performed a similar percentage of general trauma (23%). OTA fellows performed more general orthopaedics (40% vs. 1%, P < 0.001). Several OTA required codes were performed infrequently (0 to 3 during board collection) by most surgeons, and several procedures are being performed that are not included in current CPT code requirements. DISCUSSION: Early-career traumatologists are performing orthopaedic trauma procedures they were trained on during residency and fellowship, with varying complexity. Trauma fellows perform a higher percentage of complex trauma compared with early-career trauma surgeons. Continued surveillance is necessary such that educational improvements can be made to maximize the quality of trauma fellowship education. LEVEL OF EVIDENCE: Level III, therapeutic study. See Instructions for Authors for a complete description of levels of evidence.

The Effects of COVID-19 on Orthopaedic Surgery Training Programs in the United States.

INTRODUCTION: This study investigates the effects of the COVID-19 pandemic on medical education, research opportunities, and mental health in orthopaedic surgical training programs. METHODS: A survey was sent to the 177 Electronic Residency Application Service-participating orthopaedic surgery training programs. The survey contained 26 questions covering demographics, examinations, research, academic activities, work settings, mental health, and educational communication. Participants were asked to assess their difficulty in performing activities relative to COVID-19. RESULTS: One hundred twenty-two responses were used for data analysis. Difficulties were experienced in collaborating with others (49%), learning through online web platforms (49%), maintaining the attention span of others through online web platforms (75%), and in gaining knowledge as a presenter or participating through online web platforms (56%). Eighty percent reported that managing time to study was the same or easier. There was no reported change in difficulty for performing activities in the clinic, emergency department, or operating room. Most respondents reported greater difficulty in socializing with others (74%), participating in social activities with coresidents (82%), and seeing their family (66%). Coronavirus disease 2019 has had a significant effect on the socialization of orthopaedic surgery trainees. DISCUSSION: Clinical exposure and engagement were marginally affected for most respondents, whereas academic and research activities were more greatly affected by the transition from in-person to online web platforms. These conclusions merit investigation of support systems for trainees and evaluating best practices moving forward.

Update on Educational Resources and Evaluation Tools for Orthopaedic Surgery Residents.

Innovations in orthopaedic resident educational resources and evaluation tools are essential to ensuring appropriate training and ultimately the graduation of competent orthopaedic surgeons. In recent years, there have been several advancements in comprehensive educational platforms within orthopaedic surgery. Orthobullets PASS, Journal of Bone and Joint Surgery Clinical Classroom, and American Academy of Orthopaedic Surgery Resident Orthopaedic Core Knowledge each have their own unique advantages in preparation for the Orthopaedic In-Training Examination and American Board of Orthopaedic Surgery board certification examinations. In addition, the Accreditation Council for Graduate Medical Education Milestones 2.0 and the American Board of Orthopaedic Surgery Knowledge Skills Behavior program each provide objective assessment of resident core competencies. Understanding and using these new platforms will help orthopaedic residents, faculty, residency programs, and program leadership to best train and evaluate their residents.

Can Artificial Intelligence Pass the American Board of Orthopaedic Surgery Examination? Orthopaedic Residents Versus ChatGPT.

BACKGROUND: Advances in neural networks, deep learning, and artificial intelligence (AI) have progressed recently. Previous deep learning AI has been structured around domain-specific areas that are trained on dataset-specific areas of interest that yield high accuracy and precision. A new AI model using large language models (LLM) and nonspecific domain areas, ChatGPT (OpenAI), has gained attention. Although AI has demonstrated proficiency in managing vast amounts of data, implementation of that knowledge remains a challenge. QUESTIONS/PURPOSES: (1) What percentage of Orthopaedic In-Training Examination questions can a generative, pretrained transformer chatbot (ChatGPT) answer correctly? (2) How does that percentage compare with results achieved by orthopaedic residents of different levels, and if scoring lower than the 10th percentile relative to 5th-year residents is likely to correspond to a failing American Board of Orthopaedic Surgery score, is this LLM likely to pass the orthopaedic surgery written boards? (3) Does increasing question taxonomy affect the LLM's ability to select the correct answer choices? METHODS: This study randomly selected 400 of 3840 publicly available questions based on the Orthopaedic In-Training Examination and compared the mean score with that of residents who took the test over a 5-year period. Questions with figures, diagrams, or charts were excluded, including five questions the LLM could not provide an answer for, resulting in 207 questions administered with raw score recorded. The LLM's answer results were compared with the Orthopaedic In-Training Examination ranking of orthopaedic surgery residents. Based on the findings of an earlier study, a pass-fail cutoff was set at the 10th percentile. Questions answered were then categorized based on the Buckwalter taxonomy of recall, which deals with increasingly complex levels of interpretation and application of knowledge; comparison was made of the LLM's performance across taxonomic levels and was analyzed using a chi-square test. RESULTS: ChatGPT selected the correct answer 47% (97 of 207) of the time, and 53% (110 of 207) of the time it answered incorrectly. Based on prior Orthopaedic In-Training Examination testing, the LLM scored in the 40th percentile for postgraduate year (PGY) 1s, the eighth percentile for PGY2s, and the first percentile for PGY3s, PGY4s, and PGY5s; based on the latter finding (and using a predefined cutoff of the 10th percentile of PGY5s as the threshold for a passing score), it seems unlikely that the LLM would pass the written board examination. The LLM's performance decreased as question taxonomy level increased (it answered 54% [54 of 101] of Tax 1 questions correctly, 51% [18 of 35] of Tax 2 questions correctly, and 34% [24 of 71] of Tax 3 questions correctly; p = 0.034). CONCLUSION: Although this general-domain LLM has a low likelihood of passing the orthopaedic surgery board examination, testing performance and knowledge are comparable to that of a first-year orthopaedic surgery resident. The LLM's ability to provide accurate answers declines with increasing question taxonomy and complexity, indicating a deficiency in implementing knowledge. CLINICAL RELEVANCE: Current AI appears to perform better at knowledge and interpretation-based inquires, and based on this study and other areas of opportunity, it may become an additional tool for orthopaedic learning and education.

Impact of Specialty on Cases Performed During Spine Surgery Training in the United States.

OBJECTIVE: Two general pathways exist for spine surgery training in the United States: orthopedic surgery and neurological surgery. Previous studies have not quantified the impact of fellowship training when comparing case volumes between these 2 training pathways. This study compares reported spine surgery case volume upon graduation from orthopedic surgery and neurological surgery training. METHODS: This was a retrospective cohort study of recent graduates from orthopedic surgery and neurological Surgery training programs in the United States (2018-2021). The Accreditation Council for Graduate Medical Education provided case logs for residents in neurological surgery and orthopedic surgery as well as fellows in orthopedic spine surgery. Case volumes were compared for adult and pediatric spine surgery cases using parametric tests. RESULTS: Case logs from 3146 orthopedic surgery residents, 107 orthopedic spine surgery fellows, and 766 neurological surgery residents were included in this study. Across each cohort, neurological surgery trainees reported more total adult spine surgery cases than orthopedic surgery trainees (514 ± 206 vs. 383 ± 171, P < 0.001). Orthopedic surgery trainees reported more total pediatric spine surgery cases (21 ± 14 vs. 17 ± 12, P = 0.006). CONCLUSIONS: Neurological surgery training affords a greater volume of adult spine surgery cases, but orthopedic surgery affords more pediatric spine surgery cases. Identification of relative strengths and weaknesses can help facilitate multidisciplinary training experiences in spine surgery.

Acquisition of Medical Knowledge Varies During Allopathic and Osteopathic Orthopedic Surgery Residency Training.

Currently, little is known about the differences in medical knowledge acquisition between osteopathic and allopathic orthopedic surgery residents. The purpose of this study was to determine the relationship between Orthopaedic In-Training Examination (OITE) performance and training pathway in orthopedic surgery. This was a retrospective cohort study of all orthopedic surgery residents taking the OITE during the 2019-2020 academic year. Comparisons in OITE performance were made with parametric tests. A total of 4407 orthopedic surgery residents were in allopathic (86%) and osteopathic (14%) training programs. There was significant improvement in OITE performance between subsequent postgraduate year (PGY) levels among allopathic residents (P<.001). Among osteopathic residents, OITE performance increased between PGY1 and PGY4 (P<.001) but plateaued between PGY4 and PGY5 (P>.05). At the PGY1 level, osteopathic residents had higher OITE performance than allopathic residents (P<.001), but scores were equivalent at the PGY2 to PGY4 levels (P>.05). At the PGY5 level, allopathic residents had higher OITE performance than osteopathic residents (P<.001). Allopathic medical students scored higher on the Step 1 (248±19 vs 242±17, P<.001) and Step 2 (255±16 vs 250±15, P<.001) board examinations. Medical knowledge increases during orthopedic surgery residency. Disparities exist by training pathway, with osteopathic residents outperforming allopathic residents at the PGY1 level but then underperforming at the PGY5 level. Ultimately, this study provides insights into how resident promotion and training pathway impacts the acquisition of medical knowledge during orthopedic surgery residency. [Orthopedics. 2023;46(6):379-383.].

Trends in Racial, Ethnic, and Gender Diversity in Orthopedic Surgery Spine Fellowships From 2007 to 2021.

STUDY DESIGN: Descriptive. OBJECTIVE: The objective of this study is to analyze trends in racial, ethnic, and gender diversity in orthopedic spine surgery fellowship trainees. SUMMARY OF BACKGROUND DATA: Orthopedic surgery has consistently been labeled as one of the least diverse fields in Medicine. Although some effort has been made to combat this in recent years at the residency level, it is uncertain whether spine fellowships have had any changes in fellow demographics. MATERIALS AND METHODS: Fellowship demographic data were collected through the Accreditation Council for Graduate Medical Education. Data collected included gender (male, female, and not reported) and race (White, Asian, Black, Hispanic, Native Hawaiians, American Indian or Alaskan Native, other, and unknown). Percentage equivalents were calculated for each group from 2007 to 2008 to 2020 to 2021. A χ 2 test for trend (Cochran-Armitage test) was done to determine whether there was a significant change in percentages of each race and gender during the study period. The results were considered statistically significant at P <0.05. RESULTS: White, Non-Hispanic males represent the largest proportion of orthopedic spine fellowship positions each year. From 2007 to 2021, there were no significant changes in the representation of any race or gender of orthopedic spine fellows. Males ranged from 81% to 95%, Whites from 28% to 66%, Asians from 9% to 28%, Blacks from 3% to 16%, and Hispanics from 0% to 10%. Native Hawaiians and American Indians remained at 0% for all years included in the study. Females and all races, excluding Whites, continue to be under-represented in orthopedic spine fellowship. CONCLUSIONS: Orthopedic spine surgery fellowship programs have not made substantial progress in diversifying its population. More attention is needed to increase diversity in residency programs through pipeline programs, increased mentorship and sponsorship, and early exposure to the field. LEVEL OF EVIDENCE: 1.

Is Everyone Covered? A Resident's Perspective on Radiation Exposure in Orthopedic Surgery.

Orthopedic surgeons frequently use fluoroscopy and flat plate X-ray in the operating room. As the length of surgeons' careers gets longer, the risk of potential for harm from radiation exposure also grows. Knowledge of the background and science of radiation, the C-arm, and various ways that surgeons can protect themselves is fundamental and should be incorporated into residency education for orthopedic surgery. This review provides information that we hope will better prepare residents in orthopedic surgery to use fluoroscopy and X-rays and protect themselves from radiation risks.

The Student You Know: Orthopedic Surgery Home Program Match Rates and Geographic Relationships Before and After COVID-19.

OBJECTIVE: In March 2020, COVID-19 was declared a pandemic by the World Health Organization. This led to the outright cancellation of away rotations and in person residency interviews for the class of 2021. This study aims to identify the geographic relationships in the orthopedic match and further explore COVID-19's effect on these geographic relationships. Furthermore, we aim to compare the home program match rates before and after COVID-19. SETTING: Southern Illinois University School of Medicine, Department of Orthopedic Surgery (tertiary, university-based). DESIGN AND PARTICIPANTS: Residency websites and social media sites were used to record basic residency information as well as each resident's year, matriculated medical school, and matriculated medical school geographic data. This information was used to evaluate the proportion of orthopedic residents from "home program" medical schools and evaluate the geographic relationship of matched orthopedic residents. 202 Orthopedic residencies were initially identified and 134 allopathic and nonmilitary residency programs met the inclusion criteria. In all, 3253 of the 3931 (82.7%) current U.S orthopedic residents were included in the analysis. RESULTS: In the 4 orthopedic surgery residency classes before the pandemic (2017-2020), 21.8% of residency slots were filled by home program students. During the pandemic match cycle (2021), this number jumped to 28.2% (p < 0.0006). The increase was observed consistently across residency subgroup analysis: class size, doximity rank, and doximity research rank. Correspondingly, there was a statistically significant increase from 34.7% (2017-2020) to 39.3% (2021) (p = 0.0318) in residencies matching with same state medical students. Regional trends stayed consistent. Our study showed that residency programs matched applicants who went to same region medical schools during the 2020 to 2021 cycle at nearly the exact same rate as they did pre-pandemic (63.6%, up from 63.3%). CONCLUSIONS: Our study demonstrates that despite widespread virtual away rotations and virtual open houses, residency programs showed an increased preference for their home program students. This trend was significant and widespread, highlighting the generalized nationwide hesitation of both residency programs and students on the virtual interview process.

COVID-19 and the transition to virtual teaching sessions in an orthopaedic surgery training program: a survey of resident perspectives.

BACKGROUND: COVID-19 has had a tremendous impact on medical education. Due to concerns of the virus spreading through gatherings of health professionals, in-person conferences and rounds were largely cancelled. The purpose of this study is the evaluate the implementation of an online educational curriculum by a major Canadian orthopaedic surgery residency program in response to COVID-19. METHODS: A survey was distributed to residents of a major Canadian orthopaedic surgery residency program from July 10th to October 24th, 2020. The survey aimed to assess residents' response to this change and to examine the effect that the transition has had on their participation, engagement, and overall educational experience. RESULTS: Altogether, 25 of 28 (89%) residents responded. Respondents generally felt the quality of education was superior (72%), their level of engagement improved (64%), and they were able to acquire more knowledge (68%) with the virtual format. Furthermore, 88% felt there was a greater diversity of topics, and 96% felt there was an increased variety of presenters. Overall, 76% of respondents felt that virtual seminars better met their personal learning objectives. Advantages reported were increased accessibility, greater convenience, and a wider breadth of teaching faculty. Disadvantages included that the virtual sessions felt less personal and lacked dynamic feedback to the presenter. CONCLUSIONS: Results of this survey reveal generally positive attitudes of orthopaedic surgery residents about the transition to virtual learning in the setting of an ongoing pandemic. This early evaluation and feedback provides valuable guidance on how to grow this novel curriculum and bring the frontier of virtual teaching to orthopaedic education long-term.

Preference Signaling for Orthopaedic Surgery Applicants: A Survey of Residency Program Directors.

INTRODUCTION: On March 30, 2022, the American Orthopaedic Association's Council of Orthopaedic Residency Directors announced its endorsement for a preference signaling program (PSP) for the 2022 to 2023 orthopaedic residency application cycle. The purpose of our study was to assess orthopaedic surgery residency program director (PD) perceptions of the PSP and analyze potential effects of the PSP on the residency application process. METHODS: A 19-question survey was distributed to 98 PDs (40.8% response rate). Contact information was obtained from a national database. RESULTS: Most programs plan to participate in the PSP (87.5%). Preference signaling is highly regarded for residency selection, with PDs ranking its relative importance just below away rotation performance and personal knowledge of the applicant. Most PDs agreed that applicants will have increased chances of receiving interviews at programs they send a preference signal (65%). Most PDs also do not think that the PSP will help improve diversity (42.5%) and combat the overapplication phenomenon (67.5%). A majority think that an application cap limiting the total number of applications submitted should be initiated in future application cycles (85%). CONCLUSION: Preference signaling will be one of the most important factors considered during orthopaedic residency selection. A signal will likely improve applicants' chance of receiving an interview. Thus, students should be selective about where they send their preference signals and invest time in creating strong, personal connections with a few, select programs to increase their success in the orthopaedic residency match.

Current State of Research Gap-Years in Orthopedic Surgery Residency Applicants: Program Directors' Perspectives.

Background: The purpose of this study was to determine how orthopedic residency program directors (PDs) evaluate residency applicants who participated in a research gap-year (RGY). Methods: A 23 question electronically administered survey was created and emailed to all Accreditation Council for Graduate Medical Education (ACGME) orthopedic residency PDs for the 2020-21 application cycle. PDs were emailed directly if active contact information was identifiable. If not, program coordinators were emailed. The survey contained questions regarding the background information of programs and aimed at identifying how PDs view and evaluate residency applicants who participated in a RGY. Descriptive statistics for each question were performed. Results: Eighty-four (41.8%) of 201 PDs responded. Most respondent programs (N=62, 73.8%) identified as an academic center. The most common geographic region was the Midwest, N=33 (39.3%). Few programs (N=3, 3.8%) utilize a publication "cut-off" when screening residency applicants. When asked how many peer-reviewed publications were necessary to deem a RGY as "productive," responses ranged from 0-15 publications (median interquartile range 4.5 [3-5]). Forty-one (53.3%) PDs stated they would council medical students to take a RGY with USMLE Step 1 scores being the #1 factor guiding that advice. More PDs disagree than agree (N=35, 43.6%; vs N=22, 28.2%) that applicants who complete a RGY are more competitive applicants, and 35 PDs (45.5%) agree research experiences will become more important in resident selection as USMLE Step 1 transitions to Pass/Fail. Conclusion: Program directors have varying views on residency applicants who did a RGY. While few programs use a publication cutoff, the median number of publications deemed as being a "productive" RGY was approximately 5. Many PDs agree that research experiences will become more important as USMLE Step becomes Pass/Fail. This information can be useful for students interested in pursuing a RGY and for residency programs when evaluating residency applicants. Level of Evidence: IV.