Is Plastic Surgery Training Equitable? An Analysis of Health Equity across US Plastic Surgery Residency Programs

Achieving health equity includes training surgeons in environments exemplifying access, treatment, and outcomes across the racial, ethnic, and socioeconomic spectrum. Increased attention on health equity has generated metrics comparing hospitals. To establish the quality of health equity in plastic and reconstructive surgery (PRS) residency training, we determined the mean equity score (MES) across training hospitals of US PRS residencies. METHODS: The 2021 Lown Institute Hospital Index database was merged with affiliated training hospitals of US integrated PRS residency programs. The Lown equity category is composed of three domains (community benefit, inclusivity, pay equity) generating a health equity grade. MES (standard deviation) was calculated and reported for residency programs (higher MES represented greater health equity). Linear regression modeled the effects of a program’s number of training hospitals, safety net hospitals, and geographical region on MES. RESULTS: The MES was 2.64 (0.62). An estimated 5.9% of programs had an MES between 1–2. In total, 56.5% of programs had an MES between 2 and 3, and 37.7% had an MES of 3 or more. The southern region was associated with a higher MES compared with the reference group (Northeast) (P = 0.03). The number of safety net hospitals per program was associated with higher MES (P = 0.02). CONCLUSIONS: Two out of three programs train residents in facilities failing to demonstrate high equity healthcare. Programs should promote health equity by diversifying care delivery through affiliated hospitals. This will aid in the creation of a PRS workforce trained to provide care for a socioeconomically, racially, and ethnically diverse population.