General Surgery Residency Applicant Perspectives on Alternative Residency Interview Models with Implementation of an Optional Second Look Day

Abstract

OBJECTIVE

In response to Covid-19, the Association of American Medical Colleges (AAMC) recommended for residency interviews to take place virtually. Benefits of virtual interviews include substantial cost saving and scheduling flexibility. However, it is more difficult to understand program culture and there is concern that more emphasis will be placed on board examination scores and class rank. Programs are split in their decision to keep virtual interviews in the future. This study aims to provide more clarification on students’ perspectives and explore the role of an optional second look day to bridge the gap left by the lack of in-person interaction.

DESIGN

This cross-sectional study surveyed applicants at our general surgery residency program during the 2022 to 2023 cycle. An optional second look day event was held after submission of the program's rank list. The first survey was sent to all applicants who interviewed with the residency program and asked to pick an interview style that they favored (in person vs virtual) and then asked to rate factors that impacted their decision. It also asked if an optional second look day event was made available, what factors would applicants consider to be important in their decision to attend. The second survey was sent to applicants who attended second look day and asked applicants to state importance of factors that led to their decision to attend.

RESULTS

About 50/110 completed the first survey. Applicants preferred virtual over in-person interviews (52% vs 28%). Those who chose virtual selected factors of time commitment and financial burden to be very important compared to those who chose in-person. Applicants who preferred in-person interviews placed most importance on avoiding technical issues and having personal interactions such as: with attending surgeons, with residents, assessment of program culture, visiting facilities, and visiting the town. Applicants were asked to pick important factors if they were to attend an optional second look day after their virtual interview. The following factors were chosen as very important: time commitment, financial burden, interaction with program leadership, interaction with attending surgeons, interaction with residents, visiting facilities, and visiting the town. We then held a second look event after the submission of our rank list. 34/110 attended and 17 complete the survey. Cost and time commitment were not as important to this group who actually attended; they chose in-person interactions with leadership and residents and assessing the program culture to be most important.

CONCLUSION

This study aimed to determine the best interview method based on student perceptions. We also piloted an optional second look day to determine whether or not it fills the gaps left by the suspension of in-person interviews. We recommend continuing with virtual interviews as this is what applicants prefer. It alleviates the financial burden of travel and allows for better time management. However, the significance of in-person interactions cannot be ignored. We propose that second look days should be incorporated after submission of the program's rank list to allow applicants the opportunity for in-person interactions, exploration of the town, and enhance their overall interviewing experience.