Samir K Gadepalli1, Cynthia D Downard2, Keith A Thatch3, Saleem Islam4, Kenneth S Azarow5, Mike K Chen6, Craig W Lillehei7, Pramod S Puligandla8, Marleta Reynolds9, John H Waldhausen10, Keith T Oldham11, Max R Langham12, Thomas F Tracy13, Ronald B Hirschl3. 1. Division of Pediatric Surgery, Department of Surgery, University of Michigan, Ann Arbor, MI, USA. Electronic address: samirg@med.umich.edu. 2. Department of Surgery, University of Louisville, Louisville, KY, USA. 3. Division of Pediatric Surgery, Department of Surgery, University of Michigan, Ann Arbor, MI, USA. 4. Division of Pediatric Surgery, Department of Surgery, University of Florida, Gainesville, FL, USA. 5. Division of Pediatric Surgery, Department of Surgery, Oregon Health & Sciences University, Portland, OR, USA. 6. Division of Pediatric Surgery, University of Alabama at Birmingham, Birmingham, AL, USA. 7. Department of Surgery, Children's Hospital Boston, Boston, MA, USA. 8. Division of Pediatric General and Thoracic Surgery, The Montreal Children's Hospital, Montreal, Quebec, Canada. 9. Department of Surgery, Northwestern University, Chicago, IL, USA. 10. Division of Pediatric General and Thoracic Surgery, Department of Surgery, University of Washington, Seattle, WA, USA. 11. Department of Pediatric Surgery, Medical College of Wisconsin, Milwaukee, WI, USA. 12. Department of Surgery, University of Tennessee Health Science Center, Memphis, TN, USA. 13. Division of Pediatric Surgery, Department of Surgery, Brown University, Providence, RI, USA.
Abstract
PURPOSE: Increasing numbers of programs participating in the pediatric surgery match has resulted in economic and logistical issues for candidates, General Surgery residencies, and Pediatric Surgery training programs (PSTP). We sought to determine the ideal number of interviews conducted by programs based on resultant rank order lists (ROL) of matched candidates. METHODS: PSTPs received 4 online surveys regarding interview practices (2011-2012, 2014), and matched candidate ROL (2008-2010, 2012, 2014). Program directors (PD) also provided estimates regarding minimum candidate interview numbers necessary for an effective match (2011-2012, 2014). Kruskal-Wallis equality-of-populations rank tests compared ROL and interview numbers conducted. Quartile regression predicted ROL based on the interview numbers. Wilcoxon signed rank-sum tests compared the interview numbers to the minimal interview number using a matched pair. p Values<0.05 were significant. RESULTS: Survey response rates ranged from 85-100%. Median ROL of matched candidates (2-3.5) did not differ between programs (p=0.09) and the lowest matched ROL for any year was 10-12. Interview numbers did not affect the final candidate ROL (p=0.22). While PDs thought the minimum median interview number should be 20, the number actually conducted was significantly higher (p<0.001). CONCLUSION: These data suggest that PSTPs interview excessive numbers of candidates. Programs and applicants should evaluate mechanisms to reduce interviews to limit costs and effort associated with the match.
PURPOSE: Increasing numbers of programs participating in the pediatric surgery match has resulted in economic and logistical issues for candidates, General Surgery residencies, and Pediatric Surgery training programs (PSTP). We sought to determine the ideal number of interviews conducted by programs based on resultant rank order lists (ROL) of matched candidates. METHODS: PSTPs received 4 online surveys regarding interview practices (2011-2012, 2014), and matched candidate ROL (2008-2010, 2012, 2014). Program directors (PD) also provided estimates regarding minimum candidate interview numbers necessary for an effective match (2011-2012, 2014). Kruskal-Wallis equality-of-populations rank tests compared ROL and interview numbers conducted. Quartile regression predicted ROL based on the interview numbers. Wilcoxon signed rank-sum tests compared the interview numbers to the minimal interview number using a matched pair. p Values<0.05 were significant. RESULTS: Survey response rates ranged from 85-100%. Median ROL of matched candidates (2-3.5) did not differ between programs (p=0.09) and the lowest matched ROL for any year was 10-12. Interview numbers did not affect the final candidate ROL (p=0.22). While PDs thought the minimum median interview number should be 20, the number actually conducted was significantly higher (p<0.001). CONCLUSION: These data suggest that PSTPs interview excessive numbers of candidates. Programs and applicants should evaluate mechanisms to reduce interviews to limit costs and effort associated with the match.