Spine fellowship training reorganizing during a pandemic: perspectives from a tertiary orthopedic specialty center in the epicenter of outbreak.
Ontology highlight
ABSTRACT:
SUBMITTER: Dowdell JE
PROVIDER: S-EPMC7194823 | biostudies-literature | 2020 Sep
REPOSITORIES: biostudies-literature
Publications
Spine fellowship training reorganizing during a pandemic: perspectives from a tertiary orthopedic specialty center in the epicenter of outbreak.
Dowdell James E JE Louie Philip K PK Virk Sohrab S McCarthy Michael H MH Sandhu Harvinder S HS Qureshi Sheeraz A SA Albert Todd J TJ Kim Han Jo HJ
The spine journal : official journal of the North American Spine Society 20200426 9
Similar Datasets
Project description:As the world grapples with the COVID-19 pandemic, we as health care professionals thrive to continue to help our patients, and as orthopedic surgeons, this goal is ever more challenging. As part of a major academic tertiary medical center in New York City, the orthopedic department at New York University (NYU) Langone Health has evolved and adapted to meet the challenges of the COVID pandemic. In our report, we will detail the different aspects and actions taken by NYU Langone Health as well as NYU Langone Orthopedic Hospital and the orthopedic department in particular. Among the steps taken, the department has reconfigured its staff's assignments to help both with the institution's efforts and our patients' needs from reassigning operating room nurses to medical COVID floors to having attending surgeons cover urgent care locations. We have reorganized our residency and fellowship rotations and assignments as well as adapting our educational programs to online learning. While constantly evolving to meet the institution's and our patient demands, our leadership starts planning for the return to a new "normal".
| S-EPMC7195373 | biostudies-literature
Project description:Study designLongitudinal survey.ObjectiveIt remains important to align competence-based objectives for training as deemed important by clinical fellows to those of their fellowship supervisors and program educators. The primary aim of this study was to determine trainee views on the relative importance of specific procedural training competencies. Secondarily, we aimed to evaluate self-perceived confidence in procedural performance at the commencement and completion of fellowship.MethodsQuestionnaires were administered to 68 clinical fellows enrolled in the AOSNA fellowship program during the 2015-2016 academic year. A Likert-type scale was used to quantify trainee perspectives on the relative importance of specific procedural competencies to their training base on an established curriculum including 53 general and 22 focused/advanced procedural competencies. We measured trainee self-perceived confidence in performing procedures at the commencement and completion of their program. Statistical analysis was performed on fellow demographic data and procedural responses.ResultsOur initial survey response rate was 82% (56/68) and 69% (47/68) for the follow-up survey. Although most procedural competencies were regarded of high importance, we did identify several procedures of high importance yet low confidence among fellows (ie, upper cervical, thoracic discectomy surgery), which highlights an educational opportunity. Overall procedural confidence increased from an average Likert score of 4.2 (SD = 1.3) on the initial survey to 5.4 (SD = 0.8) by follow-up survey (P < .0001).ConclusionsUnderstanding trainee goals for clinical fellowship remains important. Identification of areas of low procedural confidence and high importance to training experience will better guide fellowship programs and supervisors in the strategic delivery of the educational experience.
| S-EPMC6362552 | biostudies-literature
Project description:Background: The COVID-19 pandemic has had a wide-reaching impact. Graduate medical education of orthopedic surgeons was not spared from the jarring changes. Purpose: We sought to survey fellowship program directors in the field of orthopedic surgery about how the COVID-19 pandemic affected the education of the 2019 to 2020 and 2020 to 2021 fellowship classes and the future of their programs. Methods: In October 2020, an 18-item survey was distributed by an official of the American Academy of Orthopedic Surgeons (AAOS) to the specialty societies that govern fellowship training. Each specialty society then distributed the survey to its respective program directors. A reminder email was sent during the enrollment period. Each respondent was able to complete the survey once. Survey questions were grouped into 3 sections: general information about the fellowship training programs, the impact of COVID-19 on the 2019 to 2020 fellowship class, and the future impact of COVID-19 on the fellowship training programs. Results: Of the 564 accredited orthopedic surgery fellowship programs in the United States, 190 directors responded. Of these, 73.59% reported COVID-19 had a negative impact on the 2019 to 2020 fellowship class. A normal distribution of responses was found regarding didactic and academic learning, research, and mentorship opportunities. A majority of respondents said they believe that there will be no negative impact on patient care the fellows provide in the years to come. Conclusion: Orthopedic surgery fellowship program directors acknowledged that while there were negative effects to training in the pandemic, they did not think these would negatively affect patient care provided by 2019 to 2020 fellows in the short and medium term. They also reported positive outcomes from the experience of the pandemic, including new ways to educate fellows.
| S-EPMC8753546 | biostudies-literature
Project description:BackgroundWomen continue to be underrepresented in orthopedic surgery and in orthopedic fellowship programs, especially in orthopedic trauma.PurposeWe aimed to assess sex diversity among faculty and trainees in orthopedic trauma surgery fellowship programs and investigate whether the presence of female faculty in those programs is associated with the recruitment of female fellows.MethodsThis was a cross-sectional analysis of 63 orthopedic trauma surgery fellowship programs. Information regarding program faculty (as of October 2023) and fellows from 2018 to 2024 was gathered. For programs without publicly accessible information, fellowship coordinators were e-mailed for de-identified sex breakdown of fellows categorized by year. The sex of each fellow and faculty member was categorized as male or female and determined by inference from the fellow's first name and confirmed via Internet search using photos, biographies, and preferred pronouns when available.ResultsOf 63 programs with 323 orthopedic trauma faculty, 30 (47.6%) programs had at least 1 female faculty member, with only 4 (6.4%) programs having female fellowship directors. Women made up 12% (n = 39) of orthopedic trauma faculty. Of 399 total fellows identified over the 6-year period, 67 (16.7%) were women, with a notable increase in the representation of female fellows over time, from 10.8% in 2018 to 25.4% in 2024. Although programs with female faculty had a similar proportion of female fellows over the 6-year period as those without, in the most recent fellowship year (2023-2024), programs with female faculty had a higher proportion of female fellows than those without (38.2% vs 13.5%, respectively).ConclusionThis cross-sectional, observational study suggests that female surgeons remain underrepresented in orthopedic trauma fellowship director roles, although we observed an increasing number of female trainees entering orthopedic trauma surgery fellowship programs in recent years. In the most recent fellowship class studied, programs with female faculty had more than double the proportion of female fellows compared to programs without any female faculty.
| S-EPMC11572420 | biostudies-literature
Project description:ObjectiveThe purpose of this investigation was to establish a baseline of physical therapist education on temporomandibular disorders (TMD)-related topics during credentialed orthopedic manual physical therapy fellowship training and compare it to cervical spine disorders education.MethodAn online survey was distributed electronically to each fellowship program credentialed by the American Physical Therapy Association (APTA) and recognized by the Academy of Orthopedic Manual Physical Therapists (AAOMPT). Data were analyzed to compare overall exposure to TMD educational content, including a direct comparison of TMD and cervical spine disorders education.ResultsThe response rate was 79%. Thirteen programs (87%) reported providing both didactic and clinical training on both TMD and cervical spine disorders. Didactic education for cervical spine disorders ranged from 16-20 hours to over 25 hours, whereas TMD hours ranged from 0 to 6-10 hours. Clinical education for cervical spine disorders ranged from 11-15 hours to over 25 hours, whereas TMD hours ranged from 0 to 6-10 hours. The number of hours of exposure during didactic training and the number of patients exposed to during clinical training were significantly different when comparing TMD to cervical spine disorders exposure (P<0.0001).DiscussionThe data indicate a lack of uniformity between credentialed fellowship programs in orthopedic manual physical therapy with respect to the extent to which programs expose trainees to evaluation and management of TMD. There is consistency in that all programs provided more training on cervical spine disorders than TMD. Despite a high level of clinical specialization, fellows-in-training receive minimal TMD education.
| S-EPMC4459144 | biostudies-literature
Project description: Not available
| S-EPMC7482371 | biostudies-literature
Project description: Not available
| S-EPMC7325474 | biostudies-literature
Project description:Background: Fellowship directors are assumed to be distinguished in orthopedics, but the traits and training that have enabled them to achieve their leadership positions have not been assessed. Purpose: We sought to identify common demographics, research output, and educational trends of fellowship directors in orthopedics, with an emphasis on racial, ethnic, and gender diversity. Methods: We conducted a literature review to identify published studies on fellowship directors in orthopedic surgery and found 4 cross-sectional studies of fellowship directors in spine, arthroplasty, pediatrics, and sports medicine subspecialties. Another 4 accredited orthopedic subspecialties and their fellowship directors were identified using the American College of Graduate Medical Education Public Accreditation Data System for 2020-2021 and national fellowship directories. Data endpoints included race/ethnicity, age, sex, residency and fellowship training institutions, year of fellowship completion, year of hire at current institution, year of fellowship directors appointment, and h-index. The demographics and educational backgrounds for listed fellowship directors were collected from curricula vitae (CVs). Results: Of the 537 fellowship directors identified among 8 orthopedic subspecialties, the average age was 52.9 ± 2.2 years, 5.6% (N = 30) were women, 79.1% (N = 406) were white, 12.5% (N = 64) were Asian American, 3.7% (N = 19) were African American, 2.9% (N = 15) were Middle Eastern, and 1.7% (N = 9) were Hispanic/Latino. Oncology 20% (N = 4) had the highest percentage of female fellowship directors; 37.6% (N = 202) of fellowship directors were at the same institution they trained at for residency or fellowship. Their average h-index was 18.6 ± 3.7. Conclusion: This study of fellowship directors in orthopedics found that they have a high research output and a high level of institutional familiarity. We identified a need for greater diversity in these leadership positions in both gender and race/ethnicity.
| S-EPMC9837408 | biostudies-literature
Project description:BackgroundPrevious studies have reported what patients value while choosing their surgeon, but there are no studies exploring the patterns of referral to spine surgeons among primary care physicians (PCPs). This study aims to identify any trends in PCPs' referral to orthopedic surgery versus neurosurgery for spinal pathology.MethodsIn total, 450 internal medicine, family medicine, emergency medicine, neurology, and pain management physicians who practice at one of three locations (suburban community hospital, urban academic university hospital, and urban private practice) were asked to participate in the study. Consenting physicians completed our 24-question survey addressing their beliefs according to pathologies, locations of pathologies, and surgical interventions.ResultsOverall, 108 physicians (24%) completed our survey. Fifty-seven physicians (52.8%) felt that neurosurgeons would provide better long-term comprehensive spinal care. Overall, 66.7% of physicians would refer to neurosurgery for cervical spine radiculopathy; 52.8%, to neurosurgery for thoracic spine radiculopathy; and 56.5%, to orthopedics for lumbar spine radiculopathy. Most physicians would refer all spine fractures to orthopedics for treatment except cervical spine fractures (56.5% to neurosurgeons). Most physicians would refer to neurosurgery for extradural tumors (91.7%) and intradural tumors (96.3%). Most would refer to orthopedic surgeons for chronic pain. Finally, physicians would refer to orthopedics for spine fusion (61.1%) and discectomy (58.3%) and to neurosurgery for minimally invasive surgery (59.3%).ConclusionsEven though both orthopedic surgeons and neurosurgeons are intensively trained to treat a similar breath of spinal pathology, physicians vary in their referring patterns according to spinal pathology, location of pathology, and intended surgery. Education on the role of spine surgeons among PCPs is essential in ensuring unbiased referral patterns.
| S-EPMC7031437 | biostudies-literature
Project description:BackgroundRecent evidence suggests that patients prefer subjective and crowd-sourced information over data-driven or quality-based outcomes when choosing a surgeon. Online physician rating and review websites continue to increase in popularity, and over half of patients use them to research physicians. Specifically, Yelp.com is the most frequently utilized online resource by patients. Data regarding the characteristics of negative reviews for spine surgeons and practices is lacking.MethodsOrthopedic Spine surgeons and practices in 8 major US metropolitan regions were surveyed for one-star reviews on Yelp.com. The factors noted in the reviews were recorded and they were classified according to their clinical or nonclinical nature. Reviews were also subclassified into nonsurgical or surgical episodes of care.ResultsA total of 6,286 Yelp reviews were discovered, 671 (10.6%) of which were rated one-star. The majority of negative reviews (76.4%) were from patients who did not report surgery by the surgeon or practice. Of all comments, 491 (77.6%) related to nonclinical complaints. The most common factors noted in negative reviews were related to bedside manner, rude or unprofessional staff, and wait time.ConclusionChoosing a surgeon is a complex process for patients. The large majority of negative reviews were related to nonclinical issues such as poor bedside manner or rude staff and most of these were written by patients that did not undergo a surgical procedure. This may explain the large discrepancy that has been observed between quality metrics and online crowd-sourced reviews. Paying attention to these nonclinical factors may represent the most feasible and valuable targets to improve a surgeon's practice and attract future patients.
| S-EPMC9213250 | biostudies-literature