Surgical Specialties Ranked in Order of Competitiveness

[indya]

How would you rank the specialties and subspecialties in terms of difficulty to land a residency or fellowship in?

---

Members don't see this ad.

 

[45408]

Plastics > urology = neurosurgery > ortho = ENT > general surgery > ob/gyn

That's just a ballpark ranking.

as for fellowships, SLUser mentioned it right here - http://forums.studentdoctor.net/showpost.php?p=9710876&postcount=25

 

[Guile]

From what I've heard, I'd have to mix it up a bit from what Prowler has.

Plastics >> urology > ortho > ENT > neurosurgery > general surgery >>> OB/GYN

The ortho/ENT/neurosurgery is where it's fuzziest and up for the greatest debate.

That being said, if you take the top programs for general surgery, they're just as competitive as the top in plastics/ENT/ortho, etc. I know of one GS program in particular where everyone who matched this year was AOA, with several from the top schools.

 

[skiz knot]

Ortho>>> other surgical specialties.

 

[Arzamus]

If one uses the % filled rate for the 2010 match as a criterion for competitiveness (which is surely as insightful as anyone's subjective ranking):

categorical general surgery > Neurosurg, ENT, Ob-Gyn > Neurosurg.

Urology may be higher, but for all I care, if someone wants to be a Urologist, by all means let them.

 

[SLUser11]

If one uses the % filled rate for the 2010 match as a criterion for competitiveness (which is surely as insightful as anyone's subjective ranking):

categorical general surgery > Neurosurg, ENT, Ob-Gyn > Neurosurg.

Urology may be higher, but for all I care, if someone wants to be a Urologist, by all means let them.

I wouldn't be fooled by those numbers. They reflect institutional rank lists as much as they reflect the competitiveness of specialties.

General surgery is competitive, and has been so for several years now. The numbers suggest that this year's match was almost as competitive as 2006, and more competitive than 2007-2009....by a very small fraction.

Surgical specialties like ENT, Ortho, and Plastics are harder to get into than general surgery. Neurosurgery is possibly harder, although that is a small, self-selecting group of applicants, as is urology. This is based on the % AOA, avg. step scores, etc.

OBGYN is generally easier to get into than any of the above-mentioned specialties.

 

[JackADeli]

If one uses the % filled rate for the 2010 match as a criterion for competitiveness (which is surely as insightful as anyone's subjective ranking):

categorical general surgery > Neurosurg, ENT, Ob-Gyn > Neurosurg...

...colorectal fellowships ...overall match rate for 2008 was 67% ...The match rate for an allopathic US grad (more relevant #) was 79%.
...Peds is 59%,
...plastics roughly 50-60%,
...trauma 90%,
...CT 91%,
...Vascular 93%,
...transplant 89%...

Figured I would just ~"tie it together".

 

[felipe5]

Urology may be higher, but for all I care, if someone wants to be a Urologist, by all means let them.

Ummmm....okay thanks for your approval--- but GU is still among the most competitive specialties out there. Over the past 10 years, our average NON-matching rate (ie those that turned in rank lists) is 32% with a peak of 40% in my year when I applied. I agree with my fellow Jayhawk to not be fooled by those numbers, I think looking at trends is quite helpful--plus urology is misrepresented in that source due to us being in our own match. Happy huntin'


source:http://www.auanet.org/content/residency/residency-match.cfm

 

[DHT]

Who cares, really?

I would still be doing ortho even if it were the least competitive specialty out there and I would sit back and thank my own luck that everyone else was too stupid the realize how great the field is.

FWIW:
Plastics > ENT > Ortho = Neurosurg = Urology* > General > OBGYN

*early match makes it harder to compare

I also don't think relative competitiveness means one specialty is more desired than another. The #spots available has such a large impact on competitiveness that you are really comparing apples to oranges. Competitiveness is really only an indicator of how aggressive you need to be with a backup plan (except in Urology because you can go "all in" for the early match and then do the backup plan (regular match) if you fail to match. Regular match needs to do them simultaneously).

 

[MossPoh]

How would you rate these specialities in order of sexiness?

Now, on a logarithmic scale of funk, how do you think they'd be ranked?

Can you rank all surgical and surgical subspecialties in order of average penis length?

 

[deegs]

Can you rank all surgical and surgical subspecialties in order of average penis length?

Urology wins, hands down. We know how to ligate the suspensory ligament....

 

[Mr. Freeze]

Which would be awesome if I ever wanted my boner to point straight at the floor.

 

[pvmed]

.

 

[Kizzel]

Where would ophtho fall in terms of competitiveness in this list?

 

[Guile]

Where would ophtho fall in terms of competitiveness in this list?

Ophtho ≥ ENT. The competition is stiff. There aren't that many spots, and the applicants are all pretty good.

 

[DHT]

Where would ophtho fall in terms of competitiveness in this list?

Slightly below ortho and neurosurgery

 

[SouthernSurgeon]

Ophtho ≥ ENT. The competition is stiff. There aren't that many spots, and the applicants are all pretty good.

Disagree that it is tougher than ENT. ENT has really gotten crazy.

I would put it at

Plastics >> ENT ≥ Ortho = Urology > neurosurg > ophtho

 

[dilated]

Disagree that it is tougher than ENT. ENT has really gotten crazy.

I would put it at

Plastics >> ENT ≥ Ortho = Urology > neurosurg > ophtho

This seems to agree with both the numbers and what I've seen recently. Traditionally ENT, ortho and uro were comparable but lately ENT seems to have gotten a bit worse. Among the sizable number of people in my class who wanted ENT it was (comparatively) better lifestyle + fear of weiners = ENT.

 

[JackADeli]

... better lifestyle + fear of weiners = ENT.

I would venture it is probably more a fear of a career in prostate checking more so then fear of the weiner

 

[Guile]

I would venture it is probably more a fear of a career in prostate checking more so then fear of the weiner

General surgeons spend way more time in the ass than urologists.... How many EUAs and DREs did you do in residency? I'm betting a lot. Almost every acute general surgery patient gets a finger in the butt.

 

[JackADeli]

I would venture it is probably more a fear of a career in prostate checking more so then fear of the weiner

General surgeons spend way more time in the ass than urologists....

Irrelevant to the point at hand. How much anal disease a general surgeon sees has nothing to do with what a urologist may or may not see. That would be like saying Gynecologist do more vaginal exams.... and so what? It doesn't matter. If a med-student is aversed to anal exams during urology, they are better directed to ENT as an alternative as opposed to GSurgery.

...How many EUAs and DREs did you do in residency? I'm betting a lot...

Believe it or not, I did maybe a half dozen DREs during my general surgery residency.... Fortunately, our gall bladder, appy patients, diverticulitis patients often had their DRE by the ED. The trauma high ride exam was often not performed during my PGY1 year.... We didn't spend much time with EUA. Our PD was concerned our grads were not seeing enough hemorroid/anal disease.... I was not [concerned].

I know that must mean my training experience was lacking.😀

...Almost every acute general surgery patient gets a finger in the butt.

Fortunately in my experience this was by someone else.

 

[Winged Scapula]

Fortunately, our gall bladder, appy patients, diverticulitis patients often had their DRE by the ED. The trauma high ride exam was often not performed during my PGY1 year.... We didn't spend much time with EUA. Our PD was concerned our grads were not seeing enough hemorroid/anal disease.... I was not [concerned].

Really? I remember doing them on every trauma patient except children. And you know who, CR surgeon, insisted that we do them on every patient, regardless of whether or not it was done in the ED.She would actually ask the patient if we did it so as to try and catch us lying about it. I spent a lot of time apologizing to those patients for repeating the exam (then again, having been a patient for a brief time in that ED, I'm not sure they actually *did* do the DRE).

 

[JackADeli]

Really? I remember doing them on every trauma patient except children. And you know who, CR surgeon, insisted that we do them on every patient, regardless of whether or not it was done in the ED.She would actually ask the patient if we did it so as to try and catch us lying about it. I spent a lot of time apologizing to those patients for repeating the exam (then again, having been a patient for a brief time in that ED, I'm not sure they actually *did* do the DRE).

We didn't have much of a colorectal experience early in residency. It was by my PGY3 year that the CR service was really bumping... at which point the PGY1 maybe 2 did the DREs. We had some trauma attendings... mostly female division that really pushed the philosophy that a DRE resulted in unnecessary additional traumatization to the trauma victim. They pushed this philosophy more with female patients then male.... but pushed it fairly broadly in general.