LEGO®-based communication assessment in virtual general surgery residency interviews
Ontology highlight
ABSTRACT: Purpose
Effective communication skills are a critical quality and skill that is highly sought after for surgeons which largely impacts patient outcomes. Residency programs design their interview processes to select the best candidates. LEGO®-based activities have been frequently used to enhance communication skills and team building. This study investigates the effectiveness and reliability of a novel LEGO®-based communication assessment in interviews for surgical residencies and the feasibility of implementing it in a virtual setting. Methods
This study conducted a retrospective analysis of a LEGO®-based communication assessment at the program’s 2020/2021 residency interviews. Each applicant was assessed on a different model. The total scores were analyzed for consistency among raters and correlated to faculty interviews. Furthermore, the impact of the assessment structure, scoring criteria, and range of models’ difficulties on the total scores were explored. Results
A total of 54 categorical and 55 preliminary applicants interviewed on 2 days. The assessment on different models and had no impact on applicants’ total scores for either categorical and preliminary groups (p = 0.791 and 0.709, respectively). The communication components of the assessment showed high consistency between the raters. The two applicant groups displayed a statistically significant difference (p = 0.004) in the communication evaluation and model accuracy components. Total scores did not correlate with the faculty interviews of standardized questions in either group. Conclusion
This novel LEGO®-based communication assessment showed high reliability and promising results as a tool to assess communication and problem solving for residency interviews that can be readily implemented in a virtual setting. Supplementary Information
The online version contains supplementary material available at 10.1007/s44186-022-00021-4.
SUBMITTER: Baloul M
PROVIDER: S-EPMC9171471 | biostudies-literature | 2022 Jan
REPOSITORIES: biostudies-literature
Similar Datasets
Project description:Background Virtual interviews for surgery residency may improve interview opportunities for applicants from underrepresented in medicine (UIM) and lower socioeconomic backgrounds. Objective To compare the geographic reach of surgical residency applicants during in-person versus virtual interviews. Methods This study compared applicants for the 2019 (in-person) and 2020 (virtual interviews) application cycle for surgery residency. Geographic reach (GR) was defined as the distance between applicants' current location and the program. Federal Financial Institutions Examination Council's website supplied socioeconomic data using applicants' geographic locations. Applicant demographics, United States Medical Licensing Examination (USMLE) scores, and geographic distance to program were collected. Multivariable analyses examined GR with interaction terms between interview type, UIM status, and socioeconomic status, while controlling for USMLE scores. Results A total of 667 (2019) and 698 (2020) National Resident Matching Program applications were reviewed. Overall, there was no difference in GR for applicants during in-person and virtual interviews in multivariable testing. UIM status had no association with GR for in-person interviews, but virtual interviews were associated with an increased GR for UIM applicants compared to non-UIM applicants (235.17; 95% CI 28.87-441.47; P=.02). For in-person interviews, applicants living in communities with poverty levels ≥7% had less GR vs those in communities with levels <7% (-332.45; 95% CI -492.10, -172.79; P<.001), an effect not observed during virtual interviews. Conclusions There was no difference in overall GR, or the proportion of UIM applicants or those from higher poverty level communities, but virtual survey interviews during the COVID-19 pandemic were associated with increased GR for UIM and from lower socioeconomic backgrounds applicants.
| S-EPMC10686643 | biostudies-literature
Project description:Interviews for the integrated plastic surgery residency match took place in a virtual format for the 2020-2021 application cycle. Current literature lacks the perspectives of program directors (PDs) on virtual interviews compared with traditional in-person interviews.MethodsFollowing institutional review board approval, an anonymous 17-question survey was distributed by email to 82 program directors of integrated plastic surgery residency programs in the United States. Participants were asked baseline program information, the number of positions and interview invites offered, and their perspectives on various aspects of the virtual interview process.ResultsSixty-two (75.6%) PDs completed the survey. Thirty-seven percent reported increasing the number of interview offers per available residency spot. On a five-point Likert scale (1, not well at all; 5, extremely well), PDs showed no significant differences in their ability judge an applicant's professionalism (3.1 ± 1.1), interpersonal and communication skills (3.2 ± 1.1), and "fit" with their program (2.9 ± 0.9) during virtual interviews (P = 0.360). Sixty-eight percent reported being satisfied (15.3% extremely satisfied, 52.5% somewhat satisfied) with the virtual interview process, though 76.3% preferred in-person interviews.ConclusionsThis study is the first to provide insight into PDs' impressions of virtual residency interviews. Although most reported being satisfied with the virtual interview process, the majority still preferred in-person interviews. Further long-term studies evaluating the pros and cons of each interview modality may provide more information on whether virtual interviews could become a sustainable alternative to the traditional in-person residency interview.
| S-EPMC8376389 | biostudies-literature
Project description:Background Residency selection in the United States relied on in-person interviews for many decades. The COVID-19 pandemic and recommendations from the Coalition for Physician Accountability (COPA) required programs to implement virtual interviews for the 2020–2021 residency selection cycle. Although virtual interviews may become the norm in the future, there is scant data at the institutional level to inform how to best approach this process. Objective To describe the perceptions of applicants to several residency programs at one institution on the importance of virtual recruitment features and assess the impact on their overall ranking decisions. Methods Applicants who interviewed for 12 medical and surgical residency programs during the 2020–2021 cycle at the University of California San Francisco were invited to participate in an anonymous survey in March 2021, after all interviews were completed. A survey consisting of 26 questions was administered to applicants on features that are important during interviews and the impact on their ranking decisions scored on a 5-point Likert scale. Results Of the 1422 participating applicants, 303 (21%) completed the survey. The most important feature for applicants during the interview day was getting a feel of the program (92%). Conversations with residents (91%) and faculty (79%) were also highly rated. Respondents reported morale and happiness of residents (71%) as an extremely important factor in their overall ranking decision . Conclusion Programs should consider prioritizing features that aid in alignment with getting to know residents and faculty and provide a sense of morale over emphasis on the institutional and location features. Supplementary Information The online version contains supplementary material available at 10.1007/s44186-022-00004-5.
| S-EPMC8906359 | biostudies-literature
Project description:BackgroundThe shift from in-person to virtual residency interviews may impact greenhouse gas emissions (GHGE) and costs but the direction and amount of this change is not yet clear.ObjectiveTo estimate GHGE and financial impacts of virtual interviews among applicants and programs.MethodsIn 2020-2021 we sent a postinterview survey to 1429 applicants from 7 residency programs and 1 clinical psychology program at 1 institution. The survey collected origin of travel and transit type if in-person interviews had been held and excluded responses if the applicant would not have participated in an in-person interview, or if travel type or original city was missing. We used the International Civil Aviation Organization calculator to estimate flight-related GHGE in metric tons of carbon dioxide equivalent (MTCO2e) and Google Maps to estimate ground travel, with a standard CO2e per mile. Flight, hotel, and airport taxi costs were estimated using Expedia.com, Hotels.com, Uber, and Lyft. We aggregated these data and calculated median and interquartile ranges (IQRs) for applicant GHGE and cost savings, and assumed no cost or GHGE from virtual interviews. We used Wilcoxon signed rank sum tests to compare in-person 2019-2020 and virtual 2020-2021 GME program interview budgets.ResultsThe survey response rate was 565, or 40% of applicants; 543 remained after the exclusion criteria were applied. Reduction in applicant travel due to virtual interviews led to median estimated GHGE savings of 0.47 (IQR 0.30-0.61) MTCO2e and $490 (IQR $392-$544) per applicant, per interview. Programs savings ranged from $7,615 to $33,670 for the interview season.ConclusionsVirtual interviews in 8 GME programs were associated with lower estimated GHGE and costs, for applicants and programs, compared with in-person interviews.
| S-EPMC9934836 | biostudies-literature
Project description:BackgroundStudies of the virtual interview format are needed to inform medical residency program leaders as they plan for future virtual interview seasons.ObjectiveIn the current study, completed in 2021, we sought to assess applicant perspectives of virtual interview effectiveness, advantages, and barriers, including factors that might impact equity and inclusion.MethodsInterviewees applying to 7 residency programs and 2 clinical psychology programs at an academic medical center in the Pacific Northwest completed a post-interview survey.ResultsA total of 565 of 1429 interviewees (40%) completed the survey. A vast majority (83%-96%) agreed virtual interviews were effective in each measured domain, except for learning institutional culture (352 of 565, 62%). Many also found information regarding social/living environments inadequate. Participants selected advantages to virtual interviews more frequently than disadvantages. Commonly selected advantages included cost savings, time efficiency, reduced burden of travel, and reduced carbon footprint. Disadvantages included time zone differences, access to an appropriate interview setting, and reliable access to internet. The majority of interviewees (84%, 456 of 542) desired to keep a component of virtual interviews in the future. There were no significant disparities in results based on gender, rural/suburban/urban location, race, or underrepresented minority status.ConclusionsVirtual interviews were perceived as effective, more advantageous than burdensome, and widely acceptable, with no disparities in these findings by included demographic characteristics.
| S-EPMC9017272 | biostudies-literature
Project description:Despite rules set forth by the National Resident Matching Program and American Association of Medical Colleges (AAMC), prohibited questions during the residency interview process are well documented. This study describes the prevalence of these encounters by surveying residency applicants to integrated plastic and reconstructive surgery (PRS) programs for the 2022 match cycle.MethodsAn anonymous 16-question REDCap survey was distributed to 2022 cycle applicants of a single PRS program. The applicants were queried about demographic information, interview experience, and questions deemed illegal by the AAMC/NRMP guidelines.ResultsOne hundred survey responses were attained for a 33.1% response rate. The majority of respondents were aged 26-30 (76%), women (53%), and white (53%); 33% received 15+ interviews for the application cycle. Seventy-eight percent of respondents reported being asked a prohibited question during at least one interview, with the most common "illegal" question categories being number/ranking of interviews (42%), marital status (33%), career balance (25%), and race/ethnicity (22%). Only 25.6% of applicants considered the subject matter inappropriate, whereas 42.3% were unsure. Although no applicant took action to report the potentially illegal scenarios, 30% said that their experiences influenced their rank list.ConclusionsOur survey study revealed that prohibited interview questions in PRS residency interviews are common. Permissible lines of questioning and discussion between programs and applicants during residency interviews have been defined by AAMC. Institutions should provide guidance and training to all participants. Applicants should be made aware of and empowered to utilize available anonymous reporting tools.
| S-EPMC10263253 | biostudies-literature
Project description:Purpose The transition to an all-virtual application cycle for General Surgery Match 2021 significantly altered interview day and the interactions of applicants with residency programs. We sought to evaluate the impact of a virtual match cycle on applicants’ rank list and Match results. Methods We surveyed applicants who were offered an interview for a categorical general surgery residency position at our institution during the 2021 match season. Voluntary anonymous surveys were sent after the rank list deadline and again after the Match. Results Out of 108 interviewees, 43 completed the survey (40%). Median age was 26, and 61% of respondents were male and 82% white, which skewed from our diverse interview pool. They completed a median of 17 interviews. 69% felt they had sufficient exposure to make their rank list, and this group reached statistically significant higher confidence in their decisions when compared with those who endorsed not having enough exposure to the residency programs (58% vs 42%, p = 0.02). Applicants cited the most influential interview day factors to be their interview with faculty and the virtual social with residents. Least important was their ability to assess the hospital facility. Among seven different program factors, comradery between faculty and residents (31%) and perceived happiness of the residents (18.6%) were most often selected most influential. Only 56% reported ranking all programs at which they interviewed. After submitting their rank list, 59% of applicants stated they had not visited the city of their top ranked program; however, post-match surveys revealed only 44% matched to a program in a city unknown to them. 57% of applicants stated they reached out to their top choice program with additional questions, but only 47% matched at one of those institutions. Conclusions Even in the constraints of the virtual interviews, most applicants felt they had sufficient exposure to programs to make their rank list. Applicants were willing to highly rank cities they had never visited and to reach out to programs but were ultimately less successful matching at those programs. Understanding what factors and communications most impact applicants and programs may lead to a more successful Match. Supplementary Information The online version contains supplementary material available at 10.1007/s44186-022-00071-8.
| S-EPMC9640838 | biostudies-literature
Project description:IntroductionGeneral surgery residency training programs adapted to the COVID-19 pandemic by going online instead of in-person, through virtual interviews, social media engagement, and virtual open houses. The impact of these virtual interactions is unknown. We sought to understand their effectiveness as per residency program directors and assistant program directors.Materials and methodsAn institutional review board approval was obtained to conduct this anonymous survey. A Qualtrics XM survey containing multiple-choice and short-answer questions was distributed to 590 residency program and assistant program directors through the Association of Program Directors in Surgery (APDS) listserv on July 6, July 13, and July 20.ResultsWe observed a response rate of approximately 11% across the 590 surgeons contacted. Nearly all (90%) respondents offered virtual preinterview interactions, primarily virtual open houses, virtual facility tours, and virtual question and answer (Q&A) sessions with residents and faculty; 48% of respondents were unsure of the utility of virtual interactions and the majority (54%) felt that virtual interaction limits a program's ability to evaluate applicants. Virtual Q&As were ranked to be the most effective interaction (7.6/10); 80% of respondents felt that visiting rotations were "somewhat important" to "very important," the two highest options available. In addition, 74% felt that applicants missed out on fully experiencing the program by forgoing these rotations. Most respondents (78%) noted that evaluation of applicants' preinterview did not change as a result of virtual interactions. Nearly half (48%) of the respondents offered more interview days due to the virtual format. A fifth (21%) of respondents stated that virtual interactions resulted in a change in the rank position of an applicant. Respondents ranked Twitter and Instagram higher in applicant engagement than Facebook. Factors that impacted interview or rank order list the most were late/absent step two CK scores (33%) and a lack of away rotations (31%), both being limitations largely due to the pandemic. With respect to future application cycles, most (71%) raised concerns regarding disparities between applicants applying in-person and virtually if both or either are offered.ConclusionsOur study suggests that program directors and associate program directors have reservations about the use of virtual interactions with applicants. Interestingly, these data suggest that visiting subinternships are useful for programs in evaluating applicants. This may encourage students to pursue rotations at other institutions at the expense of already-limited resources. It remains unclear whether virtual interactions will be used in the future, but respondents largely agreed that the virtual means of interacting with and disseminating information to the applicants of the 2020-2021 general surgery Match were a success.
| S-EPMC9749614 | biostudies-literature
Project description:BackgroundMicroaggressions are one form of gender bias contributing to gender disparities and mistreatment, but their prevalence during virtual residency interviews has not been explored.ObjectiveTo explore applicants' recall of experiencing gender microaggressions during virtual residency interviews and whether these experiences affected programs' rank position on applicants' rank lists.MethodsFourth-year medical students at a single institution who participated in the 2021 Match were surveyed after submitting their rank lists. Students were surveyed categorically on (1) their recall of the frequency they experienced 17 gender microaggressions during interviews, and (2) how these affected reported ranking of programs on their rank lists.ResultsSixty-one percent (103 of 170) of eligible students responded to the survey. Seventy-two percent (36 of 50) of women experienced at least one microaggression compared to 30% (9 of 30) of men. The largest difference was in the experience of environmental microaggressions, which are demeaning cues communicated individually or institutionally, delivered visually, or that refer to climate (P<.001). Women experienced more microaggressions than men in nonsurgical (P=.003) and surgical specialties excluding obstetrics and gynecology (P=.009). When microaggressions were experienced at 1 to 2 programs, 36% of applicants (26 of 73) reported significantly lowering program ranking, compared to 5% (1 of 19) when microaggressions occurred at more than 5 programs (P=.038).ConclusionsWomen applicants experience more microaggressions than men do during nonsurgical and male-dominated surgical specialty residency interviews. Respondents who recalled experiencing microaggressions at fewer programs were more likely to report significantly lowering the rank of those programs compared to those who experienced them at more programs.
| S-EPMC9380641 | biostudies-literature
Project description:ObjectiveTo evaluate perceptions of otolaryngology residency program directors (PDs) and department chairs (DCs) on virtual interviews (VIs) at the conclusion of the 2021 residency match.Study designCross-sectional survey study.MethodsAn anonymous and voluntary survey was administered to PDs and DCs of U.S. otolaryngology residency programs from March 1, 2021 to April 11, 2021. Utilizing Likert scale ratings, the survey measured overall satisfaction with the VI format, perceived ability to assess key candidate attributes, relative importance of traditional candidate metrics, and likelihood to implement VIs in future cycles.ResultsNinety-four surveys were completed by PDs (48.9%) and DCs (51.1%). Sixty (63.8%) respondents found the VI experience to be satisfactory or strongly satisfactory. Sixty-six (70.2%) respondents felt confident in their ability to assess a candidate's professionalism and communication skills through VIs; however, confidence in gauging an applicant's clinical skills/knowledge (41.2%) and overall program fit (47.3%) was lower. Regarding candidate metrics, 64 (68.1%) respondents believed that personal prior knowledge of the applicant gained increased importance with VIs. Forty-four (46.8%) and 45 (47.9%) participants believed that letters of recommendation in the specialty and perceived commitment to their program similarly attained increased significance in evaluating applicants, respectively.ConclusionMost PDs and DCs were satisfied with their VI experiences and expect the quality of interns to be unaffected by virtual assessment modalities. Majority opinion on the relative importance of traditional applicant metrics remained largely unchanged, the exception being an increase in importance of prior knowledge of the applicant.Level of Evidence: N/A.
| S-EPMC9195030 | biostudies-literature