Orthopaedic Surgery Residency: Perspective of Applicants and Program Directors on Medical Student Virtual Experiences.

INTRODUCTION: Orthopaedic Residency Directors advised against visiting subinternship rotations in the peak of the pandemic. To adapt, programs offered multiple virtual experiences. The purpose of this study was to evaluate programs and applicants perceptions regarding the value of virtual experiences during the 2020 to 2021 application cycle and their utility in future application cycles. METHODS: A survey was disseminated to 31 residency programs gathering data about virtual experiences offered in this cycle. A second survey was disseminated to interns who have successfully matched at those programs to identify how interns think to have benefited from the experiences. RESULTS: Twenty-eight programs completed the survey (90% response rate). One hundred eight new interns completed the survey (70% response rate). Virtual information sessions and resident socials were the highest attended (94% and 92%, respectively). Interns and leadership agreed that virtual rotations provided students with a good understanding of program culture and what the programs offer educationally. Neither the leadership nor the interns would recommend replacing in-person aways with virtual experiences. CONCLUSION: Virtual experiences helped bridge the gap after away rotations were canceled. Alongside in-person aways, virtual experiences are likely to play a role in future cycles. However, virtual experiences remain incomparable to in-person away rotations and are not recommended as a replacement.

Orthopaedic Surgery Residency Application, and Selection Criteria Adaptations, in Times of COVID-19: A Survey Study.

Amid the COVID-19 pandemic, medical education and residency application have faced unprecedented changes. This has forced residency directors to alter their selection criteria in the absence of away rotations and the implementation of nationwide virtual interviews. Purpose: The purpose of this study was to assess how residency directors have adapted their selection criteria in light of this unique application cycle and to look at the effect, and future, of the different changes. Methods: A 16-question online survey was disseminated to 31 residency programs gathering data about new opportunities offered this cycle, changes to selection criteria, match outcomes, as well as the number of applicants to their program. Results: Twenty-nine respondents completed the survey (94% response rate). There was a significant rise in the number of applications received by programs this cycle (p < 0.05). Programs have unanimously altered their selection processes. The biggest changes in selection criteria were putting more weight into communication from mentors, emails from the applicants, home applicant status, and virtual information session attendance. Some programs used additional application requirements beyond Electronic Residency Application Service, which were often uncompleted, and cut the number of eligible applications by up to 46%. Among the new opportunities offered this cycle, virtual information sessions and social media platforms seem to be the most commonly offered and are anticipated to grow. Discussion and Conclusion: Orthopaedic surgery residency continues to become more competitive with a significant rise in the number of applications during the COVID-19 pandemic. Amid this increasingly demanding virtual application cycle, a holistic application review was more challenging. More weight was put that cycle into communication from faculty mentors, emails from the applicants, home applicant status, and virtual information session attendance. Supplementary applications and virtual informative opportunities are likely to last and change the future of the orthopaedic surgery residency application process.

Early Versus Delayed Active Range of Motion After Open Subpectoral Biceps Tenodesis.

BACKGROUND: Little is known regarding the effect of early active elbow range of motion (ROM) protocols on failure rates and outcomes after open subpectoral biceps tenodesis. HYPOTHESIS: We hypothesized that patients managed using an early active ROM protocol after open subpectoral biceps tenodesis would demonstrate similar failure rates and functional outcomes compared to patients managed using a traditional delayed active ROM protocol. STUDY DESIGN: Cohort study; Level of evidence, 3. METHODS: We evaluated 63 patients who underwent open subpectoral biceps tenodesis with unicortical suture button fixation. Based on surgeon preference, 22 patients were managed using an early active motion protocol consisting of no restrictions on elbow flexion or forearm supination, while 41 patients were managed using a delayed motion protocol postoperatively. Primary outcome measures included failure of biceps tenodesis and American Shoulder and Elbow Surgeons (ASES) and Single Assessment Numeric Evaluation (SANE) scores. Secondary outcomes included shoulder and elbow ROM at 6 months postoperatively. RESULTS: The mean follow-up for the 63 patients was 24.2 months postoperatively. One patient (2.4%) in the delayed active motion cohort and no patients in the early active motion cohort experienced failure. Final outcome scores as well as 6-month shoulder and elbow ROM indicated excellent functional outcomes, with no significant difference between motion cohorts. The median postoperative ASES scores were 97.99 in the early active motion cohort (mean ± standard deviation [SD], 95.49 ± 7.68) and 95.42 in the delayed motion cohort (mean ± SD, 90.93 ± 16.08), while median postoperative SANE scores were 96 in the early motion cohort (mean ± SD, 94.23 ± 6.68) and 95 in the delayed motion cohort (mean ± SD, 88.39 ± 17.98). Subgroup analysis demonstrated no significant difference in outcome scores based on the performance of concomitant rotator cuff repair or hand dominance. CONCLUSION: Early active ROM after open subpectoral biceps tenodesis with unicortical suture button fixation resulted in low failure rates and excellent clinical outcomes, comparable to the results of patients managed using delayed active ROM protocols. This suggests that patients undergoing open subpectoral biceps tenodesis may be managed using either early or delayed active motion protocols without compromising functional outcome.

Wound care practices after orthopaedic trauma surgery are highly variable and not evidence based.

OBJECTIVE: Given the tremendous medical, social and financial costs of surgical site infections, the pressure to minimize these complications has been mounting. There remains a substantial gap in evidence-based practice for postoperative wound care after orthopaedic trauma surgery. The purpose of this study is to determine what standards are currently in practice for postoperative wound management. METHODS: A 16-question web-based survey was published on the Orthopaedic Trauma Association website and disseminated to members through the association's quarterly email. The survey gathered data on postoperative wound care practices; specifically, when wound checks are performed, and when providers allow patients to get the incisions wet. RESULTS: 102 Orthopaedic surgeons completed the survey. Ninety-one percent were trauma fellowship trained, and 95% worked at either a Level I (76%) or Level II (19%) trauma center. There were over 100 different proposed protocols captured by the survey. The majority of surgeons (54%) perform a wound check within the first three days after surgery. Additionally, half of surgeons (50%) do not permit patients to get their incisions wet until sutures and staples are removed. CONCLUSION: Wound care routines following surgical management of orthopaedic trauma injuries are highly variable. Diverse protocols are performed at the discretion of the treating surgeon without scientific basis. This study defines immense variability in one aspect of peri-operative care that could play an important role in surgical site infections and provides a foundation for future studies to explore the potential influence of standardized wound care routines on post-operative infections and wound healing.

Residents' Views on the Impact of Robotic Surgery on General Surgery Education.

OBJECTIVE: The use of the da Vinci Robot has been fast growing in general surgery in the United States over the past decade. While the financial cost of robot-assisted procedures has been studied, there has been limited research on the educational cost of the robotic approach on general surgery trainees, and their surgical skills. DESIGN: Analysis of anonymous educational survey responses collected from residents, in addition to case logs which were used as a retrospective review for the 5 years preceding the survey. SETTING: One thousand bed, tertiary care hospital general surgery residency program. PARTICIPANTS: Twenty-four enrolled general surgery residents in 2018. RESULTS: There has been a rapid expansion in the use of robotics in general surgery. In 2017 the total number of general surgery cases using the da Vinci robot increased 6 fold over that in 2013 (23 cases in 2013, 136 in 2017), while both open and laparoscopic procedures have witnessed about a 33% drop in the case volume during those years. Almost all residents would prefer a residency program which offers the da Vinci robot for care and training (95%), however, 38% of general surgery residents reported that the presence of robotic-assisted surgery had a "detrimental" effect on their surgical training. Senior residents were more likely to report a "detrimental" effect (56% vs 27%). A third of the residents believe that robotic surgery is impeding their ability to learn open and laparoscopic surgical techniques, and only 25% denied a negative impact. Senior residents are more likely to report this negative impact (67% vs 13%). CONCLUSIONS: Reforms in residency curricula need to be in place to accommodate the expansion of the use of the robotic platform in general surgery. A subjective survey of the residents suggests that robotic surgery can potentially impede the development of residents' open and laparoscopic surgical skills.