Article Text
PDF
Abstract
Background and objectives Most Regional Anesthesiology and Acute Pain Medicine (RAAPM) fellowship programs transitioned to virtual interviews in 2020 because of the COVID-19 pandemic. Then, the RAAPM fellowship match started in 2023 in order to make the application process more equitable. In this study, we surveyed RAAPM fellowship program directors (PDs) to determine how such major events of the early 2020s shaped the fellowship application process.
Methods A 16-question survey was distributed to US RAAPM program directors. The survey aimed to assess whether PDs prefer the fellowship match over the previous rolling application format and to gauge PDs’ confidence in using virtual interviews to evaluate applicants.
Results 56 (71%) RAAPM program directors completed the survey. 79% of respondents participated in the inaugural match. 59% of PDs preferred the fellowship match over the rolling application format. The interview was rated the most important selection criterion. Of the 93% of PDs who switched to virtual interviews during the pandemic, only 4 PDs (7%) resumed in-person interviews in some capacity. Majority of PDs believed that virtual interviews were not inferior to in-person interviews for assessing applicants; 48% of respondents preferred virtual interviews over in-person interviews.
Conclusions Most RAAPM programs continued to conduct virtual interviews exclusively. Majority of program directors preferred the fellowship match. PDs ranked the interview as the most important selection factor. Most PDs thought virtual interviews were not inferior to in-person interviews, but they remained divided on which format they prefer.
- COVID-19
- Internship and Residency
- REGIONAL ANESTHESIA
- EDUCATION
- HISTORY
Data availability statement
All data relevant to the study are included in the article or uploaded as supplementary information.
Statistics from Altmetric.com
Data availability statement
All data relevant to the study are included in the article or uploaded as supplementary information.
Footnotes
Contributors All authors included on the paper fulfill the criteria of authorship. ML served as the first author, corresponding author, and guarantor.
Funding The authors have not declared a specific grant for this research from any funding agency in the public, commercial, or not-for-profit sectors.
Map disclaimer The depiction of boundaries on this map does not imply the expression of any opinion whatsoever on the part of BMJ (or any member of its group) concerning the legal status of any country, territory, jurisdiction or area or of its authorities. This map is provided without any warranty of any kind, either express or implied.
Competing interests None declared.
Provenance and peer review Not commissioned; externally peer reviewed.
Supplemental material This content has been supplied by the author(s). It has not been vetted by BMJ Publishing Group Limited (BMJ) and may not have been peer-reviewed. Any opinions or recommendations discussed are solely those of the author(s) and are not endorsed by BMJ. BMJ disclaims all liability and responsibility arising from any reliance placed on the content. Where the content includes any translated material, BMJ does not warrant the accuracy and reliability of the translations (including but not limited to local regulations, clinical guidelines, terminology, drug names and drug dosages), and is not responsible for any error and/or omissions arising from translation and adaptation or otherwise.