The Burden of the Fellowship Interview Process on General Surgery Residents and Programs

Abstract

Objectives: This study evaluated the effect of the fellowship interview process in a cohort of general surgery residents. We hypothesized that the interview process would be associated with significant clinical time lost, monetary expenses, and increased need for shift coverage.

Design: An online anonymous survey link was sent via e-mail to general surgery program directors in June 2014. Program directors distributed an additional survey link to current residents in their program who had completed the fellowship interview process.

Setting: United States allopathic general surgery programs.

Participants: Overall, 50 general surgery program directors; 72 general surgery residents.

Results: Program directors reported a fellowship application rate of 74.4%. Residents most frequently attended 8 to 12 interviews (35.2%). Most (57.7%) of residents reported missing 7 or more days of clinical training to attend interviews; these shifts were largely covered by other residents. Most residents (62.3%) spent over $4000 on the interview process. Program directors rated fellowship burden as an average of 6.7 on a 1 to 10 scale of disruption, with 10 being a significant disruption. Most of the residents (57.3%) were in favor of change in the interview process. We identified potential areas for improvement including options for coordinated interviews and improved content on program websites.

Conclusions: The surgical fellowship match is relatively burdensome to residents and programs alike, and merits critical assessment for potential improvement.

Keywords: Medical Knowledge; Professionalism; Systems-Based Practice; cost; fellowship; general surgery; interview; match.