Faculty Bibliography

The transition to residency in obstetrics and gynecology is difficult, threatening the well-being of residents as well as their preparedness to care for patients. In addition to essential foundational knowledge and skills, obstetrics and gynecology interns must develop professional identity and a growth mindset toward learning to acquire the self-directed learning skills required of physicians throughout their careers. The transition to residency is a critical opportunity for learning and development. A group of educators and learners from around the country created a preparedness program building on available resources. The result is a national curriculum for improving the transition to obstetrics and gynecology residency on three levels: self-directed learning, facilitated small-group workshops, and coaching. Sharing tools for preparing matched applicants for residency in obstetrics and gynecology ensures adequate residency preparation for all interns, independent of medical school attended. This program aims to address potential threats to equity in the training of our future workforce and to ensure that all obstetrics and gynecology interns are prepared to thrive in residency training.

Importance:In order to equitably improve the residency application process, it is essential to understand the problems we need to address. Objective:To determine how obstetrics and gynecology (OBGYN) applicants and faculty communicate applicants' interest to residency programs, and how program directors report being influenced by these communications. Design, Setting, and Participants:This survey study was conducted with email surveys of OBGYN application stakeholders in 2022. Included participants were OBGYN applicants, clerkship directors, and residency program directors in medical education associations' email listservs. Exposures:Surveys sent by the American Association of Medical Colleges, Association of Professors of Gynecology and Obstetrics, and Council on Resident Education in Obstetrics and Gynecology. Main Outcomes and Measures:Whether applicants themselves, or faculty on their behalf, communicated to residency programs, and the influence program directors reported placing on these communications for their decision-making. Descriptive statistics and χ2 tests were used to analyze differences. Results:A total 726 of 2781 applicants (26.1%) responded to the survey and were included in analysis (79 of 249 [31.7%] clerkship directors; 200 of 280 [71.4%] program directors). The self-reported racial and ethnic demographics of the 726 applicant respondents were 86 Asian (11.8%), 54 Black (7.4%), 41 Latinx (5.6%), 1 Native Hawaiian or Pacific Islander (0.1%), 369 White (52.2%), 45 with multiple racial identities (6.2%), and 91 (21.5%) preferring not to answer. The majority of applicants (590 [82.9%]) sent communications at some point in the application process. Applicants who identified as White (336 [88.7%]) or Asian (75 [87.2%]) were more likely than those who identified as Black (40 [74.1%]) or Latinx (33 [80.5%]) to reach out to programs (P = .02). There were also differences in type of medical school, with 377 of 427 MD applicants (88.3%), 109 of 125 DO applicants (87.2%), and 67 of 87 International Medical Graduate applicants (77.7%) reporting sending communications (P = .02). Approximately one-third (254 applicants [35.7%]) had faculty reach out to programs on their behalf. White (152 [40.1%]) and Asian (37 [43.0%]) applicants were more likely to have faculty reach out compared with Black (6 [11.1%]) and Latinx (12 [29.3%]) applicants (P = .01). Program directors reported that preinterview communications from faculty they knew (64 [32.2%]) and other program directors (25 [12.6%]) strongly influenced their decisions, and otherwise rarely reported that communications strongly influenced their decisions. Conclusions and Relevance:The current state of communications may increase inequities in residency application processes; differences between faculty communications for applicants from different racial and ethnic backgrounds are particularly concerning given that program directors are more likely to weigh communications from faculty in their decision-making. A centralized, equitable means for applicants to signal their interest to programs is urgently needed.

OBJECTIVE:Virtual interviews were widely implemented alongside many other changes in the 2021 residency application process. We investigated how these many interventions may have influenced interview distributions and completions. DESIGN/METHODS:Cross-sectional survey distributed electronically to obstetrics and gynecology (OBGYN) residency applicants in February 2021. Distributions of interview invitations, interviews completed, and percent of interview offers completed were compared to the previous application cycle. The odds ratios of receiving interviews were calculated based on applicant characteristics including test scores, number of applications, and race/ethnicity. SETTING/METHODS:All OBGYN residency applicants registered through the Electronic Residency Application Service. PARTICIPANTS/METHODS:The 915 (36%) of 2577 total OBGYN applicants who responded to the survey. RESULTS:US allopathic medical students received fewer interview offers in 2021 (median 13 [interquartile range 9-19]) compared to 2020 (median 15 [interquartile range 11-20]). There was no difference in the absolute numbers of interviews completed. A United States Medical Licensing Exam Step 1 score ≥221 resulted in more than a five-fold increase in adjusted odds of receiving at least 12 interviews for allopathic students. Black or African American US allopathic seniors had a 2.3 odds ratio for receiving at least 12 interview invitations compared to White non-Hispanic or Latino US allopathic seniors, adjusted for Step 1 score and the number of programs applied to. Interview offers released on standardized dates had a mitigating effect on completing more interviews among allopathic seniors with at least 12 interview invitations. CONCLUSIONS:Virtual interviews did not change the overall number of interviews completed. Standardization of interview offer dates mitigated excessive virtual interviewing, yet additional measures are needed to curb interview inflation and the effects on interview distributions.

OBJECTIVE:To describe the perspectives of obstetrics and gynecology (OBGYN) residency applicants regarding new standards for the 2019 to 2020 application cycle. DESIGN/METHODS:An anonymous electronic survey was sent to all OBGYN residency applicants to US programs retrospectively evaluating 5 new recommended standards for the application process. This 15-item survey assessed the importance of the proposed standards and their impact on applicants' anxiety. SETTING/METHODS:The OBGYN residency application process is marked by increasing application numbers and no standardization for managing interview offers. The Association of Professors of Gynecology and Obstetrics (APGO) received a 5-year Reimagining Residency grant from the American Medical Association to improve the transition from undergraduate medical education (UME) to graduate medical education (GME) within OBGYN. The multiphase project, "Transforming the UME to GME Transition for Obstetrics and Gynecology- Right Resident, Right Program, Ready Day One (RRR)," began with Standardizing the OBGYN Application and Interview Process (SOAIP). This group recommended 5 new standards for all US OBGYN residency programs and applicants. PARTICIPANTS/METHODS:Applicants for US OBGYN residency programs for the 2019 to 2020 application cycle completed the survey, with a 904/2508 (36.0%) response rate, including 762 complete responses (30.4%). RESULTS:Applicants reported that all 5 of the new standards would cause the least self-perceived anxiety (range 76.8% - 96.5%). The impact of the standards on perceived anxiety varied by student group, with International Medical Graduates (IMGs) and students with USMLE Step I scores <200 describing lesser impact compared to others. Despite these differences, all 5 standards were consistently noted to cause the least anxiety for all groups. Despite varying degrees of effects in different groups, the new OBGYN residency application standards caused the least anxiety for all subgroups of applicants. CONCLUSIONS:Implementing universal standards for the OBGYN residency application process was favorably perceived by applicants and caused the least anxiety for applicants.

BACKGROUND:Psychological, emotional, and mental distress affects many patients who experience early pregnancy loss (EPL). A common concern is that the patient's actions or choices caused the loss. Understanding the cause of EPL may improve the distress of EPL patients and their partners. Chromosomal abnormalities leading to a significant portion of EPL. Cell-free DNA (cfDNA) testing, a non-invasive test providing high quality information about the chromosomal makeup of a fetus, may offer assurance that a fetal abnormality caused the loss, and provide more certainty or closure in processing EPL. CfDNA may be a useful adjunct to patient-centered care in the setting of EPL. This commentary explores the possibility of cfDNA testing in lessening the emotional distress that often accompanies EPL. METHODS:The peer reviewed literature was explored for manuscripts addressing (1) the potential for cfDNA serum testing for patients experiencing EPL and screening products of conception to determine the cause of EPL; and/or (2) the impact that information might have on the psychological morbidity of EPL for patients and their partners. Themes generated from extracted data were used to generate key questions for future research. RESULTS:Preliminary findings suggest fetal fraction values are instrumental in the success of cfDNA testing, and a successful cfDNA testing experience can have a positive impact on patients. CONCLUSIONS:Ultimately, we conclude cfDNA testing could have a positive impact in patient care and improve the well-being of patients undergoing the emotional toll of EPL by reducing feelings of guilt and providing closure to those who learn the loss was associated with chromosomal abnormality. Further trials and studies that explore the intersection of mental health of EPL on patients should explore the efficacy of cfDNA testing as an adjunct to patient-centered care in these cases.

PURPOSE/OBJECTIVE:Application inflation in the current residency application process leads to congestion, inefficiency, and perceptions of inequity. The authors aimed to assess the interest of key stakeholders on the topic of capping applications and interviews, and their perceptions regarding equity of the process. METHODS:An anonymous survey was electronically distributed in March 2021 to Obstetrics and Gynecology (OBGYN) residency applicants, clerkship directors, program directors, and student affairs deans after the submission of the rank order list for the 2021 application cycle and prior to the release of final Match results. Participants answered questions regarding the perceived equity of the current process (no limits on applications submitted or interviews completed) compared with limiting the number of applications and interviews students could submit or complete. Respondents supporting caps reported the number they considered a reasonable cap for applications and interviews. Associations between the profiles of applicants and program directors and their interest in application and interview caps were explored using chi-squared tests for non-parametric statistics and t-tests for normally distributed interval data. The University of Michigan determined the study exempt from IRB review. RESULTS:The overall response rate was 36.0% (1167/3243), including 34.0% of applicants (879/2579), 50.3% of program directors (143/284), 41.8% of clerkship directors (94/225) and 32.9% of student affairs deans (51/155). All groups reported application caps for either all applicants or the most competitive applicants to be more equitable than the current process, and suggested a median application cap ranging from 25 (clerkship directors and program directors) to 40 (applicants). All groups also believed interview caps to be more equitable than the current process, and suggested a median interview cap ranging from 12 (clerkship directors) to 15 (applicants, program directors, and student affairs deans). CONCLUSIONS:Stakeholders in the OBGYN application process consider caps to applications and interviews a promising means to improve equity in the Match.

Objective: To analyze physician opinions of, and experiences with patients who take a temporary break from treatment in the setting of metastatic primary or recurrent gynecologic cancer.
Method(s): An electronic survey was sent to the members of the Society of Gynecologic Oncology (SGO). A treatment holiday was defined as a planned temporary break from systemic treatment in a patient with recurrent or metastatic gynecologic malignancy. Descriptive statistics were calculated using Microsoft Excel, and continuous variables were compared using the Wilcoxon Rank Sum test. Free text responses were qualitatively analyzed.
Result(s): Of the 1314 individuals invited to participate, 74 responded (5.6% response rate). Ninety-six percent of respondents had a patient take a treatment holiday. Ninety-five percent of respondents would offer a treatment holiday for ovarian cancer, 90% for endometrial cancer, 70% for cervical cancer, 57% for vulvar cancer, 52% for vaginal cancer, and 49% for sarcoma. Using a Likert scale, respondents identified life events (86.6%), fatigue from side effects (77.9%), schedule fatigue (67.6%) and desire for ''life off treatment'' (64.7%) as ''very important'' reasons for offering a treatment holiday. Patients resumed treatment for return of symptoms (62.9%), progression of disease (60.0%), end of pre-specified break (50%), patient anxiety (45.7%) and recommendation of the physician (11%). 6.8% of physicians experienced regret after a patient underwent a treatment holiday. Ninety-eight percent of respondents agreed that a treatment holiday can be valuable.
Conclusion(s): The gynecologic and medical oncologists who responded to this survey almost uniformly offered their patients treatment holidays, were more likely to offer treatment holidays for ovarian and endometrial cancer, and were unlikely to express regret after the experience.
Copyright

Importance:The residency application process is flawed, costly, and distracts from the preparation for residency. Disruptive change is needed to improve the inefficiencies in current selection processes. Objective:To determine interest in an early result acceptance program (ERAP) among stakeholders in obstetrics and gynecology (OBGYN), and to estimate its outcome in future application cycles. Design, Setting, and Participants:Surveys of stakeholders in March 2021 queried interest in ERAP across the US. Respondents included OBGYN residency applicants, members of the Association of American Medical Colleges Group on Student Affairs, OBGYN clerkship directors, and residency program directors. Statistical analysis was performed from March to April 2021. Exposures:Respondents completed surveys sent by email from the Association of American Medical Colleges (to OBGYN applicants and members of the Group on Student Affairs), the Association of Professors of Gynecology and Obstetrics (to clerkship directors), and the Council on Resident Education in Obstetrics and Gynecology (to program directors). Main Outcomes and Measures:Applicants and program directors indicated their interest in participating in ERAP, and clerkship directors and members of the Group on Student Affairs indicated their likelihood of recommending ERAP using a 5-point Likert scale. Results:Respondents included 879 (34.0%) of 2579 applicants to OBGYN, 143 (50.3%) of 284 residency program directors, 94 (41.8%) of 225 clerkship directors, and 51 (32.9%) of 155 student affairs deans. The majority of respondents reported being either somewhat or extremely likely to participate in ERAP, including 622 applicants (70.7%) and 87 program directors (60.8%). Interest in ERAP was independent of an applicant's reported board scores, medical school type, race, number of applications submitted, or number of interviews completed. Among program directors, those at university programs were more likely to participate. Stakeholders supported a limit of 3 applications for ERAP, to fill 25% to 50% of residency positions. Estimating the outcome of ERAP using these data suggests 26 280 to 52 560 fewer applications could be submitted in the regular match cycle. Conclusions and Relevance:Stakeholders in the OBGYN application process expressed broad support for the concept of ERAP. The majority of applicants and programs indicated that they would participate, with potentially substantial positive impact on the application process. Careful pilot testing and research regarding implementation are essential to avoid worsening an already dysfunctional application process.