Plastic Surgery Faculty Research Articles

Examination of the Novel National Institutes of Health-Supported Relative Citation Ratio, a Measure of Research Productivity, Among Academic Plastic Surgeons.

Considerable interest has been devoted to quantifying research productivity for the purposes of academic appointment and promotion in plastic surgery. A novel bibliometric, the relative citation ratio (RCR), integrates features unavailable in prior metrics, such as the h-index, including the ability to compare researchers in distinct fields. This investigation examines the RCR in relation to established measures of academic productivity and provides the benchmark data in plastic surgery. Online sources were queried to identify the characteristics of 955 academic plastic surgeons from 94 programs, ie, academic rank, gender, degrees, and fellowships. Bibliometric data were acquired using the iCite and Scopus databases. Comparative and correlational analyses of variables were performed. Academic plastic surgeons were exceptionally productive, with a mean RCR of 1.20 (interquartile range, 0.79-1.67) and a weighted RCR of 17.68 (interquartile range, 5.14-52.48). Increased mean RCR was significantly associated with advanced academic rank and fellowship training. Increased weighted RCR was significantly associated with advanced academic rank, male gender, PhD acquisition, publication experience, and fellowship training. The h-index was weakly correlated with mean RCR but strongly correlated with weighted RCR and publication experience. The RCR was associated with established markers of academic productivity, indicating its validity as a reliable field-normalized measure for the evaluation of plastic surgery faculty. Because scholarly output is a potential factor with respect to decisions of hiring, promotion, and allocation of funding, this modality of standardized comparison is paramount for plastic surgeons who exist within a larger general surgery department.

Commentary: Analysis of Advanced Degrees in Academic Plastic Surgery Faculty.

Commentary: Analysis of Advanced Degrees in Academic Plastic Surgery Faculty.

The Role of Dedicated Research Training in Promoting Academic Success in Plastic Surgery: Analysis of 949 Faculty Career Outcomes

Background:This study aimed to analyze the association between completion of research training and career success in American plastic surgery faculty to aid trainees in their decisions to perform research fellowships.Methods:A cross-sectional analysis of attending academic plastic surgeons in the United States was conducted. Outcomes were compared between faculty who completed research training (research fellowship, PhD, or MPH) and those who did not. Outcomes included promotion to full professor and/or department chair, h-index, and attainment of National Institutes of Health funding. Outcomes were analyzed using chi-squared tests,ttests, and multivariable regressions.Results:A total of 949 plastic surgery faculty members were included, and of those, 185 (19.5%) completed dedicated research training, including 13.7% (n = 130) who completed a research fellowship. Surgeons who completed dedicated research training were significantly more likely to achieve full professorship (31.4% versus 24.1%,P= 0.01), obtain National Institutes of Health funding (18.4% versus 6.5%,P< 0.001), and have a higher mean h-index (15.6 versus 11.6,P< 0.001). Dedicated research fellowships were independently predictive of achieving full professorship (OR = 2.12,P= 0.002), increased h-index (β = 4.86,P< 0.001), and attainment of National Institutes of Health funding (OR = 5.06,P= 0.01). Completion of dedicated research training did not predict an increased likelihood of becoming department chair.Conclusion:The performance of dedicated research training was predictive of improved markers of career success in plastic surgery and should be considered beneficial in both the short and long term.

31. Workplace Bias Affecting Applicants to Independent Plastic Surgery Residencies

Background: The purpose of this study is to investigate what factors encouraged applicants to pursue independent plastic surgery residencies, as well as assess whether they faced any negative consequences or biases for this decision. Methods: Residents who applied to two academic independent plastic surgery residencies in 2021 and 2022 were emailed a 25-question survey through the online data collection program RedCap. The survey addressed respondent demographics, reasons for applying to plastic surgery, experiences with plastic surgery and experiences during general surgery residency including perceived bias regarding the choice to pursue a career in plastic surgery. Responses were collected anonymously and responses were analyzed using Microsoft Excel. Results: 39 complete responses were collected (21.2%). All respondents participated in a general surgery residency, with 12.8% (5/39) having applied to integrated plastic surgery during medical school, 15.4% (6/39) completing a preliminary residency year, and 28.2% (11/39) participating in plastic surgery-focused research year(s). Participating in plastic surgery cases and interactions with plastic surgery faculty and residents were the most common reasons for applying into plastic surgery, with 76.9% (30/39) citing these experiences. 23.1% (9/39) felt their attendings and program directors were not supportive of their decision to apply to plastic surgery. 64.1% (25/39) agreed that faculty made demeaning comments or jokes about their choice to go into plastic surgery, while 25.6% (10/39) experienced this behavior from co-residents. 17.9% (7/39) reported that they developed stress or anxiety due to how co-residents and faculty treated them regarding their decision. Conclusion: General surgery residents planning to apply to independent plastic surgery residencies frequently experience lack of support from faculty/program directors, as well as endure demeaning comments or jokes that can cause additional stress and anxiety. An important opportunity exists to support independent applicants and provide mentorship.

Analysis of Additional Degrees in Academic Plastic Surgery Faculty.

Background: As plastic surgery continues to evolve, an increasing number of surgeons are attaining additional degrees (ADs). Prior studies illustrate this trend of increased AD attainment among plastic surgery faculty within the United States. Yet, no such study has documented AD attainment variability and influence within Canadian plastic surgery faculty. Objectives: Our objective was to investigate the relationship between AD attainment and gender, alongside research productivity, and academic rank of Canadian plastic surgery faculty members. Methods: All Canadian academic plastic surgery faculty members were identified and information regarding gender, academic rank, research productivity, timing of AD attainment was recorded. AD was defined as any degree beyond a medical degree or equivalent. Results: A total of 299 faculty members were identified. Of these, 33% (N = 99) attained an AD. A higher percentage of females (40%) obtained ADs compared to males (30%) (P = .0402). When controlling for number of years in practice, there was a significantly larger proportion of females than males with ADs as assistant and associate professor (P = .033). Faculty with ADs were associated with higher research productivity and higher academic rank than those with MDs (P < .05). ADs were commonly obtained post-residency (38%) and most common ADs were MSc (51%) and PhDs (21%). It was found that the Canadian plastic surgeons were less likely to pursue MBAs than US plastic surgeons (P = .002). Conclusion: One-third of Canadian academic plastic surgeons had ADs. Those with ADs present with higher research productivity and academic rank. When segmented by gender, there were significant differences among AD holders. The results of this study will lend support to ongoing endeavors voicing the need for gender equity in academic plastic surgery.

Gender and Ethnic Diversity in Academic Facial Plastic Surgery.

Characterize academic facial plastic surgeons by demographics, time in practice, academic productivity, and faculty position. Cross-sectional study. Facial plastic surgery faculty in US otolaryngology residencies with a title of assistant professor, associate professor, or professor were identified. Demographics and academic data were obtained from public profiles and Scopus. One hundred sixty-eight surgeons were identified. Females comprised 25.6%. Most surgeons were White (69.6%), followed by Asian (25%), Hispanic (3.6%), and Black (1.8%). Mean h-index was similar between sexes when controlling for years in practice (1.13 vs. 1.14, p=0.575). Female representation was greater among early-career surgeons (41%) than among mid- or late-career surgeons (24% and 13%, respectively) (p=0.006). The correlation of years in practice with academic title was similar between sexes. There was no difference in h-index (p=0.384) or distribution of academic positions (p=0.658) between White and non-White surgeons. There was no statistical difference in full professorship (p=1.0) or research productivity (p=0.974) between late-career White and non-White academic facial plastic surgeons. There was no statistical difference in promotion from assistant professorship (p=0.506) or research productivity (p=0.857) between White and non-White surgeons in practice for over 5 years. Female representation in academic facial plastic surgery is low, though greater gender parity among younger surgeons suggests an improving trend. Hispanic and Black surgeons remain significantly underrepresented in the field. Although increased diversity is needed in academic facial plastic surgery, established minority surgeons have experienced similar research productivity and advancement through academic ranks as their majority counterparts. N/A Laryngoscope, 133:1869-1874, 2023.

Comparative study between early and delayed perforator flaps for reconstruction of soft tissue defects over distal third tibia

Background: Flap is tissue(s) with its own vascular supply, allowing transfer from one site to another. Flaps come in various forms. The purpose of classification is to understand the anatomy and the features that each flap provides; it also allows communication not only with peers but with the patients as well to achieve the common goal of reconstruction. Objective: The aim of this study was to compare the outcome of perforator flaps whether being early in timing in the first 48 hours of trauma or later than 48 hours. Methods: This study was conducted in the period between March 2019 to March 2021 on 40 patients with soft tissue defects in distal third tibia from the outpatient clinic, Emergency department of Plastic Surgery faculty of medicine, Beni-suef University also Surgical and Emergency departments, Agouza Police Authority hospital, Algizah, Egypt. Results: Dehiscence was more frequent in delayed as compared with early group (2 vs. 1 case in both groups respectively); but with no statistically significant difference. Healing complications were more frequent among early vs. delayed group; however, this difference had none statistically significant value.

The Unmatched Integrated Plastic Surgery Applicant: A Focus on Improving the Application.

The Unmatched Integrated Plastic Surgery Applicant: A Focus on Improving the Application.

Impact and Implementation of Plastic Surgery Interest Groups: National Survey of Plastic Surgery Interest Group Leadership.

Background: Plastic surgery interest groups (PSIGs) provide an invaluable opportunity to enhance medical students' exposure to and knowledge of plastic surgery. Despite this, there have been no studies that provide information on the formation of these groups as well as the aspects that make for a productive PSIG. Methods: An anonymous survey was distributed by email via RedCAP to US medical students who hold leadership positions within their medical school's PSIG. Participants were asked baseline medical school information, the structure of their interest group, and perspectives on the most impactful and challenging components of their interest group. Results: Sixteen members (27.6%) of PSIG leadership completed the survey. Eighty percent reported having a membership of greater than 20 students. Fifty percent of the PSIGs were led by advisors who were medical school or hospital-affiliated faculty. Sixty-nine percent of groups were allocated a predetermined amount of money to fund activities and events throughout the academic year. Based on member feedback, groups reported that interactions with plastic surgery faculty, mentorship opportunities, and research opportunities were the most impactful and beneficial components of their PSIG. Forty-four percent reported that the biggest challenge faced by their PSIG was having a small active member group, followed by a lack of funding. Conclusion: Our study provides an in-depth look at the current structure and impact of PSIGs in the United States. It also provides a framework for medical schools that wish to start a PSIG and suggestions for established groups who wish to revitalize their PSIG structure.

Identifying US Plastic Surgery Training Programs that Effectively Establish Gender and Ethnically Diverse Faculty.

Background:Successful strategies to improve the representation of female and ethnically underrepresented in medicine (UIM) physicians among US plastic and reconstructive surgery (PRS) faculty have not been adequately explored. Accordingly, we aimed to identify programs that have had success, and in parallel gather PRS program directors’ and chiefs/chairs’ perspectives on diversity recruitment intentionality and strategies.Methods:We conducted a cross-sectional analysis of the demographic composition of female and UIM faculty of PRS residency training programs. Separate lists of programs in the top quartile for female and UIM faculty representation were collated. Additionally, a 14-question survey was administered to program directors and chiefs/chairs of all 99 Accreditation Council for Graduate Medical Education-accredited PRS residency programs. The questions comprised three domains: (1) demographic information; (2) perceptions about diversity; and (3) recruitment strategies utilized to diversify faculty.Results:Female and UIM faculty representation ranged from 0% to 63% and 0% to 50%, respectively. Survey responses were received from program directors and chiefs/chairs of 55 institutions (55% response rate). Twenty-five (43%) respondents felt their program was diverse. Fifty-one (80%) respondents felt diversity was important to the composition of PRS faculty. Active recruitment of diverse faculty and the implementation of a diversity, equity, and inclusion committee were among the most frequently cited strategies to establish a culturally sensitive and inclusive environment.Conclusions:These findings reveal that female and UIM representation among US PRS faculty remains insufficient; however, some programs have had success through deliberate and intentional implementation of diversity, equity, and inclusion strategies.

Closing the Gap: Training Experiences and Career Outcomes for Underrepresented Minorities in Plastic Surgery.

Background:The present study assesses training characteristics, scholastic achievements, and traditional career accomplishments of ethnically underrepresented in medicine (UIM) plastic and reconstructive surgery (PRS) faculty relative to non-UIM PRS faculty.Method:A cross-sectional analysis of core PRS faculty appointed to accredited United States residency training programs (n = 99) was performed.Results:Of the 949 US PRS faculty, a total of 51 (5.4%) were identified as UIM. Compared with non-UIM faculty, there were few differences when evaluating medical education, residency training, pursuit of advanced degrees, and attainment of subspecialty fellowship training. UIM faculty were more likely than non-UIM faculty to have graduated from a medical school outside the United States (25% versus 13%, P = 0.014). In addition, UIM faculty did not differ from non-UIM counterparts in traditional career accomplishments, including promotion to full professor, obtaining NIH funding, serving as program director, receiving an endowed professorship, appointment to a peer-reviewed editorial board, scholarly contributions (H-index and number of publications), and appointment to chief/chair of their division/department.Conclusions:The historical lack of ethnic diversity that comprise US academic PRS faculty persists. This study reveals that those UIM faculty who are able to obtain faculty appointments are equally successful in achieving scholastic success and traditional career accomplishments as their non-UIM counterparts. As we strive toward increasing representation of UIM physicians in academic plastic surgery, the field will benefit from efforts that promote a pipeline for underrepresented groups who traditionally face barriers to entry.

584 Where Are They Now? - A Single-Center Survey of Burn Surgery Fellow Graduates

IntroductionBurn surgery encompasses different surgical disciplines such as general surgery, trauma, surgical critical care and plastic surgery. Those who apply to burn fellowship also have various interests. This study’s purpose was to discern the various career paths of burn fellowship graduates. It also investigated the frequency of specific chosen specialties and workplace settings. The results of the study could be used to modify current clinical burn fellowship curriculum.MethodsA survey was created using an internet tool and emailed to graduates of the clinical burn fellowship program from an American Burn Association verified burn center. The survey was sent to graduates of the last 10 years (2010-2020). The questions inquired about surgical field of work, board certification, additional training experience, work setting, and time since fellowship graduation. The participants’ responses were recorded anonymously to account for biases. The quantitative data was then collected for each question, and the data was calculated into percentages.ResultsOf the possible 17 fellows who graduated in the past ten years, 11 responded to our survey (64.7%). The most common surgical field pursued after the fellowship was plastic surgery with 5 graduates (45.5%). The following three fields all had 2 graduates each: burn surgery (burn/trauma), general surgery and wound care (18.2%). Almost all of the participants had completed additional training: 6 in plastic surgery (54.5%), and 4 in surgical critical care (36.4%). The work settings were primarily academic institutions (45.5%), followed by office-based practices (35.4%), ambulatory surgery centers (9.1%), and community hospitals (9.1%). Of the participants, 4 are board-certified in their chosen field, and 5 are board-eligible. Only 3 graduates are affiliated with a burn center.ConclusionsThe results of the study indicate the interests and career choices of previous burn fellows. This information can be used to modify burn fellowship curriculums to the needs and future career paths of the fellows. Traditional clinical burn fellowship programs emphasize burn critical care and acute burn surgery. Since some of the graduates are interested in plastic surgery, burn reconstruction could be added to the current curriculum. Plastic surgery faculty members could also serve as mentors to the fellows.

Leadership Roles, Academic Appointments, and Scholarly Activity-Does a Fellowship after Plastic Surgery Training Make a Difference?

Background Fellowship training is becoming more popular in plastic surgery, with over half of residents pursuing advanced training. Here, we investigate how clinical and research fellowship training impacts career trajectory and scholastic achievement in academic plastic surgery. Methods Plastic surgery faculty members, from programs recognized by the American Council of Academic Plastic Surgeons, were identified using institutional Web sites. Data extracted included faculty demographics, training history, academic positions, and research productivity. Continuous and categorical variables were compared using t -tests and chi-square, respectively. Results In total, 949 faculty members were included, with 657 (69%) having completed fellowship training. Integrated program residents were more likely to complete a fellowship when compared with independent residents ( p < 0.0001). Fellowship trained faculty were more likely to have graduated from a higher ranked residency program, in terms of both overall and research reputation ( p = 0.005 and p = 0.016, respectively). When controlling for years in practice, there was no difference found in number of publications, Hirsch index (h-index), or National Institutes of Health funding between faculty between the two cohorts ( p > 0.05). In a subanalysis comparing hand, craniofacial, microsurgery, and research fellowships, those who completed a research fellowship had higher h-indices and were more likely to reach full professor status ( p < 0.001 and p = 0.001, respectively). Fellowship training had no effect on being promoted to Chief/Chair of departments ( p = 0.16). Conclusion Fellowship training is common among academic plastic surgeons. In this study, both clinical and research fellowships were associated with various aspects of academic success. However, fellowship training alone did not affect attainment of leadership positions.

Leadership and Advanced Degrees: Evaluating the Association Between Dual Degrees and Leadership Roles in Academic Plastic Surgery.

There are increasingly prevalent formal educational programs for physicians who seek to be better trained to advance their fields. Although higher education and advanced degrees are not necessarily linked to leadership, we hypothesize that leaders in plastic surgery commonly have dual degrees. We sought to evaluate the prevalence of and association between additional advanced degrees in academic plastic surgery and plastic surgery leadership. Plastic surgery faculty from 96 academic training programs and all executive committee and board of directors' members from national, regional, and local plastic surgery societies were evaluated. Surgeons' institutional online profile pages, personal web pages, societal websites, and LinkedIn profiles were all evaluated for current/past leadership roles, as well as for advanced degree. Odds ratios (ORs) were used to determine if the presence of extra degrees increased their likelihood of leadership roles. A total of 1036 plastic surgeons were evaluated. Sixteen percent of academic faculty have a dual degree. Furthermore, 25.5% of plastic surgeons holding formal academic leadership roles have a dual degree (OR, 2.15; P = 0.043), as do 34.4% of those serving on the executive committee or board of directors in national plastic surgery societies (OR, 2.23; P = 0.026) and 29.2% of those serving in local/regional societal leadership roles (OR, 1.96; P = 0.043). Among all dual degrees, Masters in Business Administration has the highest association with leadership roles (OR, 3.45; P = 0.002). Academic plastic surgeons with dual degrees are approximately twice as likely to hold a formal academic or societal leadership role. Additional studies are needed to determine if causative relationships exist.

The State of Diversity in Academic Plastic Surgery Faculty across North America.

Background:Gender and racial disparity is prevalent in all surgical subspecialties with women and racial groups historically underrepresented in academic plastic surgery. This study evaluated gender and racial profiles of academic plastic surgery faculty in North America and correlated both with research productivity and its effect on academic ranks of faculty in plastic surgery.Methods:In this cross-sectional study, we compiled a list of accredited medical schools that offer plastic surgery training for residency. Data were collected on demographics, academic rank, and research output using the Doximity, LinkedIn, and Scopus databases. Data analyses were performed with a Mann-Whitney U test and a Kruskal-Wallis test.Results:Women who were black, indigenous, and/or other color occupied only 6.25% of plastic surgery faculty leadership positions in North America. There are more women and underrepresented minorities in leadership positions in Canada, when compared with the USA, relative to each country’s demographic. In both countries, women and underrepresented minority plastic surgeons had fewer publications, citations, and years of active research. Interestingly, having women in leadership positions was associated with a higher number of women faculty members.Conclusions:Gender and racial disparity exist in academic plastic surgery in North America. Several changes are required in order for women and underrepresented minorities in medicine to have an equal chance at career advancement. Better representation and diverse leadership have the potential to bring about equity, diversity, and inclusion in academic plastic surgery.

The Efficacy of Virtual Subinternships as a Novel Educational Platform for Education and Recruitment.

The Efficacy of Virtual Subinternships as a Novel Educational Platform for Education and Recruitment.

Predictors of Plastic Surgeons Becoming Presidents of National Professional Organizations in the United States of America.

We evaluated metrics between academic plastic surgeons that were and were not presidents of national organizations to determine predictors of becoming a president. A cross-sectional retrospective review was performed. Websites were queried of 99 Accreditation Council for Graduate Medical Education accredited plastic surgery residency programs and 17 national organizations. Demographic, academic and scholarly variables we collected from 951 full-time plastic surgery faculty affiliated with the US residency training programs during the 2020-2021 academic year. Of these full-time plastic surgery faculty, 879 were non-presidents and 72 were presidents of national organizations (2016-2021 = 42, < 2016 = 30). Plastic surgeons were more likely to become president if they were an officer/director of the American Board of Plastic Surgeons (ABPS) (OR: 16.67, 95%CI: 5.83, 47.66; p < 0.001), chief/chair of a division/department (OR: 3.10, 95%CI: 1.09, 8.79; p = 0.033), endowed (OR: 5.45, 95%CI:1.65, 18.04; p = 0.006), National Institutes of Health (NIH) funded (OR: 4.57, 95%CI: 1.24, 16.88; p = 0.023), affiliated with an integrated plastic surgery residency program (OR: 3.96, 95%CI: 1.27, 12.33; p = 0.018), and with a greater number of years in practice (OR: 1.09, 95%CI: 1.04, 1.14; p < 0.001). Additionally, plastic surgeons were more likely to become president between 2016 and 2021 with a research fellowship (OR: 7.41, 95%CI: 1.02, 52.63; p = 0.047), first author publications (OR: 1.72, 95%CI: 1.63, 1.83; p < 0.001), and last author publications (OR: 1.60, 95%CI: 1.56, 1.65; p < 0.001). Plastic surgeons were more likely to become president of a national organization if they were an officer/director of the ABPS, chief/chair of a division/department, endowed, NIH funded, affiliated with an integrated plastic surgery residency program, greater number of years in practice, research fellowship, and first and last author publications. Predictors may guide those interested in becoming president of a national organization. This journal requires that authors assign a level of evidence to each article. For a full description of these Evidence-Based Medicine Ratings, please refer to Table of Contents or online Instructions to Authors www.springer.com/00266 .

Leaders of the Pack: A Comparison of Chairs and Chiefs to Other Surgeons in American Academic Plastic Surgery.

Chairs/chiefs of plastic surgery departments/divisions are responsible for directing activities at academic institutions and thus help determine the direction of academic plastic surgery. Other studies have characterized this group but have not shown which characteristics separate them from other surgeons in the field. To study this relationship, a cross-sectional analysis of plastic surgery faculty affiliated with United States residency training programs (n = 99) was initiated. Data were collected from public online websites. Univariate and multivariate logistic regression were used to identify factors independently associated with chairs/chief status. Sub-analyses were performed within Tiers stratified by residency program rank of chair/chief's current institution. Among 943 plastic surgeons, 98 chairs/chiefs were identified. In accordance with prior literature, most are male (89%) and fellowship-trained (62%), and they have a median H-index of 17. Compared to other surgeons, chair/chiefs have more years in practice (odds ratio [OR]: 1.026, confidence interval [CI]: 0.002-0.049, P = 0.034), higher H-index (OR: 1.103, CI: 0.048-0.147, P < 0.001), and more citations (OR: 1.000, CI: -0.000 to -0.001, P = 0.006). Chair/chiefs were also more likely to be journal editorial board members (OR: 1.728, CI: -0.033 to 1.127, P = 0.046) and national society/organization presidents (OR: 1.024, CI: 0.008-0.039, P = 0.003). No notable differences were found between department chairs versus division chiefs or across Tiers. Overall, scholarly achievement and significant years of experience distinguish chairs/chiefs in American academic plastic surgery. Criteria for achieving this leadership role may not differ between departments and divisions. Further research is needed to evaluate whether these characteristics translate into more effective leadership.

The 2020 Evidence-Based Promotion Ladder of Academic Plastic Surgery.

BackgroundMetrics were evaluated between academic plastic surgeons from different tiered training programs to determine promotion predictors within tiers and between tiers for those seeking promotion from assistant professor, associate professor, to full professors.MethodologyWe performed a retrospective, cross-sectional study by collecting 61 variables from full-time plastic surgery faculty affiliated with United States residency training programs during the 2020-2021 academic year. Surgeons were stratified into nine cohorts for comparison by professorship (assistant, associate, professor) and Doximity-ranked institution program tiers (Tier 1 = T1, Tier 2 = T2, Tier 3 = T3). Univariate followed by multivariate regressions with reciprocal transformation were performed to determine predictors more likely associated with promotion or lateral movement.ResultsA total of 98 programs listed 851 surgeons. T1/T2/T3 surgeon promotion predictors included more years in practice (p = 0.002; p < 0.001; p < 0.001) and greater number of last-author publications (p < 0.001; p < 0.001; p = 0.007). T1/T3 surgeon promotion predictors included higher h-indexes (p = 0.001; p = 0.002). T1 surgeon promotion predictors included being on journal editorial board (p = 0.040). T2 surgeon promotion predictors from assistant to associate included non-white race (p = 0.010). T3 surgeon promotion predictors included residency director (p = 0.009) and greater number of citations (p = 0.026). Promotion predictors from assistant, associate, and professors for T3/T2/T1 programs included greater number of last-author publications (p = 0.007; p = 0.002; p < 0.001). Movement from assistant and associate between T3/T2/T1 programs included plastic surgery department (p = 0.002; p < 0.001). Movement from assistant between programs included attending Top 10 US News medical schools (p = 0.012), attending more favorable Doximity-ranked research programs (p < 0.001), greater number of first-author publications (p = 0.017), and greater number of citations (p = 0.023). Movement from associate between programs included attending more favorable Doximity-ranked reputation programs (p = 0.017) and higher h-indexes (p = 0.017). Movement from professor between programs included receiving any American Association of Plastic Surgeons (AAPS) award (p = 0.039) and greater number of AAPS awards (p = 0.012).ConclusionsPromotion predictors provided evidence to synthesize the Doximity-tiered Promotion Ladder of Academic Plastic Surgery.

Hitting the Books: A Nationwide Analysis of Advanced Degrees in Academic Plastic Surgery Faculty.

Plastic surgery is one of the most competitive and innovative fields in medicine. The role of the academic plastic surgeon continues to grow beyond clinical care, and many surgeons have pursued advanced degrees (AD) to expand their professional skillset. We present an analysis of ADs of academic plastic surgery faculty in the USA, with consideration of timing of AD attainment. All academic plastic surgery faculty members were identified from plastic surgery program websites, as recognized by the American Council of Academic Plastic Surgeons. ADs were defined as additional degrees beyond the primary medical degree. Outcomes included timing of AD attainment, residency rankings, institutional standings, and research productivity. 949 faculty members were identified, and 167 had ADs. The most common ADs were PhD (30%), MS/MSc (18%), and MBA/EMBA (17%). Timing of AD attainment was available for 146 faculty members (84.7%). Having an AD before residency was associated with matching into higher-tiered and integrated residency programs (both p < 0.05). For attending physicians, having an AD was associated with more journal editorial board positions, more publications, higher H-index, receiving NIH funding, and median number of NIH grants (adjusted for years in practice, all p<0.05). Institutional analysis revealed that employing more faculty with an AD was associated with having an integrated residency program, higher residency research ranking, and higher tier integrated residency (all p < 0.05). ADs are growing in popularity in academic plastic surgery and are temporally associated with specific advantages in terms of residency placement, research productivity, and institutional standing. This journal requires that authors assign a level of evidence to each submission to which Evidence-Based Medicine rankings are applicable. This excludes Review Articles, Book Reviews, and manuscripts that concern Basic Science, Animal Studies, Cadaver Studies, and Experimental Studies. For a full description of these Evidence-Based Medicine ratings, please refer to the Table of Contents or the online Instructions to Authors www.springer.com/00266 .