Current Applicant Perceptions of the Ophthalmology Residency Match

The ophthalmology residency application process is critical for applicants and residency programs, and knowledge about the preferences of applicants would assist both groups in improving the process. To evaluate the experiences and preferences of ophthalmology residency applicants. This cross-sectional, nonvalidated survey was conducted online. All applicants to the Bascom Palmer Eye Institute ophthalmology residency program during the 2018-2019 application cycle were invited to complete the survey. Data collection occurred from April 1, 2019, to April 30, 2019. Applicant demographics, application submissions, interview experiences, financial considerations, match results, and suggestions for improvement of the application process. Responses were received from 185 applicants (36.4%), including 77 women (41.6%). A successful match into an ophthalmology residency was achieved by 172 respondents (93.0%). There was a mean (SD) US Medical Licensing Examination Step 1 score of 245.8 (13.3) points. Respondents applied to a mean (SD) of 76.4 (23.5) ophthalmology residency programs, received 14.0 (9.0) invitations to interview, and attended 10.3 (4.4) interviews. Choices regarding applications and interviews were based mostly on program reputation, location, and advisor recommendation. A usual lead time of at least 3 weeks between the invitation and interview was reported by 126 respondents (69.2%), which was reduced to 14 respondents (15.1%) when a wait-list was involved. The ophthalmology residency application process cost a mean (SD) of $5704 ($2831) per applicant. Respondents reported that they were most able to reduce costs through housing choices (hotel stays or similar arrangements) and least able to reduce costs by limiting the number of programs to which they applied or at which they interviewed. The ophthalmology residency application process is complex and poses substantial challenges to applicants and residency programs. These findings suggest that many current applicants have difficulty selecting programs to apply to, and most respondents desired changes to the current system of interview invitations and scheduling

Accuracy and Utility of Internet Image Search as a Learning Tool for Retinal Pathology

Purpose Ophthalmology residency training heavily relies on visual and pattern recognition-based learning. In parallel with traditional reference texts, online internet search via Google Image Search (GIS) is commonly used and offers an accessible fund of reference images for ophthalmology trainees seeking rapid exposure to images of retinal pathology. However, the accuracy and quality of this tool within this context is unknown. We aim to evaluate the accuracy and quality of GIS images of selected retinal pathologies. Methods A cross-sectional study was performed of GIS of 15 common and 15 rare retinal diseases drawn from the American Academy of Ophthalmology residency textbook series. A total of 300 evaluable image results were assessed for accuracy of images and image source accountability in consultation with a vitreoretinal surgeon. Results A total of 377 images were reviewed with 77 excluded prior to final analysis. A total of 288 (96%) search results accurately portrayed the retinal disease being searched, whereas 12 (4%) were of an erroneous diagnosis. More images of common retinal diseases were from patient education Web sites than were images of rare diseases (p < 0.01). Significantly more images of rare retinal diseases were found in peer-reviewed sources (p = 0.01). Conclusions GIS search results yielded a modest level of accuracy for the purposes of ophthalmic education. Despite the ease and rapidity of accessing multimodal retinal imaging examples, this tool may best be suited as a supplementary resource for learning among residents due to limited accuracy, lack of sufficient supporting information, and the source Web site's focus on patient education

Optimizing Resident Clinic Efficiency Through Process Flow Analysis

Abstract Introduction: Clinic process inefficiencies cause lengthy visit and wait times, which frustrate patients and providers and limit clinic capacity Objective: To identify process inefficiencies and assess process flow interventions Methods: Prospective, consecutive series of resident clinic visits over a 3-week period after transferring refraction from tech to resident. Personnel recorded the time spent waiting for and undergoing each clinic process. The clinic also piloted a “Fast Track” from registration to resident for appropriate established patients. Results: Patients spent 53% of the visit waiting, primarily for the tech. Transferring refraction from tech to resident decreased the wait for tech and tech duration without increasing resident duration. There was no significant reduction in total visit or wait times. “Fast Track” decreased total visit time by 38% but comprised only 3.5% of visits that may have been appropriate. Conclusion: Reallocating a task from the slowest process decreased that process’s wait and duration but had no effect on total visit or wait times. Process flow analysis identifies inefficiencies and assesses interventions. Automated data collection is crucial for iterations.https://jdc.jefferson.edu/patientsafetyposters/1125/thumbnail.jp

Integrating the Internship into Ophthalmology Residency Programs: Association of University Professors of Ophthalmology American Academy of Ophthalmology White Paper

Future ophthalmologists will need to have broad skills to thrive in complex health care organizations. However, training for ophthalmologists does not take advantage of all of the postgraduate years (PGYs). Although the traditional residency years seem to have little excess capacity, enhancing the internship year does offer an opportunity to expand the time for ophthalmology training in the same 4 PGYs. Integrating the internship year into residency would allow control of all of the PGYs, allowing our profession to optimize training for ophthalmology. In this white paper, we propose that we could capture an additional 6 months of training time by integrating basic ophthalmology training into the intern year. This would allow 6 additional months to expand training in areas such as quality improvement or time for "mini-fellowships" to allow graduates to develop a deeper set of skills

Evaluation of the virtual mentor cataract training program

OBJECTIVE: Evaluate the effectiveness of an interactive cognitive computer simulation for teaching the hydrodissection portion of cataract surgery compared with standard teaching and to assess the attitudes of residents about the teaching tools and their perceived confidence in the knowledge gained after using the tools. DESIGN: Case-control study. PARTICIPANTS AND CONTROLS: Residents at academic institutions. METHODS: Prospective, multicenter, single-masked, controlled trial was performed in 7 academic departments of ophthalmology (Harvard Medical School/Massachusetts Eye and Ear Infirmary, University of Iowa, Emory University, University of Cincinnati, University of Pennsylvania/Scheie Eye Institute, Jefferson Medical College of Thomas Jefferson University/Wills Eye Institute, and the Aravind Eye Institute). All residents from these centers were asked to participate and were randomized into 2 groups. Group A (n = 30) served as the control and received traditional teaching materials; group B (n = 38) received a digital video disc of the Virtual Mentor program. This program is an interactive cognitive simulation, specifically designed to separate cognitive aspects (such as decision making and error recognition) from the motor aspects. Both groups took online anonymous pretests (n = 68) and posttests (n = 58), and answered satisfaction questionnaires (n = 53). Wilcoxon tests were completed to compare pretest and posttest scores between groups. Analysis of variance was performed to assess differences in mean scores between groups. MAIN OUTCOME MEASURES: Scores on pretests, posttests, and satisfaction questionnaires. RESULTS: There was no difference in the pretest scores between the 2 groups (P = 0.62). However, group B (Virtual Mentor [VM]) scored significantly higher on the posttest (P = 0.01). Mean difference between pretest and posttest scores were significantly better in the VM group than in the traditional learning group (P = 0.04). Questionnaire revealed that the VM program was more fun to use (24.1% vs 4.2%) and residents were more likely to use this type of program again compared with the likelihood of using the traditional tools (58.6% vs 4.2%). CONCLUSIONS: The VM, a cognitive computer simulation, augmented teaching of the hydrodissection step of phacoemulsification surgery compared with traditional teaching alone. The program was more enjoyable and more likely to be used repetitively by ophthalmology residents