A survey of the pediatric surgery program directors: optimizing resident research to make pediatric surgery training more efficient

Purpose: Resident Research (RR) has been a presumed requirement for pediatric surgery fellowship candidates. We hypothesized that: 1) pediatric surgery leaders would no longer feel that RR was necessary for fellowship candidates, 2) the type of study performed would not impact a program’s opinion of candidates, and 3) the timing of RR could be altered for those interested in a research career. Methods: An anonymous survey was sent to pediatric surgery fellowship program directors (PDs). Sixty-three percent responded, and answers were compared via Chi square analysis with p < 0.05 being significant. Results: Respondents did not agree that RR was critical for pediatric surgery fellowship candidates. Seventy-five percent had no preference between one or two years of research (p = 0.0005), 79% placed no heavier weight on basic or clinical research (p < 0.0001), and 76% had no preference between scientific research or humanitarian efforts (p = 0.0003). Sixty-three percent felt that surgeon scientists would be better prepared for extramural funding if RR was performed at the end of training (p = 0.04). Conclusion: Dedicated research time during general surgery may not be necessary. Pediatric surgery candidates who partake in RR are not penalized for their choice of study. Increasing efficiency of training is important in today’s era of medical training.