Orthopaedic In-Training Examination Research Articles

Analysis of Hand Surgery Questions on Orthopedic In-training Examination From 2014 to 2019.

The orthopedic in-training examination (OITE) continues to evolve over time. It is important for orthopedic residents and residency programs to have an up-to-date understanding of the content and resources being used on the OITE to study and tailor curricula accordingly. This study presents an updated analysis of the OITE hand domain from 2014 to 2019. All OITE questions related to hand surgery from 2014 to 2019 were analyzed for topic, subtopic, taxonomy, imaging modalities, and bibliometric factors related to cited references. Of the 1600 OITE questions, there were 113 hand surgery questions (7.1%) over a 6-year period. The most commonly tested topics were nerve (n = 22; 19%), fracture/dislocation (n = 21; 19%), and tendon/ligament (n = 19; 17%). Complex clinical management questions were the most common taxonomic category (n = 66; 58%). Two hundred fifty-two references were cited, the most common of which were from the Journal of Hand Surgery (American Volume) (n = 76; 30%), Journal of the American Academy of Orthopaedic Surgeons (n = 27; 11%), and Hand Clinics (n = 21; 8%). Publication lag decreased over the study period (P = .009). Twenty-five questions (22%) used imaging modalities, and 21 (19%) used clinical photos. Compared with a prior analysis from 2002 to 2006, there were more questions related to nerves (19.5% vs 9.8%, P = .041). Residents and residency programs can benefit from an updated understanding of OITE hand surgery content and resources. The current analysis identifies high-yield topics and resources that can guide resident preparation for the OITE.

Analysis of Hip and Knee Reconstruction Questions on the Orthopedic In-Training Examination

BackgroundIt is vital for orthopedic residents and residency programs to have a current understanding of the materials and resources utilized on the Orthopedic In-Training Examination (OITE) to tailor resident educational curricula accordingly. This study presents an updated analysis of the hip and knee section of the OITE. MethodsAll OITE questions related to hip and knee reconstruction over six examinations between 2014 and 2019 were analyzed for topic, subtopic, taxonomy, imaging modalities, resident performance, and references. ResultsThere were 166 hip and knee reconstruction questions of 1600 OITE questions (10.4%) over a six-year period. The most commonly tested topics include mechanical properties of total knee and hip implants (10.8%), instability after THA (10.8%), periprosthetic fracture (10.2%), and prosthetic joint infection (10.2%). A total of 362 references were cited from 68 different sources. The most common sources were JOA, JBJS, JAAOS, and CORR, which were collectively responsible for 68% of all citations. There was an average publication lag of 7.1 years, with 75% of all citations falling within 10 years of the question date. Compared with a prior analysis from 2005 and 2009, there were significantly more complex multistep questions regarding treatment and fewer one-step knowledge recall questions (P = .003). Similarly, recent tests had significantly more questions involving interpretation of radiographs (55%, P < .001) and advanced imaging (9.6%, P < .001), compared with a decade ago. ConclusionsThe OITE continues to evolve over time, incorporating recent literature and topics. The current analysis identifies high-yield topics and resources that can guide resident preparation for the OITE hip and knee section.

An Updated Analysis of the Pediatric Section of the Orthopaedic In-Training Examination.

An updated analysis of the pediatrics section of the Orthopaedic In-Training Examination (OITE) is helpful for resident education and preparation for the OITE. The purpose of this study is to provide an updated evaluation of the pediatric category of the OITE, and to explore trends in question topics and taxonomy compared with the previously published analysis from 2011 to 2014. Five years (2015-2019) of OITE questions, answers, and references were reviewed. The number of pediatric questions per year was recorded, and questions were subcategorized based on topic tested. The presence or absence of imaging or a clinical photograph was noted. Each question was also assigned a cognitive taxonomy level, based on a previously published classification system. The percentage of pediatric questions on the 2015-2019 OITEs averaged 11.4% compared with 12.6% from 2011 to 2014 (P=0.349). The 3 most commonly tested pediatric topics were general trauma (17.8%), elbow trauma (13.2%), and genetic disorders/syndromes (11.2%). There was a significant increase in questions that required diagnosis and interpretation (27.6% vs. 8%, P<0.001) and a slight but not significant decrease in the questions requiring simple knowledge recall (26.3% vs. 35.5%, P=0.120) and decisions about management (46.1% vs. 56.5%, P=0.077). Overall, 65% of questions utilized clinical photographs or imaging studies compared with 62% from 2011 to 2014 (P=0.621). The most common references were the Journal of Pediatric Orthopaedics, Journal of American Academy of Orthopaedic Surgeons, and Journal of Bone and Joint Surgery. Textbooks were cited less frequently than in the past. While the percentage of pediatric questions on the OITE has remained consistent over time, the percentage of questions requiring diagnosis and interpretation has increased. In addition, questions testing genetic disorders/syndromes have become more prevalent in recent years. The most commonly cited resources were high-impact journal articles, with textbooks cited less frequently than in previous years. Knowledge of the most frequently tested topics and resources cited may assist orthopaedic residents in preparing for the OITE and orthopaedic faculty to focus didactic sessions on the most commonly tested topics.

Analysis of the Sports Medicine Section of the Orthopaedic In-Training Examination: Improvements in Levels of Evidence and Question Taxonomy Over a 12-Year Period.

There has been a recent shift within the orthopedic literature to publish articles with higher levels of evidence. In this investigation, the trends in question taxonomy and the levels of evidence of the references for sports medicine questions on the Orthopaedic In-Training Examination (OITE) during a 12-year period were evaluated. Sports medicine questions were obtained from the OITEs administered between 2005 and 2007 and between 2014 and 2016. The taxonomy of each question was characterized, and levels of evidence for all references were assigned using American Academy of Orthopaedic Surgeons guidelines. Question taxonomy and article levels of evidence from 2005 to 2007 were compared with those from 2014 to 2016. Sports medicine questions comprised 8% of the OITEs in both examination groups. The questions from 2014 to 2016 had a higher mean taxonomic level (2.26 vs 1.52, P=.0001) and a greater proportion of studies with high levels of evidence (levels 1 and 2) (21% vs 10%, P=.027). However, references with low levels of evidence or nonprimary resources made up 82.2% and 68.5% of the total references on the older and more recent examinations, respectively. References from 2014 to 2016 were, on average, 2 years older than those from earlier examinations. This study indicated that sports medicine questions on recent OITEs cite references of higher levels of evidence and contain higher taxonomic question structure than examinations 10 to 12 years ago. However, the majority of questions still cite articles with low levels of evidence or nonprimary sources. These findings can be used to guide resident education and continue improvements in the selection of references for questions on the Sports Medicine section of the OITE. [Orthopedics. 2020;43(5):e460-e464.].

The Educational Impact of a Fellowship-trained Orthopaedic Oncologist.

Musculoskeletal oncology is a subspecialty of orthopaedics with few fellowship-training locations. Although orthopaedic oncologists comprise a minority within the field of orthopaedic surgery, most work at academic centers and serve in leadership roles with notable impact on patients and the training of residents. This article investigates the objective impact orthopaedic oncologists have regarding resident operative case volume and performance on in-training examinations. The William Beaumont Army Medical Center and Texas Tech University Health Sciences Center of El Paso combined orthopaedic residency program's case logs and Orthopaedic In-Training Examination (OITE) scores between 2013 and 2018 were reviewed. This provided 3 academic years of data before and after an orthopaedic oncology faculty member arrived in 2016. The case volume and OITE examination performance before and after the addition of the orthopaedic oncology faculty member were compared. After the addition of an orthopaedic oncology faculty member, a significant increase was observed in the program's OITE overall correctly answered questions (171.30 versus 181.03, P = 0.004) and oncology subsection percentile (56th to the 66th percentile, P = 0.038). An increase was also observed in resident oncology case volume from 29 oncology cases per year to 138 cases on average (P = 0.022). The addition of a fellowship-trained orthopaedic oncologist results in increased exposure to orthopaedic oncology cases and improved resident performance on the OITE. This may correlate to improved American Board of Orthopaedic Surgeons Part I pass rates and improved overall resident satisfaction.

The Changing Nature of the Oncology Section of the Orthopaedic In-Training Examination

The Orthopaedic In-Training Examination (OITE) assesses orthopaedic resident knowledge over 275 multiple-choice questions.Since the first publication examining the contents of the pathology section was published over ten years ago, the pathology content has been renamed (oncology) and revamped. As the overall extent of these alterations is currently unknown, the efficacy of current orthopaedic oncology educational practices for optimal OITE performance should be questioned. To determine how the oncology (pathology) material has changed, we compared the following characteristics from previous examinations (2002 to 2006) to current examinations (2012 to 2016): (1) What are the average number of oncology questions being asked? (2) What are the specific imaging modalities presented for examinee interpretation? (3) Which pathologic diagnoses are commonly examined? (4) What is the pattern of taxonomic question classifications? The 2012 to 2016 OITE study guides were reviewed, and each oncology question was categorized into one of the following: benign or malignant, imaging modality grouping, common pathologic diagnosis, question type, and taxonomic classification. The aforementioned information was extrapolated from the previous pathology publication published in 2010 to create the previous examination cohort (2002 to 2006). The current examination characteristics were then compared with those of the previous examinations. The current number of oncology OITE questions significantly decreased from previous years (27.2 versus 21.2; P = 0.015). Current examinations displayed a significant increase in testing the interpretation of diagnostic imaging modalities compared with previous examinations (78.3% versus 55.8%; P < 0.001). The current examinations examined a wide spectrum of pathologic diagnoses, including previously untested pathologies. The number of taxonomy 1 questions on current examinations significantly decreased (36.8% versus 24.5%; P = 0.032), whereas the number of taxonomy 3 questions significantly increased from previous examinations (48.1% versus 32.4%; P = 0.032). This study demonstrated that the nature of the orthopaedic oncology (pathology) section has changed over the past 10 years. Although the overall number of pathology-related questions decreased, the difficulty level of these questions increased, demanding a higher level of knowledge and critical thinking. A formal orthopaedic oncology rotation may be the best method to educate and improve OITE oncology performance. Prognostic study, level III.

Orthopaedic In-Training Examination (OITE) Preparation and Study Habits of Orthopaedic Residents: Revisited

Introduction: The Orthopaedic In-Training Examination (OITE) is well-established as the cornerstone for educational evaluation of orthopaedic surgery residents. Great significance has been placed on the OITE, particularly as it has been found to correlate closely with successful completion of the American Board of Orthopaedic Surgery Part I Exam (ABOS I). Our study correlated different aspects of OITE study preparation, including resources and habits, with OITE performance.

What Predicts Outstanding Orthopedic Residents among the Program?

An oversupply of qualified applicants leads to intense competition for the limited number of first year orthopedic residency positions. Therefore, program directors can be more selective in choosing their future residents. However, it is unclear if there are resident characteristics that correspond with trainee performance. We asked (1) what resident characteristics are associated with subjective residency performance score? and (2) what resident characteristics are associated with Orthopedic In-Training Examination (OITE) score?A total of 119 orthopedic residents accepted at the Harvard Combined Orthopedic Residency Program from 1999 - 2009 were included in this study. The current program director together with two former program directors in the selected time period defined the subjective residency performance score based on the clinical skills of the residents during training. Former Olympic or varsity athlete (P=0.018) and Alpha Omega Alpha (AOA) status (P=0.014) were associated with a better subjective residency performance score. Higher USMLE step 1 score (P=0.0038), known person within faculty prior to the residency (did a research rotation, or local medical student) (P=0.041), and AOA (P=0.015) status were associated with a higher OITE score. AOA status of the applicant for orthopedic residency is associated with both a higher OITE score and a better subjective residency performance score.

Orthopedic Oncology Experience During Residency.

The objective of this study was to determine the characteristics and logistics of orthopedic oncology rotations at various residency programs across the USA and determine the effect of orthopedic oncology rotations on Orthopedic In-Training Examination (OITE) scores. An eight-question survey was sent to 162 orthopedic surgery residency programs obtained from the Accreditation Council for Graduate Medical Education public database. Pre-oncology rotation and post-oncology rotation OITE scores for 24 residents at a major academic medical center were collected and analyzed. The response rate was 43.8%. Survey results were as follows: 90.1% responded positively to having a dedicated orthopedic oncology rotation in their curriculum; 49.3% carried out their oncology rotation at a hospital outside of their home institution; 70.4% of programs had only one dedicated orthopedic oncology rotation throughout residency; 42.3% indicated that residents experience 6-10weeks of dedicated orthopedic oncology training during the 5-year residency program; 42.2% indicated that residents experience oncology rotations during post-graduate year 4; and 80.3% of programs had orthopedic oncology trained surgeons on their faculty. The mean increase in OITE oncology scores after the rotation was 12.1% (p = 0.005). There are variations in orthopedic oncology curricula across residency programs, most notably in the number of weeks residents participate in a dedicated oncology rotation, the post-graduate year that residents rotate on an oncology service, and the location where residents obtain their orthopedic oncology training. Participating in a dedicated orthopedic oncology rotation resulted in significant improvement in scores on the oncology domain of the OITE.

Orthopaedic Resident Burnout Is Associated with Poor In-Training Examination Performance.

Resident burnout-the state of exhaustion, maladaptive detachment, and low sense of accomplishment-is a widely documented phenomenon that affects between 27% and 75% of residents in the United States. To our knowledge, no previous study has examined the relationship between resident burnout and performance on the Orthopaedic In-Training Examination (OITE). The current investigation sought to evaluate whether an association exists between indices of orthopaedic surgery resident burnout as assessed by the Maslach Burnout Inventory (MBI) and performance on the OITE. In a cross-sectional study of the orthopaedic surgery residents at a single large academic institution, the MBI was completed by all trainees in May 2016. The results of the 2016 OITE were documented for each resident, including the percentage of correctly answered questions and OITE percentile ranking. To control for individual test-taking skills, United States Medical Licensing Examination (USMLE) Step-1 and Step-2 scores also were documented for each resident. The relationship between the MBI subscale scores and OITE performance was evaluated. The analysis included 100% of the 62 orthopaedic surgery residents in training at our institution. Sixteen (25.8%) of the residents experienced at least moderate emotional exhaustion, while 32 (51.6%) of the residents experienced at least moderate depersonalization and 8 (12.9%) of the residents experienced a moderate sense of impaired personal accomplishment. Postgraduate year (PGY)-2 residents had the highest emotional exhaustion and depersonalization scores compared with residents in other years of training. Each of the 3 MBI indices of burnout was associated with worse OITE performance when controlling for general test-taking ability. In this study of orthopaedic surgery residents at a large academic training program, burnout was present among residents in all PGYs of training; it was most prevalent during the second year of training. Increased levels of the 3 components of burnout were associated with worse performance on the OITE. While there is a lack of consensus in the existing literature, this study provides additional evidence that burnout is negatively associated with 1 aspect of overall resident performance. Orthopaedic surgery residency training is challenging; residents are tasked to acquire a considerable amount of knowledge, develop complex surgical skills, and hone critical clinical thinking in a relatively short period of time. Identifying modifiable contributors to resident burnout and the development of strategies to promote resident wellness during training are important as we strive toward developing the next generation of capable, competent, and well-balanced orthopaedic surgeons.

Learning Styles of Orthopaedic Residents and Their Performance in the Orthopaedic In-Training Examination

This article was migrated. The article was not marked as recommended. The success of a training programme hinges on the performance of their residents. Trainers and learners need to adapt to rapid advancement of medical knowledge and technology coupled with training requirements such as research and duty hour restrictions. An understanding of the learning style preferences may be helpful for both trainers and learners.In this study we evaluated the orthopaedic resident learning styles and hypothesised that the read/write dominant learning styles is associated with better OITE scores.The Fleming VARK learning styles questionnaire was administered to orthopaedic residents at a single centre in 2017. Their OITE scores and yearly faculty review of performance were analysed for association with their learning styles.All residents (n=22) completed the questionnaire. All but one resident had quad-modal preference for learning. 45% of the trainees were kinaesthetic dominant, 32% read/write dominant and 27% visual dominant and 18% aural dominant. Aural dominant learners had highest average OITE scores followed by kinaesthetic dominant learners.Our residents showed multimodal preferred learning style with most of our residents being kinaesthetic dominant. Trainers and learners may consider incorporating a greater number of teaching activities that suit their individual learning styles to enhance their learning efficiency.

Factors Predictive of Orthopaedic In-training Examination Performance and Research Productivity Among Orthopaedic Residents.

Selection of qualified candidates for orthopaedic residency is necessary for growth and innovation. The purpose of this study was to determine predictors of Orthopaedic In-training Exam (OITE) performance and research productivity. A survey was distributed to 13 residency programs collecting demographics, United States Medical Licensing Examination (USMLE) and OITE scores, and authored publications. Associations between preresidency qualifications and OITE scores and publications were determined. A total of 274 of 294 surveys were returned (93.2%). We found a positive correlation between USMLE step 1 and 2 scores with recent OITE percentile (P < 0.001). Preresidency authorship (P < 0.001) and postgraduate training year (P < 0.001) were independent predictors of authorship during residency, whereas USMLE step 1 score was not (P = 0.094). Candidates who perform well on the USMLE are likely to perform well on the OITE, whereas those with greater authored publications are likely to continue research during residency.

Orthopedic In-Training Examination: An Analysis of the Sports Medicine Section—An Update

Previously published studies have evaluated Orthopedic In-Training Examination sports medicine questions, but none have evaluated whether question difficulty has changed over time. Sports medicine subsection questions between 2012 and 2016 were evaluated and compared with previously published data on Orthopedic In-Training Examination from 2004 to 2009. Question categories were classified into 1 of 3 taxonomy levels-basic recall, diagnosis, and advanced problem solving. Medical University of South Carolina; Charleston, SC, 29425; Institution. Two residents evaluated the Sports Subsection questions separately. Then an attending physician evaluated the questions to resolve discrepancies. A statistician was used for analysis. Utilization of imaging modalities averaged 37%, with 28% (11/39) of the questions containing 2 or more imaging modalities. There were increases in utilization of advanced problem-solving questions (45% vs. 27%, p = 0.002) and decreases in basic recall questions (49% vs. 67%, p = 0.008) compared with previously published data. While the percentage of the Orthopedic In-Training Examination represented by sports medicine has remained relatively unchanged, there were fewer questions requiring residents to demonstrate simple recall and diagnosis, and increased demand to perform advanced problem solving while utilizing multiple imaging modalities.

Orthopaedic In-Training Examination Resources and Residency Training for the Foot and Ankle Domain.

Residency programs use the annual Orthopaedic In-Training Examination (OITE) prepared by the American Academy of Orthopaedic Surgeons (AAOS) to monitor resident progress and prepare them for the part 1 of the American Board of Orthopaedic Surgeons (ABOS) Certifying Examination. The purpose of this study was to determine resources residents currently use to prepare for the OITE and also to learn about their perception of training they receive in the foot and ankle subspecialty in their program and their interest in foot and ankle fellowship after residency. An anonymous survey was sent to both allopathic programs and osteopathic residents to learn what resources residents used to study for the OITE, preparatory question sets, on-call resources, their perception on training received in foot and ankle surgery, and their intent to pursue fellowship training. A total of 130 residents participated in the survey. The majority of residents in allopathic and osteopathic residencies used Orthobullets (OB) to prepare for the OITE and use this resource while on-call. Most residents also used OB question sets to study along with the AAOS self-assessment examinations. In total, 43.2% of osteopathic residents felt they did not get enough exposure to foot and ankle subspecialty while in training, in contrast to 31.2% of allopathic residents. A total of 35% of all orthopaedic surgery residents felt they lacked enough exposure to foot and ankle orthopaedic surgery. Only 7 residents (6%, 6 allopathic, 1 osteopathic) intended to pursue a foot and ankle fellowship following graduation. Online resources such as OB continue to be frequently used by residents for preparation for the OITE. Greater than one-third of orthopaedic residents feel they do not get enough exposure to foot and ankle orthopaedic surgery. Improvement in this area could be helped by continued endeavors from the American Orthopaedic Foot and Ankle Society such as the Visiting Professor Program and Resident Scholarship Program. Level V: Single Cross-Sectional Study.

Orthopaedic Surgery Residency Rotations and Correlation With Orthopaedic In-Training Examination Performance

The Orthopaedic In-Training Examination (OITE) is administered annually and is used to assess medical knowledge of orthopedic surgery residents. Beginning in the 2013 to 2014 academic year, the ACGME expanded the postgraduate year (PGY)-1 curriculum from 3 to 6 months of orthopedic surgery rotations. The purpose of this study is to evaluate the effect of increased PGY-1 orthopedic surgery exposure on medical knowledge as measured by the OITE. From 2011 to 2013, 24 PGY-2 residents completed 3 months of PGY-1 orthopedic training (Group 1). From 2014 to 2016, 24 PGY-2 residents completed 6 months of PGY-1 orthopedic training (Group 2). The effect of an initial PGY-2 pediatrics rotation (Sub-group A), compared to a trauma rotation (Sub-group B) was also analyzed. The hypothesis of this study is that Group 2 scores higher on the OITE than Group 1. Raw percentage and overall percentile scores for all PGY-2 residents from 2011 to 2016 for the pediatrics subsection, the trauma subsection, and for the overall OITE test in our program were recorded. Group 1 versus Group 2, and Sub-group A versus Sub-group B were compared (Student's t-test). University of Minnesota (Institutional, Tertiary); Gillette Children's Hospital (Institutional, Tertiary); Regions Hospital (Institutional, Tertiary). 48 PGY-2 residents from 2011 to 2016 were included in the study. Group 2 achieved higher raw and percentile scores on the OITE during their PGY-2 year than Group 1. Sub-group B scored higher than Sub-group A on all OITE subsections and overall. This study suggests that raw percentage and percentile OITE scores improve with an additional 3 months of orthopedic training in the PGY-1 year. Clinical exposure, specifically in orthopedic trauma, correlates with higher OITE performance in our residency program.

Hand Surgery Questions on the Orthopaedic In-Training Examination: Analysis of Content and Reference.

To provide an updated analysis of the hand surgery section of the Orthopaedic In-Training Examination (OITE) from 2009 to 2015. The goal was to contribute to the existing literature on the analysis of OITE questions, to aid both residents and residency programs in preparation for the OITE and board examination. The authors analyzed all OITE questions pertaining to hand surgery between 2009 and 2015. Hand questions were analyzed for category and subcategory of content, cited reference, treatment intervention, and imaging modality used. Hand-related questions comprised 157 of the 1,872 OITE questions (8.4%). Nine general topic areas were identified, the most common of which were fracture-dislocation, tendon/ligament, nerve, congenital, and amputation. Trends existed in the recommended references; the 5 journals and 2 textbooks that were consistently cited included the Journal of Hand Surgery (American Volume), the Journal of the American Academy of Orthopaedic Surgeons, the Journal of Bone and Joint Surgery (American Volume), the Journal of Hand Surgery (European Volume), Hand Clinics, Orthopaedic Knowledge Update, and Green's Operative Hand Surgery, respectively. Knowledge regarding topics and resources used for OITE hand questions could be mutually beneficial to both residents and residency programs. This information would consolidate resident OITE and board examination study time. Furthermore, this analysis could help residency programs develop or improve educational conferences and journal clubs. An understanding of question content and sources should enable efficient learning and improved scores on this section of the examination.

Evaluation of Spine Questions on the Orthopaedic In-Training Examination: An Update from 2013 to 2017.

Spine is one subject evaluated by the Orthopaedic In-Training Examination. The purpose of our study was to analyze all spine-related questions on the OITE to determine the most commonly tested spine topics, as well as the level of evidence in cited references, to help guide resident preparation for future examinations. The OITE was analyzed from 2013 to 2017 for number of spine questions, subject matter, anatomy, and use of diagnostic imaging. The preferred responses were reviewed for journal article references and corresponding levels of evidence for each citation. The average number of spine questions on the OITE was approximately 25 (9.0% of the exam) with a focus on cervical spine (7.8; 31.5%) and lumbar spine (9.8; 39.5%). At least one type of diagnostic image accompanied 18.4 questions (74.2%), with magnetic resonance imaging being the most common modality (50.0%). Degenerative diseases (10.8; 43.5%) and trauma (7.0; 28.2%) made up the majority. The most commonly cited journals were Spine (21.5%), Journal of the American Academy of Orthopedic Surgeons (20.8%), Spine Journal (8.4%), and Journal of Bone and Joint Surgery (8.4%). Review articles made up an average of 27.4 citations annually (49.5%). Level I evidence investigations were cited 3.4 times per examination. Developing a study plan centered on review articles as well as on high-yield topics should lead to optimal preparation for residents on the OITE.

Determining the Most Important Factors Involved in Ranking Orthopaedic Sports Medicine Fellowship Applicants.

Background:Orthopaedic surgery residencies and certain fellowships are becoming increasingly competitive. Several studies have identified important factors to be taken into account when selecting medical students for residency interviews. Similar information for selecting orthopaedic sports medicine fellows does not exist.Purpose:To determine the most important factors that orthopaedic sports medicine fellowship program directors (PDs) take into account when ranking applicants.Study Design:Cross-sectional study.Methods:A brief survey was distributed electronically to PDs of the 92 orthopaedic sports medicine fellowship programs that are accredited by the Accreditation Council for Graduate Medical Education (ACGME). Each PD was asked to rank, in order, the 5 most important factors taken into account when ranking applicants based on a total list of 13 factors: the interview, the applicant’s residency program, letters of recommendation (LORs), personal connections made through the applicant, research experience, an applicant’s geographical ties to the city/town of the fellowship program, United States Medical Licensing Examination (USMLE) scores, Orthopaedic In-Training Examination (OITE) scores, history of being a competitive athlete in college, extracurricular activities/hobbies, volunteer experience, interest in a career in academics, and publications/research/posters. Factors were scored from 1 to 5, with a score of 5 representing the most important factor and 1 representing the fifth-most important factor.Results:Of the 92 PDs contacted, 57 (62%) responded. Thirty-four PDs (37%) listed the interview as the most important factor in ranking fellowship applicants (overall score, 233). LORs (overall score, 196), an applicant’s residency program (overall score, 133), publications/research/posters (overall score, 115), and personal connections (overall score, 90) were reported as the second- through fifth-most important factors, respectively.Conclusion:According to orthopaedic sports medicine fellowship PDs, the fellowship interview is the most important factor in determining how an applicant will be ranked. Other factors, including LORs, the applicant’s residency program, research production, and personal connections, were also considered to be important. This information provides orthopaedic sports medicine fellowship applicants with a better understanding of which areas to focus on when preparing for the fellowship interview and matching process.

Evaluation of Pediatric Questions on the Orthopaedic In-Training Examination-An Update.

Pediatric orthopaedics is tested frequently on the Orthopaedic In-Training Examination (OITE). The most recent data on the pediatrics section of the OITE were generated from content 10 years old. The purpose of this study is to assess the pediatric orthopaedic questions on the 2011 to 2014 OITE, and to compare question categories and cognitive taxonomy with previous data. Four years (2011 to 2014) of OITE questions, answers, and references were reviewed. The number of pediatric questions per year was recorded, as well as presence of a clinical photo or imaging modality. Each question was categorized and assigned a cognitive taxonomy level. Categories included: knowledge; knowledge-treatment modalities; diagnosis; diagnosis/recognition of associated conditions; diagnosis/further studies; and diagnosis/treatment. Cognitive taxonomy levels included: simple recall, interpretation of data, and advanced problem-solving. The 3 most commonly covered topics were upper extremity trauma (17.4%), scoliosis (10.1%), and developmental dysplasia of the hip (5.7%). Compared with previous data, the percentage of pediatric questions was constant (13% vs. 14%). Categorically, the more recent OITE examinations contained significantly fewer questions testing simple knowledge (19% vs. 39%, P=0.0047), and significantly more questions testing knowledge of treatment modalities (17% vs. 9%, P=0.016) and diagnosis with associated conditions (19% vs. 9%, P=0.0034). Regarding cognitive taxonomy, there was a significant increase in the average number of questions that required advanced problem-solving (57% vs. 46%, P=0.048). Significantly more questions utilized clinical photographs and imaging studies (62% vs. 48%, P=0.012). The most common reference materials provided to support correct responses included Lovell and Winter's Pediatric Orthopaedics (25.7%) and the Journal of Pediatric Orthopaedics (23.4%). Although the percentage of pediatric questions on the OITE has remained essentially constant, the percentage of questions requiring advanced problem-solving or interpretation of images has increased significantly in the past 10 years. Knowledge of question type and content may be helpful for those involved in resident education and in the development of didactic pediatric orthopaedic curricula. Level IV.

Residents and Program Director Perspectives Often Differ on Optimal Preparation Strategies and the Value of the Orthopedic In-Training Examination

The purpose of this work was to compare resident and program director (PD) perspectives on the value of the Orthopaedic In-Training Examination (OITE), resident study habits, and best resources for optimal performance. A national survey of orthopedic surgery residents and PDs. Mayo Clinic, Rochester, MN PARTICIPANTS: The survey was completed by 445 (41.5%) eligible orthopedic surgery residents and 37 (77.1%) PDs. Although residents and PDs agreed on when (p = 0.896) and how much (p = 0.171) residents currently study, residents felt that the OITE was not as valuable of an assessment of their knowledge, and also felt their individual scores were less likely to remain confidential compared to PDs (p < 0.001). The mean OITE score below which residents were concerned about their ability to pass American Board of Orthopaedic Surgeons Part 1 was 9.7 percentile points higher than PDs threshold (42.3% vs. 32.6%, respectively, p = 0.003). Both groups agreed that it is important to dedicate focused study time to the OITE (p = 0.680) and to perform well (p = 0.099). Regarding the best resources and preparation strategies, both residents and PDs tended to agree on the value of most (6 of 10) study methods. Residents ranked practice question websites (mean ranking of 2.6 vs. 3.8 of 10, respectively; p < 0.001) and formal rotations in a subspecialty (6.0 vs. 7.7 respectively, p < 0.001) higher than PDs. In contrast, PDs tended to value their program's formal OITE prep program (4.1. vs. 5.3, respectively, p = 0.012) and reading primary literature (5.6 vs. 6.6, respectively, p = 0.012) more than residents. Residents and PDs agreed on many critical components of this process; however, a number of key differences in perspectives exist.