Identifying US Plastic Surgery Training Programs that Effectively Establish Gender and Ethnically Diverse Faculty

Ginikanwa Onyekaba; Jaclyn T Mauch; Phoebe B McAuliffe; Fortunay Diatta; Joseph A Mellia; Martin P Morris; Alexander I Murphy; Robyn B Broach; John P Fischer; Paris D Butler

doi:10.1097/GOX.0000000000004303

Identifying US Plastic Surgery Training Programs that Effectively Establish Gender and Ethnically Diverse Faculty

Plast Reconstr Surg Glob Open. 2022 May 6;10(5):e4303. doi: 10.1097/GOX.0000000000004303. eCollection 2022 May.

Authors

Ginikanwa Onyekaba^{1

2}, Jaclyn T Mauch³, Phoebe B McAuliffe^{1

4}, Fortunay Diatta^{1

2}, Joseph A Mellia^{1

4}, Martin P Morris¹, Alexander I Murphy⁵, Robyn B Broach¹, John P Fischer¹, Paris D Butler¹

Affiliations

¹ Division of Plastic Surgery, Department of Surgery, University of Pennsylvania, Philadelphia, Pa.
² Perelman School of Medicine, University of Pennsylvania, Philadelphia, Pa.
³ Section of Plastic Surgery, Department of Surgery, University of Michigan, Ann Arbor, Mich.
⁴ Renaissance School of Medicine, Stony Brook University, Stony Brook, N.Y.
⁵ Columbia University, New York City, N.Y.

Abstract

Background: Successful strategies to improve the representation of female and ethnically underrepresented in medicine (UIM) physicians among US plastic and reconstructive surgery (PRS) faculty have not been adequately explored. Accordingly, we aimed to identify programs that have had success, and in parallel gather PRS program directors' and chiefs/chairs' perspectives on diversity recruitment intentionality and strategies.

Methods: We conducted a cross-sectional analysis of the demographic composition of female and UIM faculty of PRS residency training programs. Separate lists of programs in the top quartile for female and UIM faculty representation were collated. Additionally, a 14-question survey was administered to program directors and chiefs/chairs of all 99 Accreditation Council for Graduate Medical Education-accredited PRS residency programs. The questions comprised three domains: (1) demographic information; (2) perceptions about diversity; and (3) recruitment strategies utilized to diversify faculty.

Results: Female and UIM faculty representation ranged from 0% to 63% and 0% to 50%, respectively. Survey responses were received from program directors and chiefs/chairs of 55 institutions (55% response rate). Twenty-five (43%) respondents felt their program was diverse. Fifty-one (80%) respondents felt diversity was important to the composition of PRS faculty. Active recruitment of diverse faculty and the implementation of a diversity, equity, and inclusion committee were among the most frequently cited strategies to establish a culturally sensitive and inclusive environment.

Conclusions: These findings reveal that female and UIM representation among US PRS faculty remains insufficient; however, some programs have had success through deliberate and intentional implementation of diversity, equity, and inclusion strategies.