Anesthesiology Fellowships in the Military Health System: An Education Analysis of the Supply and Demand

Abstract

ABSTRACT Introduction Evidence indicates that desire for fellowship training is most influenced by personal interest, enhancement of career options, and a specific interest in an academic medicine career. The overall objective of this study is to evaluate anesthesiology fellowship interest and its potential impact on military retention and other outcomes. We hypothesized that current fellowship training accessibility is outpaced by the interest for fellowship training and that additional factors will be associated with the desire for fellowship training. Methods This prospective cross-sectional survey study was approved as Exempt Research by the Brooke Army Medical Center Institutional Review Board in November 2020. Participants were eligible to complete the online voluntary survey if they were active duty anesthesiologists. Anonymous surveys were administered via the Research Electronic Data Capture System from December 2020 to January 2021. Aggregated data were evaluated using univariate statistics, bivariate analyses, and a generalized linear model. Results Seventy-four percent of general anesthesiologists (those without fellowship training) were interested in pursuing future fellowship training versus 23% of subspecialist anesthesiologists (those currently in fellowship training or have completed fellowship training), odd ratio 9.71 (95% CI, 4.3-21.7). Of subspecialist anesthesiologists, 75% indicated serving in a nongraduate medical education (GME) leadership position (e.g., service/department chief), with 38% serving in a GME leadership position (e.g., program or associate program director). Almost half (46%) of subspecialist anesthesiologists reported being “extremely likely” to serve ≥20 years, versus 28% of general anesthesiologists. Conclusions There is a high demand among active duty anesthesiologists for fellowship training, which in turn, may improve military retention. The demand for fellowship training is outpaced by what the Services currently offer, including training in Trauma Anesthesiology. Leveraging this interest in subspecialty fellowship training, particularly when the skills align with combat casualty care–related requirements, would greatly benefit the Services.