Related Experiment Video
Updated: Jun 5, 2026
Autologous Microfractured and Purified Adipose Tissue for Arthroscopic Management of Osteochondral Lesions of the Talus
Published on: January 23, 2018
Orthopaedic in-training examination: an analysis of the sports medicine section
Daryl C Osbahr1, Michael B Cross, Asheesh Bedi
1Hospital for Special Surgery, New York, NY, USA. osbahrd@gmail.com
Background:
Since 1963, the Orthopaedic In-Training Examination (OITE) has been administered to orthopaedic residents to assess resident knowledge and measure the quality of teaching within individual programs. The OITE has evolved dramatically over the years and now maintains a standardized format consisting of 275 questions divided among 12 sections.
Purpose:
To provide a detailed analysis of the OITE sports medicine section to identify patterns in question content, recommended references, and resident performance.
Study Design:
Cross-sectional study.
Methods:
All OITE sports medicine questions from 2005 to 2009 were analyzed, and the following data were recorded: resident performance scores, tested topics, type of imaging modalities, tested treatment modalities, taxonomy classification, and recommended references.
Results:
From 2005 to 2009, the sports medicine section composed 7.8% of the OITE. Mean resident performance on the entire OITE as well as on the sports medicine section improved during each year of training. Imaging modalities typically involved questions on radiographs and magnetic resonance imaging and constituted 27.4% of the OITE sports medicine section. Treatment modalities involved 36.8% of the OITE sports medicine section questions, including most treatment questions relating to ligament reconstruction or rehabilitation. The authors' assessment of taxonomy classification showed that recall-type questions were most common; however, mean resident performance was minimally affected by type of taxonomy question. Finally, there were trends noted in recommended references; namely, the American Journal of Sports Medicine and Orthopaedic Knowledge Update Sports Medicine were the most commonly and consistently cited journal and review book, respectively.
Conclusion:
The current study provides some unique information relating to content, recommended references, and resident performance on the OITE sports medicine section. It is hoped this information will provide orthopaedic trainees, orthopaedic residency programs, and the American Academy of Orthopaedic Surgeons Evaluation Committee valuable information relating to improving resident knowledge and performance and optimizing sports medicine educational curricula.
