Search

Background: Plastic and reconstructive surgery (PRS) is recognized as a highly competitive specialty. Since the first assessment of resident selection criteria in 2007, PRS residency programs have adopted holistic review processes and adapted to changes such as a decline in medical schools participating in the Alpha Omega Alpha Honor Medical Society as well as the recent transition to pass/fail grading for the United States Medical Licensing Examination (USMLE) step 1 examination (Schultz et al. Plast Reconstr Surg Glob Open . 2020;8:e2892; Tadisina et al. Plast Reconstr Surg . 2017;139:330e-331e). This study was devised to evaluate current PRS residency criteria in light of these changes., Methods: An anonymous, 12-item, electronic survey was generated and distributed using Alchemer. An email was sent to 171 program directors (PDs) and associate program directors (APDs) of PRS residency programs. Survey questions were developed to collect data regarding respondent demographics and their desired criteria when assessing residency applicants. Complete responses were collected and analyzed with summary statistics and multivariate logistic regression using RStudio (version 1.3.109)., Results: In total, 44 (25.7% response rate) of the 171 PDs and APDs completed the survey. Of the 16 programs (36.4%) with a USMLE cutoff score, 7 (43.8%) reported a range of 230 to 239 and 6 (37.5%) reported a range of 240 to 249. Without a score for step 1, the majority (48.8%) of respondents believe that step 2 scores will replace step 1 scores in terms of assessment criteria, and the content of recommendation letters was selected as the criterion with the greatest increase in weight (66.7%). In addition, 27.3% of programs require a step 2 score at the time of interview. The top 3 academic criteria in order of decreasing importance were the content of recommendation letters, clinical grades, and letter writers, whereas the top 3 nonacademic criteria were subinternship performance, maturity, and interview performance., Conclusions: Plastic and reconstructive surgery remains a highly competitive specialty for residency applicants. Our findings suggest that Alpha Omega Alpha membership remains diminished in importance, whereas USMLE cutoff scores have increased. With recent changes in the step 1 grading system, PDs and APDs will rely more heavily on step 2 scores and the content of recommendation letters., Competing Interests: Conflicts of interest and sources of funding: none declared., (Copyright © 2024 The Author(s). Published by Wolters Kluwer Health, Inc.)

Background: Despite their widespread use, there are no evidence-based guidelines on the management of closed-suction drains or antibiotics in postmastectomy breast reconstruction. The purpose of this study was to assess consensus and variation in postoperative care among plastic surgeons., Methods: The authors designed and administered a self-reported, anonymous survey to 4669 American Society of Plastic Surgeons and Canadian Society of Plastic Surgeons members in October 2009., Results: A total of 650 completed surveys were available for analysis. A majority (>81%) of respondents reported using closed-suction drains in breast reconstruction. Most surgeons (>93%) used a volume criteria for drain removal, most commonly when drain output was ≤30 mL over 24 hours (>86%). Preoperative antibiotic use was nearly universal (98%), usually consisting of intravenous cefazolin (97%). Postoperative care demonstrated less uniformity with outpatient antibiotics administered by 72% of respondents. Surgeons were divided on when to discontinue outpatient antibiotics: 46% preferred concomitant discontinuation with drains, whereas 52% preferred a specific postoperative day. No clear consensus was observed for the number (1 or 2) or type (Jackson-Pratt or Blake) of drains used. Respondents were further divided on the restriction of postoperative showering with drains and the use of acellular dermal matrix., Conclusions: These results demonstrate a consensus for drain use, drain removal, and preoperative antibiotic administration. There was no consensus for number or type of drain used, postoperative antibiotic use, shower restrictions, and use of acellular dermal matrix. Our results further emphasize the need for evidence-based postoperative-care guidelines specific to breast reconstruction.