Is there an impending loss of academically productive trauma surgical faculty? An analysis of 4, 015 faculty. Issue 2 (August 2016)

• Record Type: Journal Article
• Authors: Valsangkar, Nakul P.; Blanton, Casi; Mayo, John S.; Rozycki, Grace S.; Bell, Teresa M.; Zimmers, Teresa A.; Feliciano, David V.; Koniaris, Leonidas G.
• Is Part Of: Journal of trauma and acute care surgery. Volume 81:Issue 2(2016:Aug.)
• Publication Date: 2016-08
• Subjects: Academic productivity -- H-index -- NIH-funding -- scholarship -- trauma; Surgical intensive care -- Periodicals; Surgical emergencies -- Periodicals; Wounds and injuries -- Surgery -- Periodicals; 617.026
• DOI: 10.1097/TA.0000000000001117
• Languages: English
• ISSNs: 2163-0755

Abstract

Abstract : OBJECTIVE: The aim of this work was to compare the academic impact of trauma surgery faculty relative to faculty in general surgery and other surgery subspecialties. METHODS: Scholarly metrics were determined for 4, 015 faculty at the top 50 National Institutes of Health (NIH)-funded university-based departments and five hospital-based surgery departments. RESULTS: Overall, 317 trauma surgical faculty (8.2%) were identified. This compared to 703 other general surgical faculty (18.2%) and 2, 830 other subspecialty surgical faculty (73.5%). The average size of the trauma surgical division was six faculty. Overall, 43% were assistant professors, 29% were associate professors, and 28% were full professors, while 3.1% had PhD, 2.5% had MD and PhD, and, 16.3% were division chiefs/directors. Compared with general surgery, there were no differences regarding faculty academic levels or leadership positions. Other surgical specialties had more full professors (39% vs. 28%; p < 0.05) and faculty with research degrees (PhD, 7.7%; and MD and PhD, 5.7%). Median publications/citations were lower, especially for junior trauma surgical faculty (T) compared with general surgery (G) and other (O) surgical specialties: assistant professors (T, 9 publications/76 citations vs. G, 13/138, and O, 18/241; p < 0.05), associate professors (T, 22/351 vs. G, 36/700, and O, 47/846; p < 0.05), and professors (T, 88/2, 234 vs. G, 93/2193; p = NS [not significant for either publications/citations] and O, 99/2425; p = NS). Publications/Citations for division chiefs/directors were comparable with other specialties: T, 77/1, 595 vs. G, 103/2, 081 and O, 74/1, 738; p = NS, but were lower for all nonchief faculty; T, 23/368 vs. G, 30/528 and O, 37/658; p < 0.05. Trauma surgical faculty were less likely to have current or former NIH funding than other surgical specialties (17 % vs. 27%; p < 0.05), and this included a lower rate of R01/U01/P01 funding (5.5% vs. 10.8%; p < 0.05). CONCLUSIONS: Senior trauma surgical faculty are as academically productive as other general surgical faculty and other surgical specialists. Junior trauma faculty, however, publish at a lower rate than other general surgery or subspecialty faculty. Causes of decreased academic productivity and lower NIH funding must be identified, understood, and addressed. Abstract : Supplemental digital content is available in the text.