Top Programs In Anesthesiology

[keith77]

anyone who is in or is interviewing at a top program, can u list your stats in terms of rank, extracurricular, board scores, etc?

is it important to take step 2 and have it sent to them or do they not expect it?

thanks!!!

---

Members don't see this ad.

 

[OldManDave]

I doubt you will get too much of a response to this query as "top program(s)" is largely defined through personal perceptions. Granted, there a few programs considered to be the toughest to get into; however, that does not necessarily translate into those programs being the 'best fit' for every individual. For example, if you're hell-bent on a career in heavy research, you would be remiss in applying to a collection of programs who focus on clinical anesthesia or community based programs that do not emphasize research in their curriculum.

To ensure that you are happy, receive the best training in the context of your professional goals & meeting your program expectations requires that you select programs based upon your personal & professional needs. I would caution you against merely going to some throw-away journal and applying to the top 20 or so programs some unknowing journalist decided was the "top programs".

Do yourself a favor and spend some time researching the programs & their charateristics (Dept publications, web sites, FRIEDA, Scutwork.com & SDN) so that you apply to programs that fit your goals. You will be working way too hard during your residency to pile a generous helping of "misery" for selecting a program based upon someone else's parameters/definition of "top program" -- strive for contentment, happiness & personal success.

I wish you the best of lucK & success!

 

[nodiggity]

This is a previous poster's take on "top programs":
********************************************
********************************************
Academic anesthesiologists I have spoken to generally seem to stratify the outstanding programs into 3 tiers...

1) Best of the best: JHU, MGH, UCSF

2) Considered to be Elite programs: Alabama, Brigham, Columbia, Duke, Mayo, Michigan, Penn, Stanford, Wake Forest, U. Washington

3) Other excellent academic programs: Beth Israel, Cornell, Dartmouth, MC Wisconsin, Mt. Sinai, Northwestern, Penn State, UC Irvine, UCLA, UCSD, U. Chicago, U. Colorado, U. Florida, U. Iowa, UNC Chapel Hill, U. Pittsburgh, U. Rochester, U. Texas Galveston, Utah, UVA, Vanderbilt, Wash U, Yale
********************************************
********************************************

Most people I know who matched into these programs had a Step 1 above 215 and a mixture of A's and B's (Honors and High Passes) on their core third year rotations.

 

[Yogi Patel]

i would caution that reputation does not necessarily correlate with admission competetiveness. for instance, i would argue that due to location and program size, u.colorado and ucsd are tougher to match in than hopkins.

by the way, anyone know why u.michigan didn't fill last year in the match?

 

[jester]

I think Michigan is a great program.... why didn't it fill? Location location location.
I would agree with NoDiggity on the best of the best. The rest are debatable.

 

[Yogi Patel]

Here's the 2002 Top 25 NIH award rankings among Anesthesiology Departments:

full list at http://grants1.nih.gov/grants/award/rank/anesthesiology02.htm

1 ALBERT EINSTEIN COL OF MED $7,802,368
2 JOHNS HOPKINS $5,226,383
3 WASHINGTON UNIVERSITY $5,126,876
4 CORNELL $4,960,490
5 UCSF $4,888,226
6 UPENN $4,689,497
7 U WASHINGTON $4,569,254
8 U ALABAMA $3,608,645
9 DUKE $3,558,082
10 U IOWA $3,433,524
11 MC WISCONSIN $3,400,808
12 UNIV OF PITTSBURGH $3,161,513
13 U MICHIGAN $2,810,906
14 VANDERBILT $2,758,930
15 YALE $2,645,690
16 COLUMBIA $2,465,932
17 UCSD $2,227,084
18 NYU $2,144,192
19 UCLA $2,044,812
20 WAKE FOREST $1,861,694
21 STANFORD $1,846,694
22 UTAH $1,346,008
23 UC Davis $1,158,010
24 U TX GALVESTON $1,030,693
25 WAYNE STATE $949,713

 

[Fiberoptic]

I am surprised that Harvard University with reputed Anesthesia programs such as MGH and BWH has not featured on this list.

 

[huktonfonix]

Theyre probably rich as hell.

 

[drlard]

Harvard university is not on the list because this is a list of only university programs. The anesthesia research coming out of "harvard" is coming from Brigham and MGH, which are private entities. Harvard does not have its own hospitals, they instead have affiliations. MGH is #1 or #2 in anesthesia research. MGH is the bomb.

 

[Beantown]

Duke probably has the most prolific anesthesia reserch program in the country. The next question is how many of you are actually planning on doing funded research during your residency program? If your answer is no, then why would it matter how much NIH funding a program gets? NIH funding is usually for bench research. Like myself, I feel most of us would rather be handling laryngoscopes rather tha pipettes during residency.

 

[Tenesma]

MGH's anesthesia department has over 9.5 million in funded research per year... and that doesn't include the funded pain and critical care labs it doesn't hurt either that with the "invention" of nitric oxide, our chair (warren zapol) has been able to fund FOUR endowed chairs alone !!! more than any other dept. in the country

 

[VentdependenT]

Virginia Mason, need I say more.

 

[gaseous]

Originally posted by nodiggity
This is a previous poster's take on "top programs":
********************************************
********************************************
Academic anesthesiologists I have spoken to generally seem to stratify the outstanding programs into 3 tiers...

1) Best of the best: JHU, MGH, UCSF

2) Considered to be Elite programs: Alabama, Brigham, Columbia, Duke, Mayo, Michigan, Penn, Stanford, Wake Forest, U. Washington

3) Other excellent academic programs: Beth Israel, Cornell, Dartmouth, MC Wisconsin, Mt. Sinai, Northwestern, Penn State, UC Irvine, UCLA, UCSD, U. Chicago, U. Colorado, U. Florida, U. Iowa, UNC Chapel Hill, U. Pittsburgh, U. Rochester, U. Texas Galveston, Utah, UVA, Vanderbilt, Wash U, Yale
********************************************
******************************************
I think this list is pretty good overall for good programs nationwide. One could argue that some of these programs should be taken off while other could argue that some should be added.

Where you stratify the programs should be based on your experiences when you interview there. My "preseason" idealistic rank list has changed substantially since I started interviewing at the top programs. I would have easily ranked JH, MGH, BW in some order at the top of my list but after interviewing; Only 1 of these programs even cracked the top 3 and one I'm not even ranking at ALL. (please don't ask which one; I don't want to bad mouth any programs. Everyone experience is different)

In the end, research money is nice, but its all about how you fit when you go there and how happy you will be.

 

[Tenesma]

couldn't agree more with gaseous... if you aren't happy at home, you won't be happy at work... and if you aren't happy at work (even if it is a top program), you won't be happy at home...

you will get good training wherever you go, and job opportunities still abound...

 

[voltron]

According to my PD( from a school that ranks in the top 15 programs for anesthesia)

Top- UCSF, Stanford, Wash U, UPenn, B&W, MGH, UW(Seattle), JHU.

 

[ether]

Zapol has done some serious research on many things including Nitric Oxide and especially ECMO, but I think u may be wrong.

NO was founded by Furschgott in the 70's, which he called EDRF and Louis Ignario from UCLA found that EDRF was the same as NO.

They plus one other won the Nobel Prize for NO in the late 90s or in 2000's.

I don't believe ur boss is one of the nobel prize laurettes.

Correct me if I'm wrong.

 

[Gator05]

NO therapy here in the US can cost upwards of $2000 per day. Other countries: $12 per day. Are these other countries using the same iNO system we are?

 

[Tenesma]

you are absolutely right that Zappol didn't invent or discover nitric oxide, but he holds the most patents on nitric oxide delivery systems - thus the cash flow

 

[Med4ever]

Can anybody update this thread with new rankings after being on the interview trail. Also, what really defines that these programs as good?

 

[GasPundit]

Can anybody update this thread with new rankings after being on the interview trail. Also, what really defines that these programs as good?

Ah, the great question: what really defines that these programs are good?

You may have to back up for a moment, and ask what are you looking for in a program? And the step 2 steps forward, and ask, "What does it mean to be a good anesthesiologist? What does it mean to be well trained?" Then back one step, and you're that virtual particle floating between the chicken and the egg.

A strong program from the academic perspective is one strong in research, clinical experience, teaching, community service, financial strength, and administrative activity. These must necessarily be attached to strong universities.

But as an applicant, does this matter? After all, what are you looking for in a program? Does the name matter? Some will say absolutely, as with a strong program comes a strong reputation. But what REALLY is in a name? If your department is strong but trains anesthesiologists poorly, are you truly benefiting from the name? I would say perhaps in the interim until your peers realize your weaknesses.

Another issue I have with the elite programs comes from their research. I must say, academic anesthesiology is in an embarassing position. Most publications now in Anesthesiology are from outside US borders. Many departments seem to be struggling to fulfill the demands of supplying enough providers to the OR at the expense of allowing faculty sufficient time to develop academic goals.

What makes a good anesthesiologist? Let's say you're a PD who wants some followup on recent graduates. What do you ask? Is it simply the clinical acumen? Perhaps facility with procedures? Endurance? Patient-centered care? Financial-centered care? Research ability? Teaching ability?

Back to the original question. What defines these programs as good? I would say these rankings aren't for us. MGH tops the list, yet most of the other interviewers I meet on the trail either couldn't stand the place or won't even consider it. Many of the "third tier" programs at the same time are offering a solid caseload with no fellows, a fantastic relationship between residents and attendings, superb didactics with time to read, customized career planning and mentorship with excellent CA3 flexibility, and a great network of alumni both in academics and private practice. Aside from name recognition, what more does a "top-tier" program offer above these "third-tier" programs? Now, as a fellow I think it does make a difference, since this is the end ofyour formalized training, and you need to have the best environment possible to hone your research, administrative and clinical skills prior to leaping off into your own academic career.

I guess in the end it depends on your goals. Looking for an enjoyable residency that will train you to be a great anesthesiologist? Or are you looking to have a certain name on your wall, regardless of the learning environment?

Disclaimer: I'm not for or against any type of program, I'm just confused. Leaning more towards a private-practice type environment, perhaps with a fellowship in there. The big name programs simply don't seem to be offering much over the 2nd tier programs except for school colors. The expense, both financial and educational, does seem to be steep in some locations (Boston). I am confused.

 

[gaspasser2004]

I thought gaspundit had a well thought out and articulate post. I'd like to weigh in with my own opinions on the "best" programs. Full disclosure: I am currently a medicine intern and will be going to Hopkins in July.

1. "If you take the smartest resident, put him in the worst program, is he going to be the worst anesthesiologist? Likewise, if you take the biggest piece of **** and put him through MGH, is he going to be the best?"

This question was posed to me by an attending anesthesiologist at the University of Chicago and I think it holds true in many regards. The amount of time and effort one puts into learning anesthesia in and outside the hospital is largely up to the individual - great anesthesiologists put in a lot time learning their craft, average anesthesiologists put in the bare minimum. The resident who wants to learn will always read at home, will always volunteer for the toughest cases, and will always be on top when he or she gets out. When the resident graduates and becomes an attending, the institution where he or she trained now longer will be training them - it is ultimately up to the individual as to how good he or she wants to be when they are say, 45 years old.


2. One of the advantages of a "top name" program is the caseload and volume.

This is probably one of the most important reasons to me for choosing a "top" program. I think it is critical to have the opportunity to do the toughest cases on the sickest patients. There are only so many lap choles you can do before the learning curve is so maxed out it becomes scutwork. The big names have all the cutting edge surgeons and cases to provide anesthesia residents with amazing experience. You may not do these cases every day in private practice, but I have heard from anesthesiologists out in the "real world" that when the hypotensive ruptured AAA comes in, its important that it isn't the first, or even fifth time you have handled it.


3. Another advantage to a "top name" program is that they usually have strong research programs and prominent faculty researchers.

The benefits of the above are obvious to those who want to do research as a career, but still are important to those who won't. Being around research as a resident and learning what good research is and how it is produced first hand will help the resident identify good and bad research once he or she leaves the program. When I am a 50 year old attending anesthesiologist, I don't necessarily want to have been trained on how to PRODUCE research, but I sure would have wanted to be trained on how to IDENTIFY what makes good and bad research.


4. Whenever I have a difficult question regarding decisions in medicine, I put myself in an imaginary situation when I try to explain my choice to the patient.

Example: "Mr. Smith, I just want to let you know that last week I went to this really expensive dinner that cost $100 a person to hear someone sponsored by a drug company give me biased medical information on how I should care for patients. The drug company picked up my dinner tab and drinks at the bar when I got there a little early. I don't know whether or not that dinner is going to increase the cost of the drugs I prescribe to you, but it might. I just wanted to let you know."

I'm not Jesus or anything, and I do go to the drug dinners. However, that doesn't mean what I do is right.

Example #2: "Mr. Smith, before I wheel you back to the operating room, I want to tell you a little bit about my training and the attitudes I took when I chose my training. I was a really solid student in medical school and I could have gone to a top program to do my residency in anesthesiology. However, the cost of living was kind of high in the city where I would have gone and I heard that they made the residents learn, I mean work, too hard. So instead, I went to a lesser known program that was in a warmer climate and cheaper cost of living. They also let me out early every day. The faculty there didn't ride me so hard and even let me call them by their first names! But don't worry, I graduated when I was supposed to and got board certified on my first try. I would describe my skills as "adequate", maybe even "strong". You see, I wasn't interested in becoming the best anesthesiologist out there, I was just looking to find a high paying job and not have to go through too much hardship along the way. I hope that is okay with you, this is just a simple lap chole - its not like it is a whipple or anything."

People define excellence in different ways and it is not up to me to define what excellence is for you. For me, excellence is going to the program that is going to train you to be the best anesthesiologist you can be, regardless of how hard they make you work, regardless of how crappy a city it is in, regardless of how warm or cold it is, regardless of how your significant other feels about it, and regardless of how miserable you fear you life may be during residency.

 

[GasPundit]

Thanks for the props, gaspasser.

I guess my confusion comes against the bias I'm seeing towards the southeast and midwest programs. Medical disasters happen there as well, as does some fantastic research; the last Anesthesiology didn't have squat from Harvard, but it did have some stuff from Texas that was pretty interesting. And Texas does practice some pretty big medicine. But nothing from that state is "top tier". Same could be said for the clinical caseload at Miami, yet nobody (yet) is holding that program up as a "top 5".

It's sorta funny; everyone on the interview day says they work harder than everybody else. Everybody points to the program where you are done by 3pm daily. I've hit many to most of the programs on the East Coast; there is no such program. Actually, Duke may have one of the more controlled schedules of them all, and I don't hear anyone saying Duke is cush. I was told Wake Forest was "cush", but they take their share of call, and the residents state they invariably find themselves in the hospital at 5pm rather than out the door at 3pm. Some of the lowest acuity schedules I've seen are at big-name places.

Yes, I understand you don't want to go to podunk university for training. But I also think there are diminishing returns after a certain point. If you can cut your teeth as a CA1 with good intruction, have complex subspecialty cases every single day as a CA2, and arrange your CA3 year with complete flexability to satisfy your every whim in desired cases (rather than necessary ones), you've found a strong program. If you competently complete all of these, yet still put forth the effort to conduct research, enthusiastically teach, compassionately minister to your patients, and make your working environment a better than you left it, I believe you will find yourself respected as a great anesthesiologist.

 

[GasPundit]

One more thing...

Don't EVER disregard the importance of your spouse or significant other being happy with your new position!!! If he/she is not, you will simply not be as proficient in performing your duties as you could be.

If you look down on those who take this into concern, may God have Mercy when it is your turn to balance your spouse and medicine.

You don't have to move Bora Bora, but if your husband has SAD and you're planning on moving to Seattle, something's gotta give. Provided you're not a heartless mate, his unhappiness will be yours too, and this will affect your performance. If you are a heartless mate, I don't want you in the room when I go under.

 

[Med4ever]

Is cleveland clinic a top program? It is missing form the list I was wondering if there ws a reason for this? Is the training, research subpar?

 

[xampower]

Very well said gasspundit. In a perfect world with no outside pressures or interests we would all strive for programs that would allow us to be the best clinician, teacher, researcher etc etc. The reality is, at least in my life, I have many interests outside of medicine (ie family). If I were living in a vacuum my choices would be different. Cost of living, location to family, spouses happiness are all important and many time equally important to where I choose to interview. Gasspasser your #2 scenario to me sounds good but at the end of the day it is impractical. No one I know is making program decisions based purely on program alone.

 

[Vooder]

Is cleveland clinic a top program? It is missing form the list I was wondering if there ws a reason for this? Is the training, research subpar?

Med4ever, I have the same question!
After visiting the Cleveland Clinic I was really impressed!
They have very solid program: Huge hospital with about 70 ORs (inpatient and outpateint), excellent case load (including all weird cases), all possible fellowships (pain and cardio are the strongest), a lot of ongoing research (boht clinical and bench), well organized didactics, many brilliant attendings with all possible memberships and participations (ASA, ABA etc).
Also this program has other traits of top-notch: huge program (>25 residents), heavely overworked residents, fair amout of arrogant and distant faculty and attendings.
Obviously, Cleveland is not Boston or San Franisco, but cost of living make it even more attractive!
So what is a problem with this program? Why it is not included in all "top-tier" lists and ratings?
Any ideas?

 

[NYC_anest_2004]

The simple truth is this... You can and will get excellent training at the majority of residency programs. Arguing over which programs are "the best" is impossible, and truly pointless. There is really no difference in training between the top 30+ programs. I have been told this multiple times by multiple people - including several chairman/PDs. You can get a top notch fellowship or excellent job after graduating from the majority of the programs in the country.

So, what it ultimately comes down to is "What is the top program for ME?". That is far more difficult to answer. Don't go to a program for the "name" or the "reputation." You can go to the "top" program in the country, but if you are unhappy there, it will be a truly miserable. Pick a location that you want to be in. Pick an area where you will be happy. Pick a program where the residents seem happy, and seem like people you would enjoy spending time with. But, don't pick a program based on the name, as that is probably the least important aspect.

 

[johncunningham]

edit

 

[GasPundit]

Thanks for the awesome post, John. Really inspiring to hear about your decision process. I wouldn't knock BID; in talking with interviewers from last year, one told me there were only 2 programs you needed to really look at; BID and an unnamed program (for anonymity reasons) in the Southeast.

 

[Benjamin]

The Rank list is due tomorrow night (!), and I have no idea what to think about Temple and St. Lukes-Roosevelt. Someone please say something. Thanks!

I rarely post, but here is my take. I'm also all for full disclosure... I'm a prelim medicine intern in Boston, off to Beth Israel Deaconess next year.

I agree with most of what has been said, and would like to emphasize the considerations of one's spouse. I was seperated from my fiancee, now wife for the last two years of medical school. She in Boston, me in Philadelphia. When it came time to interview, I had ok numbers/grades/letters, and part of me wanted to apply to all the "big names". But, in reality I could only justify Philly, Boston, and perhaps New York. I, like most, cast a wide net, and when the interviews came in I decided against New York all together. I realize the above seems like a waste of time, but it helps to explain my two city application. Philly and Boston are the only places I interviewed.

Now, for my take, having seen Penn, Jeff, Temple, Brigham, (no MGH interview), BID, Tufts, BU, and UMass.

Penn: If my wife was out of the equation, Penn would have been my number one choice. peds at CHOP, Great hours, great attendings, great chair from Hopkins, lots of trauma, lots of pathology. Moreover, I love Philly, and I think the city is underrated. You can live in a great neighborhood, like Rittenhouse, and walk to work. The rent is fairly cheap, and there are tons of things to do. I think most would agree that Penn is a "great" program, likely "top tier", but my wife is an attorney in Boston, so I had to rank it second.

BID: Loved the program. Residents were super cool. Lots of good cases. Peds at Childrens. Stellar pain fellowship. Harvard affiliate. The list goes on.

Brigham: My pre-interview favorite. I can't describe the feeling I got there. It isn't fair to say that I felt intimidated, more like, I am just not that intense. I think of myself as a hard worker, but some of the residents were really really into what they do. I'm all for reading, and I know I will have to read on an almost daily basis to be adequately prepared, but these guys were reading articles on the T, reading at lunch, reading on coffee break...

BU: Very charismatic leadership. Clearly a program on the upswing. To review their recruiting is to see a big trend toward less FMGs. Lots of cases. Lots of Pathology, it is a city hospital. Great trauma. Almost no transplant. Also to Childrens for Peds. In the end, a good program that is training very skilled anesthesiologists. I was honestly unsure about the program being run by a private practice, and got the feeling that the residents were "worked" very hard without a great deal of "teaching".

Tufts: the leadership seemd weak. The peds seemed weak, even though they have the Floating Hospital. The attendings seemed disinterested. No Trauma. ?Neuro. Unsure of how they place for fellowship, but not a frontrunner in Boston.

UMass: "Worcester" case closed.

So... Whats the point? The "best" program for me was BID. It doesn't have the biggest name, the best location, the most patholgy, trauma, or the most well known attendings. But, having had the chance to see a number of well known programs, and a couple of "top tier" programs, it had the best fit for me, and also my wife. I have no regrets, and feel like I have made a good choice. Is it "top tier"? No. Is it a good solid program? Absolutely. Will it ensure that I become an "excellent" anesthesiologist? No, but it will give me all the opportunity I need. For me, Opportunity plus effort should yield success; professionally, academically, and financially.

Good luck to all the MS4's

John

 

[Idiopathic]

I would be interested in hearing any new additions to the top tiers. Has anyone's opinion changed?

 

[GuP]

bump for any changes

 

[sevoflurane]

I would be interested in hearing any new additions to the top tiers. Has anyone's opinion changed?

Although not a "Top Tier" program, University of Rochester is an excellent program with plenty of ASA III-IV / crazy-sick cases to go around. Lot's of regional. Board pass score this year was 100%.

 

[GuP]

Bump for any changes/additions/rants

 

[Purpose]

Can anyone compare UCIrvine vs USC vs Loma Linda in terms of reputation and future potential for a strong reputation in the coming few years. Can't decide if I should go for Cali or stick to the strong reputations from UPenn, Mich, Wake Forest, Cleveland Clinic, & Yale.

Thx

 

[Purpose]

.

 

[Laurel123]

After finishing residency and spending some time in a large private practice with people from all different types of residencies, I tend to believe that if you go to a good, stable residency with good volume, then the training is what you make of it. It is up to you how much you read, ask questions, go get the difficult cases, try different techniques while you are there. You can slide by in any program and no matter how good the reputation. Just my thoughts.

Now about academic and research, that is a different story and I don't know anything about that.

 

[GassiusClay]

After reading many of these posts, I'd like to add my story for any upcoming applicants that there is more than reputation alone.

I went on 10 interviews including some big name places. Programs such as Cleveland Clinic, BWH, UCSF, and Stanford do work their residents hard to a point where I didn't see much satisfaction on residents' faces. Some would try to brush it off as "well, it's only 3 years anyway." Others would be much more honest, and I realized that a lot more lurks beneath the facade of the interview day.

I understand that if your goal is to be a big dog in academics, you might be willing to suffer for 3 years. However, if you are going to do it so you can say, "I trained at Harvard or Hopkins," you might actually want to save yourself the trouble. This latter mentality really doesn't seem to hold up when you're a transplant with no connections in a new city. Two residents in Boston stated that moving there was not that great especially when you really don't know anyone after a year except your classmates, and they wanted to get back home real quick (Chicago and Seattle). I assume Boston is a very insular crowd, which wouldn't work for me. Quality of life does need to be addressed at some point, especially when it is 3 years.

Location, location, location including family needs should drive your choice for residency. There are very few programs that stink and so you should be able to get a good job at most places. Thus, I ended up ranking local #1, which I consider relatively second tier, even though stats would let me easily go to the "big" programs.

Always talk with residents in the same boat as you (single/married, local/transplant, age). You'll then get an idea if you really want to spend 3 years somewhere.

 

[pd4emergence]

For what it's worth check out some of these Southern programs: UVA, Alabama, Duke, Wake Forest, Florida. I have alot of friends and attendings who did their residency/fellowship in these places and are very well trained/good doctors. These were all at the top of my rank list. Good luck on the interview trail.

 

[DreamLover]

For what it's worth check out some of these Southern programs: UVA, Alabama, Duke, Wake Forest, Florida. I have alot of friends and attendings who did their residency/fellowship in these places and are very well trained/good doctors. These were all at the top of my rank list. Good luck on the interview trail.

For what it's worth, it's not like Alabama, Duke, and Wake Forest aren't some of the top programs in the country...I am sure you definitely would get good training there. People would be silly to think that by simply being in the south that their training would be inferior to the Northeast or Cali programs. Trust me! I'm from the south...people smoke, drink, eat lots of saturated fats and watch way too much television! There's plenty of pathology down here!! (plus the cost of living can't be beat, the people are laid back and the weather's not half bad)

Wow...I feel like I just did a little commercial for the south

 

[junebugjohnson]

Although I agree with many of the points made about the virtues of choosing a program that will make you happy, I also thing it is unwise to dismiss some of the real advantages of going to a "top" program.

It all depends on what you want to do with your career. If you are planning on banging out your four years of residency and then going on to a PP job in your small hometown or wherever you can land a position, then it probably doesn't matter too much where you train.

However, some job markets are highly sought after and difficult to crack (SF/Bay Area, NYC, SoCal, etc). I would have to think that, all other factors being equal, a graduate of say MGH or UCSF is going to get dibs on those positions over someone from a more "middle/lower" tier program. Whether it's justifiable or not, I believe there is truth to it.

Also, some of the toughest to get fellowships (Peds at CHOP) tend to take folks from bigger name places.

Like I said, it depends on what you want to do. In general, I think it's good advice to say that students should go to the programs that offer the maximal balance between personal happiness factors and great training/reputation. This way you maximize your residency experience and your future options.

 

[OldManDave]

Here's the 2002 Top 25 NIH award rankings among Anesthesiology Departments:

Gauging programs exclusively by NIH research dollars is probably a mistake. Most graduates of anesthesia programs do not spend their careers hunkered over a bench in some lab doing research. We go out into the real world, populated by human beings - not petri dishes, and take care folks in the OR, many of them sicker than snot.

 

[Stimulate]

I have always approached my training from a "keep my options open" point-of-view. When I started applying for residencies my goal was to go into a private general anesthesiology practice environment. I interviewed at some "easy" programs that were very appealing.

After much thought I decided to rank higher the big-name/work-you-to-the-bone type programs (where fellowship opportunities are plentiful) because I thought "what if I change my mind and want to do a fellowship or enjoy academics?".

I am glad I chose this route because sure enough I changed my mind and decided to pursue a very competitive fellowship-track. I never would have obtained my fellowship position had I come from a smaller, community-hospital based anesthesiology residency program. And for me having the option to practice in my speciality of choice was definitely worth the 3 year sacrifice.

 

[GassiusClay]

A previous post on the anti-midwest bias has me wondering what people from the coasts feel about Chicago programs, particularly PDs/chairs on this forum. I would say that those listed below do have quite a caseload compared to coastal programs minus UCSF, MGH, or JHU. However, people seem to blow them off. I'm thinking people's fear of cold weather, which happens to be just about as bad in NY and Boston, rather than the programs themselves. Wind is there, but certainly overrated.

Rush
Loyola
U of Chicago
Northwestern
UIC

Also, U of Washington (not STL) is considered good. Is it more their research or clinical learning? Three have told me that their interview experience emphasizes the former and nothing unique is brought up about the clinical portion (in comparison to midwest places). Plus, fellowship opportunities and placements are not so clear. Correct me if I'm wrong.

 

[darkmansaad]

does anyone know the relative difficulty of applying to each of the individual programs in nyc, i mean mt sinai is up there on the heap from what i have heard but can anyone gimme a ball park ranking? living in manhattan is my dream and doing anesthesia there would be a dream come true. so basically i wanna know where to aim and which schools i may not have "as hard" of a time as with others...

 

[VentdependenT]

A previous post on the anti-midwest bias has me wondering what people from the coasts feel about Chicago programs, particularly PDs/chairs on this forum. I would say that those listed below do have quite a caseload compared to coastal programs minus UCSF, MGH, or JHU. However, people seem to blow them off. I'm thinking people's fear of cold weather, which happens to be just about as bad in NY and Boston, rather than the programs themselves. Wind is there, but certainly overrated.

Rush
Loyola
U of Chicago
Northwestern
UIC

Also, U of Washington (not STL) is considered good. Is it more their research or clinical learning? Three have told me that their interview experience emphasizes the former and nothing unique is brought up about the clinical portion (in comparison to midwest places). Plus, fellowship opportunities and placements are not so clear. Correct me if I'm wrong.

If ya wanna stay in Chi town its Rush, NW, and UofC.

Loyola is supposed to be a good, but equally "hard working," program. Its just a bit outside of the city itself.

That all being said I liked UIC the best during interviews. How bout that eh?

 

[StealYourFace]

does anyone know the relative difficulty of applying to each of the individual programs in nyc, i mean mt sinai is up there on the heap from what i have heard but can anyone gimme a ball park ranking? living in manhattan is my dream and doing anesthesia there would be a dream come true. so basically i wanna know where to aim and which schools i may not have "as hard" of a time as with others...

addressing only the question of "relative difficulty", i would say from least competitive to most competitive:

st lukes > nyu > cornell > columbia > mt sinai

(thats not necessarily my opinion of which program is better than another, just which is harder to match into)

 

[HotFratBoy]

What is Emory's program like? Especially compared to the other southern programs like duke, wake, uva, etc?

thanks

 

[tennisnr]

Best of the Best? JHU, MGH, UCSF, Brigham?
Tier 1?
Tier 2?

 

[Jeff05]

any large program will train you to be a good anesthesiologist. people at harvard don't put in the tube better than people at penn state..
if you're interested in research/academics it's a different story.