Jaimo Ahn

Editorial: Insights in orthopaedic surgery: 2021

The field of orthopedics has a limited ability to recruit high-quality female applicants. The purpose of this study was to determine whether early exposure to the field affects a woman’s decision to pursue orthopedics. We performed a prospective, nonrandomized cohort study between academic years 2005 and 2009 and compared interest in orthopedic surgery among female (n=271) and male (n=71) medical students at 2 urban teaching institutions. Elective lectures and orthopedic literature were distributed via e-mail to the study participants. These materials included articles published in the medical literature, materials produced and distributed by the American Academy of Orthopaedic Surgeons, and Web sites providing educational materials. The primary outcome was the likelihood of application for orthopedic residency. We studied the influence of demographics, exposure, and attitudes on interest in pursuing an orthopedic career. Men had a significantly higher baseline level of interest in orthopedic surgery than women ( P =.005). Younger age ( P <.001) and personal ( P <.001), independent ( P <.001), and school ( P =.023) exposures to orthopedics were significantly related to interest among women. At final follow-up, total personal exposures ( P =.003) and total independent exposures ( P <.001) in the form of our literature and lectures were correlated with final interest in women. Female interest was decreased by the long hours, physical demands, and predominantly male nature of the field. Early exposure to orthopedic educational resources may be useful in generating female interest. Perceptions and attitudes regarding orthopedic surgery must to be changed to attract the best and brightest minds, regardless of sex.

Esearch and the opinions of academic chairs who must support them. Methods: Residents from sixteen departments were surveyed with a twenty-four-question online survey. Similar surveys were sent to chairs of all residency-sponsoring departments. Results: The response rate was 44% (183) for the residents and 60% (eighty-six) for the chairs. Forty-two percent of the residents felt certain or likely that they would perform research during their careers, and 28% were undecided. Ninety-nine percent thought that orthopaedic surgeons performing research is important to clinical orthopaedics. Ninety-three percent of the residents expressed the need for monetary incentives for research, but only 40% would help to provide it. Chairs similarly noted the importance of research subsidization (92%) and a willingness to support it (70%). Residents indicated that increased funding and protected time would provide the greatest incentives for research during residency; chairs agreed. After training, debt relief and salary support were most important for residents; chairs chose protected time and a chair who is supportive of research as most important. Primary authorship on a prior manuscript and past research experience were found to be associated with greater future research interest in univariate analyses; primary authorship maintained an independent association in multivariate analysis. Younger residents and women were more likely to be unsure of their research interest. Conclusions: Many orthopaedic residents in training have interest in integrating research into their future practice and support the research mission of orthopaedic surgeons. Our results may aid in identifying residents with high research interest (and those unsure) and help to guide the provision of incentives to actuate those interests. Clinical Relevance: Increasing the future research potential of residents will help to spur scientific investigation, which serves as the foundation for evidence-based clinical orthopaedic care....

Although hemiarthroplasties are an important treatment for femoral neck fractures, the literature does not provide a clear approach for selecting the implant fixation method. Therefore, we performed a systematic search of the medical literature and identified 11 prospective and retrospective studies that compared results between cemented and uncemented femoral implant fixation methods. After independent blind data extraction, we compared variables between cemented and uncemented cohorts using two different meta-analysis models. Pooled data represented 1632 cemented and 981 uncemented hemiarthroplasties (average age of patients, 78.9 and 77.5 years, respectively). The average operating room times and blood loss volumes were 95 minutes and 467 mL, respectively, for the cemented and 80 minutes and 338 mL for the uncemented cohorts. Postoperative mortality rates, overall complications, and pain were similar between the two cohorts. Despite a few potential trends, we found few statistical differences between cemented and uncemented techniques based on reported outcome measurements. In addition, inspection of this literature underscored the lack of and need for consistent and standardized reporting of outcome variables regarding these procedures. Level of Evidence: Level III, therapeutic study. See the Guidelines for Authors for a complete description of levels of evidence.

Background: There is currently a severe shortage of clinician-scientists, who fill a vital role in musculoskeletal care. One way to address this shortage is to recruit more MD-PhD students into orthopaedics. We analyzed data from a national survey of MD-PhD students to assess this potential. Methods: A total of 868 students from thirteen MD-PhD training programs were requested to fill out a multiple-choice online survey concerning their education and future goals. Results: We achieved a response rate of 56.7% (492 of 868). Seven (1.4%) of the 492 respondents listed orthopaedics as their primary clinical interest, and thirty (6.1%) listed it as one of their three strongest clinical interests. Among the thirty respondents, seven (23%) were senior students, five (17%) were women, and none were minorities. In comparison, 33% of the 462 respondents in the nonorthopaedic cohort were women and 12.1% were a member of a minority group (p < 0.05). Among twenty-three students who had a secondary orthopaedic interest, only one-third had a primary surgical interest. Both the thirty with a strong clinical interest in orthopaedics and the others without a strong interest in orthopaedics showed similar intent on becoming physician-scientists (a score of 2.73 and 3.30, respectively) and an interest in an academic career (90.0% and 90.3%, respectively) (p > 0.05 for both). The orthopaedic group showed significantly greater interest in clinical care as a primary activity than did the nonorthopaedic group (63.3% compared with 30.7%; p < 0.0005). Eighty-seven percent of those in the orthopaedic group reported research as their most likely primary or secondary activity. Conclusions: This study suggests that there is a relatively strong interest in orthopaedic surgery (patient care and research) among MD-PhD students nationally, creating the potential to recruit approximately 100 new orthopaedic clinician-scientists every eight years (the average MD-PhD training period). Extrapolation indicates that there is the ability to double the number of orthopaedic clinician-scientists in the United States over the next fifty years. Therefore, efforts should be made to attract these students (especially women and those in underrepresented minority groups) to orthopaedic surgery. The study further suggests recruiting broadly—we should not be biased toward students late in training and just those with surgical interests.

To collect national trainee-derived data about the educational process and experience of MD-PhD students. Eight hundred sixty-eight MD-PhD students enrolled in 15 training programs nationally were surveyed in spring 2003 via a 29-item Web-based questionnaire. Closed-ended questions assessed students' opinions, attitudes, and goals concerning education and future careers, as well as demographic characteristics. Programs were categorized by size; students were categorized by stage of training. Statistical analyses included chi-square tests and ANOVAs. From 13 institutions, 492 questionnaires were received, for a 57.6% response rate. Generally, satisfaction with overall education was highest at the beginning of training, lowest during graduate school, and rebounded after the PhD. Students at smaller programs were less satisfied with information received regarding future residency/career choices and coordination between training stages. Later-stage students showed greater satisfaction in obtaining the philosophical goals of their education and a different array of clinical interests than early-stage students. A majority of students chose research as their future primary activity, academic centers as their primary practice setting, and disease oriented as their future primary research activity. Many students did not agree with the current working definition of a physician-scientist. Findings indicate that students have clinical interests that develop over time, a variety of future career goals, and ambivalence concerning the appropriate balance of clinical and research activities. This information may provide a basis for future improvements in the education of MD-PhDs in the United States and abroad.