Background: Orthopaedic trauma fellowship applicants use online-based resources when researching information on potential U.S. fellowship programs. The 2 primary sources for identifying programs are the Orthopaedic Trauma Association (OTA) database and the San Francisco Match (SF Match) database. Previous studies in other orthopaedic subspecialty areas have demonstrated considerable discrepancies among fellowship programs. The purpose of this study was to analyze content and availability of information on orthopaedic trauma surgery fellowship web sites. Methods: The online databases of the OTA and SF Match were reviewed to determine the availability of embedded program links or external links for the included programs. Thereafter, a Google search was performed for each program individually by typing the program’s name, followed by the term “orthopaedic trauma fellowship.” All identified fellowship web sites were analyzed for accessibility and content. Web sites were evaluated for comprehensiveness in mentioning key components of the orthopaedic trauma surgery curriculum. By consensus, we refined the final list of variables utilizing the methodology of previous studies on the topic. Results: We identified 54 OTA-accredited fellowship programs, offering 87 positions. The majority (94%) of programs had web sites accessible through a Google search. Of the 51 web sites found, all (100%) described their program. Most commonly, hospital affiliation (88%), operative experiences (76%), and rotation overview (65%) were listed, and, least commonly, interview dates (6%), selection criteria (16%), on-call requirements (20%), and fellow evaluation criteria (20%) were listed. Programs with ≥2 fellows provided more information with regard to education content (p = 0.0001) and recruitment content (p = 0.013). Programs with Accreditation Council for Graduate Medical Education (ACGME) accreditation status also provided greater information with regard to education content (odds ratio, 4.0; p = 0.0001). Otherwise, no differences were seen by region, residency affiliation, medical school affiliation, or hospital affiliation. Conclusions: The SF Match and OTA databases provide few direct links to fellowship web sites. Individual program web sites do not effectively and completely convey information about the programs. The Internet is an underused resource for fellow recruitment. The lack of information on these sites allows for future opportunity to optimize this resource.
Objectives: To investigate the incidence of concomitant posterior malleolar fractures (PMFs) in operative, distal-third, spiral tibia fractures. Design: Prospective protocol with retrospective review of data. Setting: Single, Level 1 trauma center. Patients/Participants: One hundred ninety-three consecutive, skeletally mature patients with operatively treated fractures of the distal-third, tibial shaft and metaphysis. Pilon fractures were excluded. Intervention: Computed tomography (CT) scans were obtained in all distal-third, spiral fractures of the tibia to determine fracture morphology and presence of a PMF. Main Outcome Measurements: The incidence of concurrent PMFs in operative spiral fractures of the distal tibia. Results: Twenty-six distal-third, spiral fractures were identified with an ipsilateral PMF diagnosed in 92.3% of cases (24 cases). PMFs were over 25 times more likely to occur in distal-third, spiral fractures when compared with other distal-third fracture patterns (relative risk = 25.7, 95% confidence interval, 11.6–56.8). PMFs were treated with supplemental fixation in 23/24 (95.8%) cases. Conclusions: There is a high incidence of concomitant, ipsilateral fractures of the posterior malleolus in patients presenting with operative distal-third, spiral fractures of the tibia. A preoperative ankle computed tomography should be strongly considered in all cases with this specific fracture morphology. Level of Evidence: Diagnostic Level III. See Instructions for Authors for a complete description of levels of evidence.
Background: The purpose of this study was to determine the importance of factors considered by orthopaedic trauma fellowship applicants when evaluating programs. We hypothesized that applicants will prioritize consistent factors when applying to programs. In addition, we assessed how the applicants use the Internet to research potential fellowships. Our goal is to provide fellowships with information to optimize both their fellowship and online contents. Methods: At the 2018 and 2019 Orthopaedic Trauma Association meetings, a paper survey was given to each attendee of multiple fellowships' informational sessions. The survey consisted of 25 factors that applicants may consider when evaluating fellowships ranked on a 1-to-5 Likert scale. Additional questions were asked to determine how applicants use the Internet and social media when researching fellowships. Results: We received 111 surveys (roughly a 56% response rate). Ninety-eight applicants (88%) indicated that they use fellowship websites to research fellowships. The utilization of fellowship websites was markedly greater than the use of other online resources. The highest rated factors surveyed were surgical experience (mean 4.95; SD 0.26), pelvic and acetabular experience (4.80; 0.52), lower extremity fracture experience (4.75; 0.58), and current faculty at the fellowship (4.55; 0.78). The lowest rated factors were the ability to moonlight (2.04; 1.08), salary (1.88; 1.12), and spine trauma experience (1.45; 0.87). Surgical experience and pelvic/acetabular experience were rated markedly higher than every other factor surveyed. Discussion: To our knowledge, this is the first study to demonstrate that most orthopaedic trauma fellowship applicants use fellowship websites when researching programs. Programs may use this study to optimize their fellowship experience to reflect what the applicants value. In addition, programs may use this study as a guide when updating their websites. Fellowships with informative websites that meaningfully highlight their fellowship experience may have a competitive edge in attracting applicants to their programs.
scite is a Brooklyn-based organization that helps researchers better discover and understand research articles through Smart Citations–citations that display the context of the citation and describe whether the article provides supporting or contrasting evidence. scite is used by students and researchers from around the world and is funded in part by the National Science Foundation and the National Institute on Drug Abuse of the National Institutes of Health.
hi@scite.ai
10624 S. Eastern Ave., Ste. A-614
Henderson, NV 89052, USA
Copyright © 2024 scite LLC. All rights reserved.
Made with 💙 for researchers
Part of the Research Solutions Family.