Berend Mets1, Jennifer A Galford, Heather R Purichia. 1. Department of Anesthesiology, Pennsylvania State University College of Medicine and the Milton S. Hershey Medical Center, Hershey, Pennsylvania 17033-0850, USA. bmets@psu.edu
Abstract
BACKGROUND/ METHODS: We conducted an Internet-based survey of all current academic anesthesiology chairpersons to benchmark their characteristics and accomplishments, as well as to gain insights that might be useful to aspirant department chairs. RESULTS: The response rate was 55%; chairs were predominantly male (92%), with a mean age of 55 yr and an average time in post of 6.5 yr. They were American medical graduates (82%), had undergone a research (31%) or a clinical fellowship (57%), were full professors (86%) and practiced most commonly as generalists and in intensive care. Chairs had a significant record of scholarship, including a median of 30 peer-reviewed papers, and an average of 11.0 industry and 2.7 federal grants. Thirty-two percent served as editors of peer-reviewed journals and 42% have served as president/chairman of national committees. Fully 30% of current chairs had previous experience as a chair. Sixty-eight percent of current chairs decided early in their career (at the resident/fellow or assistant professor level) that they wished to be a chair. In advising aspirant chairs, the most helpful experience to being a chair was that of having served as a vice chair, and the highest rated advice was to become a division director. Chairs were predominantly satisfied with their position (median 3 of 10) and 44% would return to clinical anesthesiology after chairmanship. CONCLUSIONS: The survey suggests that anesthesiology chairs value peer-reviewed research, scholarship, and academic achievement, but do not believe that significant research experience is of great benefit to functioning as a chair.
BACKGROUND/ METHODS: We conducted an Internet-based survey of all current academic anesthesiology chairpersons to benchmark their characteristics and accomplishments, as well as to gain insights that might be useful to aspirant department chairs. RESULTS: The response rate was 55%; chairs were predominantly male (92%), with a mean age of 55 yr and an average time in post of 6.5 yr. They were American medical graduates (82%), had undergone a research (31%) or a clinical fellowship (57%), were full professors (86%) and practiced most commonly as generalists and in intensive care. Chairs had a significant record of scholarship, including a median of 30 peer-reviewed papers, and an average of 11.0 industry and 2.7 federal grants. Thirty-two percent served as editors of peer-reviewed journals and 42% have served as president/chairman of national committees. Fully 30% of current chairs had previous experience as a chair. Sixty-eight percent of current chairs decided early in their career (at the resident/fellow or assistant professor level) that they wished to be a chair. In advising aspirant chairs, the most helpful experience to being a chair was that of having served as a vice chair, and the highest rated advice was to become a division director. Chairs were predominantly satisfied with their position (median 3 of 10) and 44% would return to clinical anesthesiology after chairmanship. CONCLUSIONS: The survey suggests that anesthesiology chairs value peer-reviewed research, scholarship, and academic achievement, but do not believe that significant research experience is of great benefit to functioning as a chair.