Army orthopaedic surgery residency program directors' selection criteria

Justin D. Orr, Jeffrey D. Hoffmann, Edward D. Arrington, Tad L. Gerlinger, John Glenden DeVine, Philip J. Belmont

Research output: Contribution to journalArticle

4 Scopus citations

Abstract

Factors associated with successful selection in U.S. Army orthopaedic surgical programs are unreported. The current analysis includes survey data from all Army orthopaedic surgery residency program directors (PDs) to determine these factors. PDs at all Army orthopaedic surgery residency programs were provided 17 factors historically considered critical to successful selection and asked to rank order the factors as well as assign a level of importance to each. Results were collated and overall mean rankings are provided. PDs unanimously expressed that performance during the on-site orthopaedic surgery rotation at the individual program director's institution was most important. Respondents overwhelmingly reported that Steps 1 and 2 licensing exam scores were next most important, respectively. Survey data demonstrated that little importance was placed on letters of recommendation and personal statements. PDs made no discriminations based on allopathic or osteopathic degrees. The most important factors for Army orthopaedic surgery residency selection were clerkship performance at the individual PD's institution and licensing examination score performance. Army PDs consider both USMLE and COMLEX results, because Army programs have a higher percentage of successful osteopathic applicants.

Original languageEnglish (US)
Pages (from-to)120-124
Number of pages5
JournalJournal of surgical orthopaedic advances
Volume24
Issue number2
Publication statusPublished - Jun 1 2015
Externally publishedYes

    Fingerprint

ASJC Scopus subject areas

  • Medicine(all)

Cite this

Orr, J. D., Hoffmann, J. D., Arrington, E. D., Gerlinger, T. L., DeVine, J. G., & Belmont, P. J. (2015). Army orthopaedic surgery residency program directors' selection criteria. Journal of surgical orthopaedic advances, 24(2), 120-124.