Abstract

NM-264

The Virtual Interview: Saving Time, Money, and Travel for the Fellowship Interview Process in the Digital Age

Stallard S, Dillow J
University of New Mexico Health Science Center, Albuquerque, NM, United states of america

Background:
Each year, the number of fellowship applicants, positions, and programs grow.  The application process has a high monetary and time cost for both programs and applicants. The University of New Mexico saw a 400% increase in the number of pediatric anesthesia fellowship applicants since the institution of the match. To accommodate this increase, we began to offer video interviews (VI) as well as traditional in-person interviews(TI).  After several years of offering both options, we aimed to determine if this should be a more widely used process. 
Methods:
The program was initiated in 2014. Over time, the VI process was standardized and refined. Since then, participation in VI has increased steadily; 10% in 2014 to 40% in 2017. An anonymous online survey was sent to all interviewees from 2016 and 2017. Additionally, a survey was sent to all participating faculty. The responses were reviewed and analyzed for trends. 
Results:
More than half of the 27 applicants responded. The average number of fellowship interviews per applicant was 7, with one outlier having over 15 interviews.  Each interviewee spent an average of $4,000 to interview for fellowship positions.  The average time cost away from clinical duties was 2 weeks.  Over half of respondents that participated in VI believed it was sufficient to make an informed decision regarding our program.  When asked if TI could have been replaced by VI at other interview sites, half agreed and half disagreed.  60% of respondents felt VI should be used more widely.
The results from the survey of interviewing faculty were consistent.  The majority initially felt uncomfortable with the VI process.  Now, faculty feel the VI process is nearly equivalent when evaluating candidates for fellowship positions. 
Discussion:
Fellowship interview season is costly for all.  Programs supplement the cost of travel and meals. Candidates take vacation, and pay up to 15% of their salary to attend interviews.(1) Candidates and programs limit the number of interviews due to these costs.  Some programs have implemented VI, saving time and money(2). For programs that are isolated, this option increases the pool of candidates that otherwise may not travel to their facility. Our results support the hypothesis that VI may be an equivalent, less costly alternative to TI. Certainly this is true from our faculty’s perspective. The respondents with a negative view of VI were those who had never participated in VI, and perhaps this was a justification of time and money already spent.  In order to increase acceptance by the applicant, we could offer supplemental material such as a video presenting the program, facility, and city.  
VIs are a cost-effective tool, and are increasing in popularity and acceptance.  Although not universally accepted, VI technology should be offered as an option to offset the monetary and time cost for both the program and the candidate.
References.
2016 NRMP Fellowship Match Data, 2016 Appt Yr, nrmp.org.
Staudt S. 2014 Pediatric Anesthesiology Match Survey Results. Personal Communication.
Sumanth D, et al. Interview from anywhere: Feasibility and utility of web based videoconference interviews in fellowship selection process. Amer J Gastro. 2014.