ROL and Cali Gen Surg Programs

[wheresmyscrubs]

Haven't seen a more current discussion of rank list as I found in past years yet and wanted to hear some opinions. I've also extensively searched on Scutwork, Interview Feedback and general search of SDN, but I was also particularly interested in a more current discussion of UCSD (with new chair) vs. Harbor-UCLA, UCLA, USC and Cedars for ranking.

My tentative list:

UCLA
UCSD
Harbor-UCLA
Cedars
USC
Baylor Houston
Mayo in AZ
UCSF East Bay
NYU
Kaiser LA
UT San Antonio
(I'll leave off the rest below this)


I am interested in a program with research time and solid opportunity for fellowships later on.

Any advice/experience welcomed! Esp alumni of said programs! Thanks!

---

Members don't see this ad.

 

[NJA61479]

UCLA - extremely passive / aggressive program plagued with unhappy residents and high attrition rate. decent research and residents get good fellowships but at the expense of 5 years of displeasure and watching fellows operate

UCSD - low key program with great research in multiple fields, weak trauma, difficult to travel between the three hospitals effectively without getting bogged down in traffic, excellent location and great living situation, also from what I hear, not too hard and good operative experience

Harbor-UCLA - good hybrid program semi-academic, semi-community, good basic OR experience with good trauma but lacking decent experience in higher complexity cases. residents get decent fellowships

Cedars - watching high profile attendings operate on VIPs while you retract; in a great location and at a beautiful hospital, minimal autonomy

USC - good dichotomy of watch and learn at the university hospital and do at the county facility. good amount of autonomy, trauma / acute care heavy, moderate amount of competition with fellows, research is scarce but easy to find research elsewhere in LA or in other areas if need be, the program is in a state of flux but is on the up and up, still plagued by misconceptions of a malignant program

Baylor Houston - don't know

Mayo in AZ - don't know

UCSF East Bay - sleeper program with great resident experience and decent fellowships, residents really seem to enjoy it

NYU - i interviewed there and really liked it and ranked it high but since then I thank god every day that I didn't match there. i have heard from residents and med studs there that the program is about as malignant as can be, you have push for everything, do your own nursing work, etc. buyer beware!

Kaiser LA - program is one of the weaker in LA but has a lot of potential. if you plan to work in the kaiser system it is great since you get to start at higher salaries when you finish, the residents are noticeably weaker than other LA programs but the location is decent and the hospital provides volume and variety, good call ranking it so low.

UT San Antonio

All in all, depends on what you want. If you want to do research and stay academic then go to an academic medical center with a big name and a large NIH funding. Let me know if you have other questions.

Again, these are just my opinions on programs from my own views and talking to residents, etc.

 

[7abiby]

Interesting, I actually didn't get that impression at UCLA. Residents actually seemed very happy. Did you do any electives there?

 

[pntgrd]

UCLA - extremely passive / aggressive program plagued with unhappy residents and high attrition rate. decent research and residents get good fellowships but at the expense of 5 years of displeasure and watching fellows operate

What do you mean "passive/aggressive program"? What makes the residents unhappy?

 

[NJA61479]

I am actually at another program across town. I did a medicine rotation at the West LA VA which is a UCLA affiliated hospital and so I talked with a bunch of surgery residents there picking their brain about their program since I was thinking about ranking it highly. I was basically told that the residents don't really have a lot of pull / say in how their curriculum is structured and that they begrudgingly do what they are told. The attendings are not the nicest bunch although I thought they were great when I interviewed. The program is fellow heavy and the residents sometimes get lost in the shuffle. For the most part it is really all about the research and the big names there rather than educating their residents. Most of the residents match into fantastic fellowships however since the UCLA name carries a decent amount of weight on the west coast especially.

 

[filter07]

I did a surgical rotation at UCLA as a medical student a few years ago. UCLA is an academic program with typical strengths and weaknesses of most academic programs.

I felt that the level of discussion during M&Ms were quite high. The presenters seemed to be comfortable defending their decisions. I sat in on a few basic science sessions for the junior level residents and was impressed with that as well. I had a chance to work fairly closely with faculty and felt that they were welcoming of medical students. There were a few that were somewhat awkward to work with, but in general most were fine. The residents seemed to get along well, and they were fairly honest about the program. Junior levels had minor gripes, mostly to do with lack of major cases and a particularly douchey chief, but nothing major, and nothing you won't find at any other program. The other chief that rotated in was well liked. Nothing out of the ordinary. There are fellows for many rotations, but from what I've seen, the general surgery chief still does a good number of major cases.

Overall I thought the program was great. The atmosphere was not malignant by any means. Expectations of residents was high. There were no major personality issues with the people I was working with. I ranked it #1, but I did not match there.

 

[dpmd]

Can't comment on the rest, but USC was actively working on becoming a kinder, gentler residency program after I was done with med school. Don't know how well it is working out. At the county you will have to deal with slow turnover, not enough time for cases, and ancillary staff that doesn't have your (or your patient's) needs in mind. It was an awesome place to be as a student because it was so absurdly busy that you felt needed (and got to do more procedures as a third year student than some interns do). I applied and interviewed there because it would have raised red flags if I didn't, but I didn't even rank it. They have supposedly changed since then though.

All I can say about UCLA is that on my transplant rotation there (I was a third year resident) I only saw the OR once (for a harvest) and got to hold retractors and close skin only. One of my colleagues saw a fellow getting walked through how to open an abdomen (not because he didn't know how, but because they are particular about wanting it done their way). I was supposed to run all orders by the fellow, and they thought I would need to be supervised for lines since the second year residents they usually have need to be walked through.

 

[dynx]

All I can say about UCLA is that on my transplant rotation there (I was a third year resident) I only saw the OR once (for a harvest) and got to hold retractors and close skin only. One of my colleagues saw a fellow getting walked through how to open an abdomen (not because he didn't know how, but because they are particular about wanting it done their way). I was supposed to run all orders by the fellow, and they thought I would need to be supervised for lines since the second year residents they usually have need to be walked through.

ditto this
I ranked UCLA dead last. They were on probation the year I applied for double scrubbing cases (chiefs and fellows). Indicated to me a lack of autonomy in the OR. I asked the PD about this on the interview and he blew a gasket. I don't think the problem is resolved. This is a place to go if you want a fellowship based upon the name of the residency you went to but not your operative ability. I think when mandatory reporting of outcomes is common place, products of these programs are going to be delegated to the labs.

 

[pntgrd]

ditto this
I ranked UCLA dead last. They were on probation the year I applied for double scrubbing cases (chiefs and fellows). Indicated to me a lack of autonomy in the OR. I asked the PD about this on the interview and he blew a gasket. I don't think the problem is resolved. This is a place to go if you want a fellowship based upon the name of the residency you went to but not your operative ability. I think when mandatory reporting of outcomes is common place, products of these programs are going to be delegated to the labs.

What year was this?

 

[SLUser11]

Can't comment on the rest, but USC was actively working on becoming a kinder, gentler residency program after I was done with med school. Don't know how well it is working out. At the county you will have to deal with slow turnover, not enough time for cases, and ancillary staff that doesn't have your (or your patient's) needs in mind. It was an awesome place to be as a student because it was so absurdly busy that you felt needed (and got to do more procedures as a third year student than some interns do). I applied and interviewed there because it would have raised red flags if I didn't, but I didn't even rank it. They have supposedly changed since then though.

All I can say about UCLA is that on my transplant rotation there (I was a third year resident) I only saw the OR once (for a harvest) and got to hold retractors and close skin only. One of my colleagues saw a fellow getting walked through how to open an abdomen (not because he didn't know how, but because they are particular about wanting it done their way). I was supposed to run all orders by the fellow, and they thought I would need to be supervised for lines since the second year residents they usually have need to be walked through.

Yikes. That is absolutely unacceptable.

On a related note, I usually let the med student close after a harvest....that was probably the only type of surgery that I enjoyed on transplant.....

 

[dpmd]

What was really the topper on that case was that the attending actually only had me close half of the wound. He did the other half and was giving me pointers...on how to close skin...on a dead guy. I remember in med school as a third year being pitted against someone else (student? intern? I don't remember) in a race to close my half of a trauma pt that didn't make it.

 

[dynx]

what year was this?

2006

 

[SLUser11]

He did the other half and was giving me pointers...on how to close skin...on a dead guy.

Hilarious. At least it was only for a rotation and not for five years.

I'm picturing him interjecting points about wound healing that really wouldn't apply.

 

[45408]

Whoa, don't scallop the wound edges there! Make sure you bury the knot. Do you always cut your tails that short?

 

[dpmd]

I knew I wanted a more hands on residency, since I enjoyed being at a hands on school. That is why I took a chance on the program I ended up in. Had never heard of it until the SICU director told me about it and said it would be right up my alley. Heavy on trauma, early operative experience, and a good amount of autonomy (mostly due to necessity, but with backup if you need it). It's small, it's in bakersfield, and we don't have all rotations in house but we have had graduates feel ready to go directly into private practice, as well as obtain good fellowship spots if desired. I wouldn't trade it for a UCLA (or other fancy place) spot for anything (unless maybe if it was an ortho spot-old desires die hard).