Does "Hoarding" Impact Interview Distribution Among Orthopaedic Surgery Residency Applicants? A Modeling Study Based on a Large Database.

BACKGROUND: "Interview hoarding" is commonly used to refer to the concentration of interview offers among a small number of high-performing residency applicants. Theoretically, if the same applicants interview at every program, fewer rank lists will be submitted than open residency positions, leading to a "match crisis" with unfilled positions after the match. There are no published studies we are aware of that describe the observed distribution of residency interview offers among orthopaedic surgery applicants or the potential impact of "hoarding" on that distribution. QUESTIONS/PURPOSES: We examined the distribution of interview invitations extended to orthopaedic surgery residency applicants in the 2020 to 2021 and 2021 to 2022 application cycles. The change in the shape of the interview invitation distribution was the primary outcome for two central questions: (1) Does the interview offer distribution curve among orthopaedic surgery applicants change meaningfully from baseline with implementation of an interview cap (Model 1)? (2) What is the impact on the distribution of invitations with a reduction in the number of applicants in the field (Model 2)? METHODS: This was a retrospective study of orthopaedic surgery interview invitations extended to applicants via the Thalamus interview management program during the 2020 to 2021 and 2021 to 2022 residency application cycles. The Thalamus database was chosen because it contains data on interview invitations for orthopaedic surgery residency positions and has the largest market share in orthopaedics compared with similar databases. Thalamus data represent 1565 applicants and 53 residency programs (90% and 25% of the national total, respectively) in 2021 to 2022 and 993 applicants and 46 programs (77% and 23%, respectively) in 2020 to 2021. It has been shown to contain a representative sample of orthopaedic residency programs. An interview cap (Model 1) was simulated by removing excess interviews held by applicants above the 75th and 95th percentiles, which were chosen to represent a formal cap and an informal cap, respectively. A reduction in the size of the applicant pool was similarly modeled by randomly removing 5% and 25% of applicants, chosen to simulate informal and formal application requirements, respectively. In both models, the excess interviews were redistributed among the remaining applicants. RESULTS: Applicants received a mean of 1.8 ± 2.2 Thalamus interview invitations in 2020 to 2021 and 1.7 ± 2.4 invitations in 2021 to 2022, with no change to the overall distribution curve. A total of 39% (606 of 1565) of applicants received no Thalamus interview invitations in 2021 to 2022, 75% (1176 of 1565) received two or fewer, and < 1% (14 of 1565) of applicants received 10 or more invitations. Redistributing excess interviews held by the top 5% of applicants resulted in 2% (61 of 2651) of interviews being redistributed (Model 1). Removing 5% of the total applicant pool resulted in a redistribution of 3% (87 of 2651) of the interview invitations (Model 2). CONCLUSION: Orthopaedic surgery interview data demonstrated an expected uneven distribution of interview invitations, with a small proportion of highly competitive applicants receiving a higher number of interview offers as well as a large group of applicants receiving no interview invitations in Thalamus. Concerns that "hoarding" would lead to a crisis resulting in many unmatched residency positions seemed unfounded, given the excess of applicants relative to positions and the minimal change in the distribution of interviews in the cap model. CLINICAL RELEVANCE: Medical students applying to orthopaedic residency should seek individual advising to improve their individual odds of matching, while understanding that interview hoarding does not seem to alter the distribution of interviews. Program directors and medical students' advisors should be cognizant that a small proportion of applicants are broadly interviewed and may benefit from steps taken to ensure applicants have genuine interest in the program.

Role of single-dose intravenous iron therapy for the treatment of anaemia after orthopaedic trauma: protocol for a pilot randomised controlled trial.

INTRODUCTION: Orthopaedic trauma and fracture care commonly cause perioperative anaemia and associated functional iron deficiency due to a systemic inflammatory state. Modern, strict transfusion thresholds leave many patients anaemic; managing this perioperative anaemia is an opportunity to impact outcomes in orthopaedic trauma surgery. The primary outcome of this pilot study is feasibility for a large randomised controlled trial (RCT) to evaluate intravenous iron therapy (IVIT) to improve patient well-being following orthopaedic injury. Measurements will include rate of participant enrolment, screening failure, follow-up, missing data, adverse events and protocol deviation. METHODS AND ANALYSIS: This single-centre, pilot, double-blind RCT investigates the use of IVIT for acute blood loss anaemia in traumatically injured orthopaedic patients. Patients are randomised to receive either a single dose infusion of low-molecular weight iron dextran (1000 mg) or placebo (normal saline) postoperatively during their hospital stay for trauma management. Eligible subjects include adult patients admitted for lower extremity or pelvis operative fracture care with a haemoglobin of 7-11 g/dL within 7 days postoperatively during inpatient care. Exclusion criteria include history of intolerance to intravenous iron supplementation, active haemorrhage requiring ongoing blood product resuscitation, multiple planned procedures, pre-existing haematologic disorders or chronic inflammatory states, iron overload on screening or vulnerable populations. We follow patients for 3 months to measure the effect of iron supplementation on clinical outcomes (resolution of anaemia and functional iron deficiency), patient-reported outcomes (fatigue, physical function, depression and quality of life) and translational measures of immune cell function. ETHICS AND DISSEMINATION: This study has ethics approval (Oregon Health & Science University Institutional Review Board, STUDY00022441). We will disseminate the findings through peer-reviewed publications and conference presentations. TRIAL REGISTRATION NUMBER: NCT05292001; ClinicalTrials.gov.

Orthopaedic Surgery Residency Program Adherence to Universal Interview Offer Day Guidelines: A Retrospective Analysis.

INTRODUCTION: The 2020 to 2021 application cycle was marked by structural changes due to the COVID-19 pandemic. Adaptations included the American Orthopaedic Association Council of Residency Program Directors recommendations for a universal interview offer day (UIOD), synchronizing applicant interview offer release. As a novel process within orthopaedics, there are limited data on the execution and effect of a UIOD. Study goals include determining (1) residency program adherence to the Council of Residency Program Directors UIOD guidelines during the 2020 to 2021 cycle, (2) how quickly programs filled available interviews, and (3) any difference in time from release to booking between applicants using edu and com e-mail domains. METHODS: Orthopaedic residency programs and applicants using the Thalamus interview management software platform during the 2020 to 2021 residency application cycle were analyzed, representing 46 residency programs and 993 interviewees (22% and 77% of the national total, respectively). RESULTS: Of the programs included in this study, 19 (41%) were strictly adherent to the UIOD and time, 14 (30%) were weakly adherent and sent out offers outside of the assigned time, and 13 (28%) were nonadherent and sent out offers on dates other than the UIOD. The average time to fill to 80% capacity was 26 ± 14 minutes (range 3 to 77 minutes) for the 33 programs that released on the UIOD. Applicants with edu e-mail domains scheduled their first interview an average of 1.8 minutes after those with com e-mail domains (14.8 versus 13.0 minutes, P < 0.05). CONCLUSION: Despite more than 60% of the residency programs committing to participate, less than half of the programs that initially agreed to participate were strictly adherent to guidelines during the first UIOD in orthopaedic surgery. Although additional research is needed to analyze the unique, fully virtual 2020 to 2021 recruitment season, a phased or waved approach to the UIOD may improve the process for all stakeholders in future cycles. LEVEL OF EVIDENCE: Level V.

Reduced postoperative morbidity in computer-navigated total knee arthroplasty: A retrospective comparison of 225,123 cases.

BACKGROUND: Total knee arthroplasty (TKA) is one of the most common elective surgical procedures in the United States, with more than 650,000 performed annually. Computer navigation technology has recently been introduced to assist surgeons with planning, performing, and assessing TKA bone cuts. The aim of this study is to assess postoperative complication rates after TKA performed using computer navigation assistance versus conventional methods. METHODS: The American College of Surgeons National Surgical Quality Improvement Program (NSQIP) database was queried for unilateral TKA cases from 2008 to 2016. The presence of the CPT modifier for use of computer navigation was used to separate cases of computer-navigated TKA from conventional TKA. Multivariate and propensity-matched logistic regression analyses were performed to control for demographics and comorbidities. RESULTS: There were 225,123 TKA cases included; 219,880 were conventional TKA (97.7%) and 5,243 were navigated (2.3%). Propensity matching identified 4,811 case pairs. Analysis demonstrated no significant differences in operative time, length of stay, reoperation, or readmission, and no differences in rates of post-op mortality at 30 days postoperatively. Compared to conventional cases, navigated cases were at lower risk of serious medical morbidity (18% lower, p = 0.009) within the first 30 days postoperatively. CONCLUSION: After controlling for multiple known risk factors, navigated TKA patients demonstrated lower risk for medical morbidity, predominantly driven by lower risk for blood transfusion. Given these findings, computer-navigation is a safe surgical technique in TKA.