Analysis of Trends in the Selection and Production of U.S. Academic Plastic Surgery Faculty.

Abstract

Purpose:In academic plastic surgery, there is a paucity of data examining the relationship between program rank, faculty training history, and production of academic program graduates. The purpose of this study is to determine objective faculty characteristics that are associated with a high program reputation.Methods:Accreditation Council for Graduate Medical Education-accredited integrated Plastic and Reconstructive Surgery (PRS) programs were ranked using Doximity and divided into Top-quartile programs and Other programs. Accredited medical schools were ranked using U.S. News and World Report. Individual faculty profiles were reviewed on program websites for information on prior training.Results:Seventy-nine programs with 712 faculty were identified and objectively analyzed. Compared to Other PRS programs, Top-quartile programs had a higher proportion of faculty that trained at Top-quartile residency programs (P < 0.0001) and Top-quartile medical schools (P < 0.0001). Top-quartile programs also had the highest proportion of faculty that trained at the same institution for fellowship (P = 0.0001), residency (P = 0.03), medical school (P = 0.4), or any prior training (medical school, residency, or fellowship) (P = 0.002). Top-quartile programs were associated with the largest total faculty size (P < 0.0001) and the largest number of graduates entering the field of academic plastic surgery (P < 0.0001).Conclusions:Program reputation is associated with PRS faculty selection and production. Top-ranked programs are more likely to have faculty that previously trained at the same institution or at top-ranked programs. Top-ranked programs are more likely to graduate residents that will become academic plastic surgeons.