<< Back to the abstract archive
The Evolution of Applying to Integrated Plastic Surgery Residency Programs: Analyzing trends in the last five years of the match
Kashyap Komarraju Tadisina BS, Susan Orra BA, Bahar Bassiri Gharb MD PhD, Grzegorz Kwiecien, MD, Karolina Mlynek, MD MBA, Steven Bernard MD, James E. Zins MD
Cleveland Clinic
2015-03-13
Presenter: Kashyap Tadisina
Affidavit:
This abstract has not been published in any scientific journal or previously presented at a major meeting. All work related to this project represents the original work of the authors.
Director Name: Steven Bernard
Author Category: Medical Student
Presentation Category: Clinical
Abstract Category: General Reconstruction
Introduction:
The average integrated plastic surgery (IPS) applicant spends over $6,000 for interviews. The average program director reviews over 200 applications/cycle. It is important to make the IPS residency application process efficient and cost effective. The authors aim to shed light on trends in the last 5 years of the IPS match to guide both applicants and programs.
Methods:
A cross-sectional study of the National Residency Match Program (NRMP) Charting Outcomes and Results/Data for the years 2009-2014 was performed. Applicant profile elements were examined for differences between matched/unmatched US senior medical students. Additionally, a review of literature was performed.
Results:
Number of IPS positions rose from 69 in 2010 to 135 in 2014. Both matched and unmatched US senior medical students have higher Step 2 scores, research experiences, publications, and volunteer experiences than 5 years ago. However, the likelihood of matching into an IPS residency has increased (50%-2009, 44%-2011, 71%-2014). Successful match rates were associated with AOA status and graduating from a top 40 ranked medical school (p<0.05). Applicants with a lower number of ranked programs had increased match rates in 2014 than in previous years. Literature review revealed that program directors also value strong recommendation letters, publications, persistent work ethic ('grit'), away rotations, and an accurate curriculum vitae.
Conclusions:
Within the setting of increased applicant competitiveness, the authors recommend maximizing subjective qualities in order to differentiate themselves from a highly eligible applicant pool. Additionally, applicants should diversify the types of programs at which they interview to maximize their chances of matching.
