Literature DB >> 31567662

Critical Assessment of the Contemporary Orthopaedic Surgery Residency Application Process.

Neill Y Li1, Philip A Gruppuso1, Saisanjana Kalagara1, Adam E M Eltorai1, J Mason DePasse1, Alan H Daniels1.   

Abstract

BACKGROUND: Matching into orthopaedic surgery residency in the United States has become an increasingly competitive process because of the large number of well-qualified applicants. Over the past several years, applicants have sought to maximize their chances of matching by submitting an increasing number of applications. The purpose of this study was to assess trends in application numbers, applicant qualifications, and application reviews, with the goal of obtaining data to help inform future improvements in the orthopaedic surgery residency application process.
METHODS: Applicant data were obtained from the Electronic Residency Application Service (ERAS, www.aamc.org/services/eras/stats) and the National Resident Matching Program (NRMP, www.nrmp.org/report-archives). These included residency application data from 2000 to 2017. In addition, we analyzed available NRMP Applicant Survey Reports between 2008 and 2017, Program Director Survey Reports between 2008 and 2016, and NRMP's Charting Outcomes in the Match between 2006 and 2016.
RESULTS: The number of U.S. senior medical student applicants per orthopaedic surgery residency position was stable from 2000 to 2017 (1.13 vs. 1.16 for 2000 and 2017, respectively). A significant increase in the United States Medical Licensing Examination (USMLE) Step-1 and Step-2 scores and self-reported research activity was present over the same time period. The number of applications submitted per applicant significantly increased, by 71.7%, from 48.4 in 2006 to 83.1 in 2017. Additionally, applications per program increased 46.4% from 457 in 2010 to 669 in 2016. In 2010, programs performed in-depth reviews for 54% of applications; however, in 2016, in-depth reviews had decreased to 45% of applications.
CONCLUSIONS: Orthopaedic residency applicant USMLE scores and research productivity have increased over time. Concurrently, the average number of applications submitted per applicant has increased, with the average applicant applying to nearly half of all orthopaedic residency programs. Consequently, programs have seen more than double the number of applications over this study period. The accompanying decline in the proportion of applications undergoing in-depth review, along with the applicant and program resources associated with these changes, warrants the development of strategies to enhance the efficiency of the application process for orthopaedic residency.

Year:  2019        PMID: 31567662     DOI: 10.2106/JBJS.18.00587

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  J Bone Joint Surg Am        ISSN: 0021-9355            Impact factor:   5.284


  11 in total

1.  How Did Coronavirus-19 Impact the Expenses for Medical Students Applying to an Orthopaedic Surgery Residency in 2020 to 2021?

Authors:  Adam M Gordon; Charles A Conway; Bhavya K Sheth; Matthew L Magruder; Rushabh M Vakharia; William N Levine; Afshin E Razi
Journal:  Clin Orthop Relat Res       Date:  2022-03-01       Impact factor: 4.755

2.  Rate of USMLE Step 2 CK Scores Included on Orthopedic Surgery Applications and Associations With Step 1 Score.

Authors:  Stephen D Bigach; Daniel J Johnson; Joshua C Patt; Matthew D Beal
Journal:  Cureus       Date:  2021-05-13

Review 3.  Systems-Level Reforms to the US Resident Selection Process: A Scoping Review.

Authors:  Ryley K Zastrow; Jesse Burk-Rafel; Daniel A London
Journal:  J Grad Med Educ       Date:  2021-06-14

4.  CORR Insights®: More Than One-third of Orthopaedic Applicants Are in the Top 10%: The Standardized Letter of Recommendation and Evaluation of Orthopaedic Resident Applicants.

Authors:  Paul J Dougherty
Journal:  Clin Orthop Relat Res       Date:  2021-08-01       Impact factor: 4.755

5.  CORR® Curriculum-Orthopaedic Education: Changing USMLE Step 1 Scores to Pass/Fail Removes an Objective Measure of Medical Knowledge.

Authors:  Paul J Dougherty
Journal:  Clin Orthop Relat Res       Date:  2021-06-01       Impact factor: 4.755

Review 6.  The Content and Accessibility of Orthopaedic Residency Program Websites.

Authors:  Nathan C Sherman; Jacob C Sorenson; Ansab M Khwaja; Gregory L DeSilva
Journal:  JB JS Open Access       Date:  2020-10-28

7.  The Cost of Getting in: Is It Time for Change in the Adult Reconstruction Fellowship Application Process?

Authors:  Jacob M Wilson; Andrew M Schwartz; Kevin X Farley; Greg A Erens
Journal:  Arthroplast Today       Date:  2021-02-26

8.  Do Medical Students Who Participate in a Research Gap Year Produce More Research During Residency?

Authors:  Joshua Wright-Chisem; Matthew R Cohn; JaeWon Yang; Daniel Osei; Monica Kogan
Journal:  J Am Acad Orthop Surg Glob Res Rev       Date:  2021-05-13

Review 9.  Cost Analysis of Medical Students Applying to Orthopaedic Surgery Residency: Implications for the 2020 to 2021 Application Cycle During COVID-19.

Authors:  Adam M Gordon; Azeem Tariq Malik; Thomas J Scharschmidt; Kanu S Goyal
Journal:  JB JS Open Access       Date:  2021-03-17

10.  The Impact of COVID-19 on the Orthopaedic Surgery Residency Application Process.

Authors:  Amiethab A Aiyer; Caroline J Granger; Kyle L McCormick; Cara A Cipriano; Jonathan R Kaplan; Matthew A Varacallo; Seth D Dodds; William N Levine
Journal:  J Am Acad Orthop Surg       Date:  2020-08-01       Impact factor: 3.020

View more

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.