Background More and more female residents enter postgraduate medical training (PGMT). Meanwhile, women are still underrepresented in academic medicine, in leadership positions and in most surgical specialties. This suggests that female residents’ career development may still be negatively impacted by subtle, often unconscious stereotype associations regarding gender and career-ambition, called implicit gender-career bias. This study explored the existence and strength of implicit gender-career bias in doctors who currently work in PGMT, i.e. in attending physicians who act as clinical trainers and in their residents. Methods We tested implicit gender-career bias in doctors working in PGMT by means of an online questionnaire and an online Implicit Association Test (IAT). We used standard IAT analysis to calculate participants’ IAT D scores, which indicate the direction and strength of bias. Linear regression analyses were used to test whether the strength of bias was related to gender, position (resident or clinical trainer) or specialty (non-surgical or surgical specialty). Results The mean IAT D score among 403 participants significantly differed from zero (D-score = 0.36 (SD = 0.39), indicating bias associating male with career and female with family. Stronger gender-career bias was found in women (βfemale =0 .11; CI 0.02; 0.19; p = 0.01) and in residents (βresident 0.12; CI 0.01; 0.23; p = 0.03). Conclusions This study may provide a solid basis for explicitly addressing implicit gender-career bias in PGMT. The general understanding in the medical field is that gender bias is strongest among male doctors’ in male-dominated surgical specialties. Contrary to this view, this study demonstrated that the strongest bias is held by females themselves and by residents, independently of their specialty. Apparently, the influx of female doctors in the medical field has not yet reduced implicit gender-career bias in the next generation of doctors, i.e. in today’s residents, and in females.

Background: There is no generally established treatment algorithm for the management of surgical site infection (SSI) and non-union after instrumented spinal surgery. In contrast to infected hip- and knee- arthroplasties, the use of a local gentamicin impregnated carrier in spinal surgery has not been widely reported in literature.Patients and methods: We studied 48 deep SSI and non-union patients after instrumented spine surgery, treated between 1999 and 2016. The minimum follow-up was 1.5 years. All infections were treated with a treatment-regimen consisting of systemic antibiotics and repetitive surgical debridement, supplemented with local gentamicin releasing carriers.We analysed the outcome of this treatment regimen with regard to healing of the infection, as well as patient- and surgery-characteristics of failed and successfully treated patients.Results: 42 of the 48 (87.5%) patients showed successful resolution of the SSI without recurrence with a stable spine at the end of treatment.36 patients' SSI were treated with debridement, local antibiotics, and retention or eventual restabilization of the instrumentation in case of loosening. 3 patients were treated without local antibiotics because of very mild infection signs during the revision operation. 3 patients were treated with debridement, local antibiotics and removal of instrumentation. One of these patients was restabilized in a second procedure.Infection persisted or recurred in 6 patients. These patients had a worse physical status with a higher ASA-score. Staphylococcus aureus was the most frequent causative microorganism.Interpretation: Debridement and retention of the instrumentation, in combination with systemic antibiotics and the addition of local antibiotics provided a successful treatment for SSI and non-union after instrumented spinal fusion.