How Does Lacking a Home Program Impact Otolaryngology Applicants?

Abstract

ObjectivesTo compare otolaryngology interview and match outcomes between applicants with and without home residency programs.MethodsOtolaryngology applicants from US allopathic medical schools during the 2019–2023 cycles who responded to the Texas Seeking Transparency in Application to Residency (STAR) survey were identified. Students were stratified based upon whether their medical school had an affiliated otolaryngology residency program. The primary outcomes were number of interviews and match rate. Wilcoxon‐rank sum and χ2 testing was used to assess associations between home program status and interview and match outcomes.ResultsOf the 633 fourth‐year medical students applying to otolaryngology during the 2019–2023 application cycles, 89 had no home program (NHP) and 544 had a home program (HP). Applicants with NHP completed significantly more away rotations than applicants with a HP (2.2 vs. 1.5; p < 0.01). There was no difference in mean number of applications submitted between applicants with NHP and applicants with a HP. However, applicants with a HP received a significantly greater number of interviews (14.7 vs. 11.8; p < 0.01), attended more interviews (12.4 vs. 11.3; p = 0.02), attended a lower percentage of their offered interviews (84.4% vs. 95.8%), and had a higher match rate (81.8% vs. 70.8%; p = 0.02) than applicants with NHP. Applicants with NHP interviewed at (1.9 vs. 1.3; p < 0.01) and matched at (33.7% vs. 23.9%; p = 0.048) significantly more away rotation institutions than applicants with a HP.ConclusionApplicants with NHP received fewer interviews and had lower match rates. Away rotations may be especially important for applicants with NHP.Level of EvidenceNA Laryngoscope, 2024