Leadership Roles, Academic Appointments, and Scholarly Activity—Does a Fellowship after Plastic Surgery Training Make a Difference?

Background Fellowship training is becoming more popular in plastic surgery, with over half of residents pursuing advanced training. Here, we investigate how clinical and research fellowship training impacts career trajectory and scholastic achievement in academic plastic surgery. Methods Plastic surgery faculty members, from programs recognized by the American Council of Academic Plastic Surgeons, were identified using institutional Web sites. Data extracted included faculty demographics, training history, academic positions, and research productivity. Continuous and categorical variables were compared using t -tests and chi-square, respectively. Results In total, 949 faculty members were included, with 657 (69%) having completed fellowship training. Integrated program residents were more likely to complete a fellowship when compared with independent residents ( p < 0.0001). Fellowship trained faculty were more likely to have graduated from a higher ranked residency program, in terms of both overall and research reputation ( p = 0.005 and p = 0.016, respectively). When controlling for years in practice, there was no difference found in number of publications, Hirsch index (h-index), or National Institutes of Health funding between faculty between the two cohorts ( p > 0.05). In a subanalysis comparing hand, craniofacial, microsurgery, and research fellowships, those who completed a research fellowship had higher h-indices and were more likely to reach full professor status ( p < 0.001 and p = 0.001, respectively). Fellowship training had no effect on being promoted to Chief/Chair of departments ( p = 0.16). Conclusion Fellowship training is common among academic plastic surgeons. In this study, both clinical and research fellowships were associated with various aspects of academic success. However, fellowship training alone did not affect attainment of leadership positions.