Plastic Surgery Residency Applicants’ Perceptions of a Virtual Interview Cycle

BACKGROUNDThe 2020 to 2021 residency application cycle marked the first year of fully virtual integrated plastic surgery interviews. The virtual format was a double-edged sword for applicants with several advantages, such as reduced costs and time lost from travel, and disadvantages as the novel for...

Ausführliche Beschreibung

Gespeichert in:
Bibliographische Detailangaben
Veröffentlicht in:Plastic and reconstructive surgery (1963) 2022-10, Vol.150 (4), p.930-939
Hauptverfasser: Shen, Abra H., Shiah, Eric, Sarac, Benjamin A., Maselli, Amy M., Nassar, Amer H., Lee, Bernard T., Janis, Jeffrey E., Lin, Samuel J.
Format: Artikel
Sprache:eng
Online-Zugang:Volltext
Tags: Tag hinzufügen
Keine Tags, Fügen Sie den ersten Tag hinzu!
Beschreibung
Zusammenfassung:BACKGROUNDThe 2020 to 2021 residency application cycle marked the first year of fully virtual integrated plastic surgery interviews. The virtual format was a double-edged sword for applicants with several advantages, such as reduced costs and time lost from travel, and disadvantages as the novel format introduced new stressors on top of an already demanding process. Concerns included unfair interview invitation distribution, interview "hoarding," and assessing "fit" virtually. In this study, the authors aimed to understand applicants' experiences of the 2020 to 2021 virtual plastic surgery interview cycle. METHODSA survey was sent to 330 applicants in the 2020 to 2021 integrated plastic surgery application cycle. The survey included questions about participant demographics, preinterview preparation, virtual interview experiences, and postinterview process. Statistical comparisons were performed on responses using IBM SPSS Statistics version 25.0 (IBM, Armonk, N.Y.). RESULTSEighty-nine participants responded to the survey, representing a 27 percent response rate. Applicants received an average of 13.3 interview invitations (range, 0 to 45) and attended an average of 11.4 interviews (range, 0 to 30). Almost half (48.2 percent) did not feel interview invitations were distributed equitably, and more than half (68.2 percent) reported that there should be a limit on the number of interview invitations an applicant can accept. The majority of respondents (88.1 percent) reported spending $500 or less on virtual interviews. Half (50.6 percent) participated in virtual subinternships, of which 30.4 percent became significantly less interested in a program afterward. CONCLUSIONSThe inaugural virtual interview cycle had several advantages and disadvantages. Lessons learned from this year could be utilized toward building a more equitable, fair, and effective potential virtual cycle in years to come.
ISSN:0032-1052
1529-4242
DOI:10.1097/PRS.0000000000009521