Rebecca McAteer1, Shala Sundaram2, Shantie Harkisoon3, Julia Miller4. 1. Faculty Physician, Phelps-Northwell Family Medicine Residency Program. 2. Program Director, Lewis-Gale Family Medicine Residency Program. 3. Program Director, Phelps-Northwell Family Medicine Residency Program. 4. Project Coordinator, Phelps-Northwell Family Medicine Residency Program.
Abstract
BACKGROUND: Videoconference interviews (VCIs) are increasingly being used in the selection process of residency program candidates across a number of medical specialties, but nevertheless remain an underutilized approach, particularly in the field of primary care. OBJECTIVE: This retrospective data review with cost analysis explores financial and acceptability outcomes of VCI implementation over a 9-year period. METHODS: VCIs were incorporated into the recruitment process at a community-based academic family medicine residency program in 2011, whereby suitable candidates were selected for VCIs after Electronic Residency Application Service (ERAS) application review. Based on the outcome of VCI, candidates were invited via a structured interview tool for a subsequent in-person interviews to determine final rank decisions. Costs of the interview process were tracked, as well as perceptions of VCIs. RESULTS: VCI implementation over 9 years demonstrated a median 48% reduction of in-person interviews-or 95 applicants eliminated out of a total 195 VCIs performed. This represents a mean annual direct cost savings estimated at $9,154, equating to a 55% reduction in allocated program costs, in addition to indirect cost savings to both applicants and the program. CONCLUSIONS: Compared to exclusively in-person interviewing, the utilization of VCIs is potentially more cost-effective for residency programs and candidates, while creating a more personal experience for applicants early in the recruitment process. Limited data of acceptability among faculty and candidates is generally favorable but remains mixed.
BACKGROUND: Videoconference interviews (VCIs) are increasingly being used in the selection process of residency program candidates across a number of medical specialties, but nevertheless remain an underutilized approach, particularly in the field of primary care. OBJECTIVE: This retrospective data review with cost analysis explores financial and acceptability outcomes of VCI implementation over a 9-year period. METHODS: VCIs were incorporated into the recruitment process at a community-based academic family medicine residency program in 2011, whereby suitable candidates were selected for VCIs after Electronic Residency Application Service (ERAS) application review. Based on the outcome of VCI, candidates were invited via a structured interview tool for a subsequent in-person interviews to determine final rank decisions. Costs of the interview process were tracked, as well as perceptions of VCIs. RESULTS: VCI implementation over 9 years demonstrated a median 48% reduction of in-person interviews-or 95 applicants eliminated out of a total 195 VCIs performed. This represents a mean annual direct cost savings estimated at $9,154, equating to a 55% reduction in allocated program costs, in addition to indirect cost savings to both applicants and the program. CONCLUSIONS: Compared to exclusively in-person interviewing, the utilization of VCIs is potentially more cost-effective for residency programs and candidates, while creating a more personal experience for applicants early in the recruitment process. Limited data of acceptability among faculty and candidates is generally favorable but remains mixed.
Authors: Sirichai Pasadhika; Todd Altenbernd; Richard R Ober; Erin M Harvey; Joseph M Miller Journal: Ophthalmology Date: 2012-02 Impact factor: 12.079
Authors: Srinivas M Susarla; Edward W Swanson; Sheri Slezak; Scott D Lifchez; Richard J Redett Journal: Plast Reconstr Surg Date: 2017-01 Impact factor: 4.730
Authors: Daniel M Breitkopf; Isabel C Green; Matthew R Hopkins; Vanessa E Torbenson; Christopher L Camp; Norman S Turner Journal: Obstet Gynecol Date: 2019-10 Impact factor: 7.661
Authors: Arlene S Chung; Kaushal H Shah; Michael Bond; Brahim Ardolic; Abbas Husain; Ida Li; Lukasz Cygan; William Caputo; Jan Shoenberger; Jeff van Dermark; Jonathan Bronner; Moshe Weizberg Journal: West J Emerg Med Date: 2019-08-20