Virtual Interviews for Surgical Fellowship are an Acceptable Alternative to In-Person Interviews for Applicants and...

Background: In-person interviews have traditionally been an integral part of the fellowship application process to allow faculty and applicants to interact and evaluate the intangible aspects of the matching process. COVID-19 has forced a transition away from in-person interviews to a virtual platform. This study sought to track faculty and applicant perspectives on this transition. Study Design: Prospectively collected survey data was obtained from all participants after each of 3 consecutive virtual interview days for minimally invasive surgery fellowship at a single academic institution. Results: One hundred percent (27/27 applicants and 9/9 faculty) of interview participants completed the survey. Cost (100% applicants, 77.8% faculty) was perceived as the greatest barrier to in-person interviews, and "inability to get a feel for the program/applicant" was the largest concern for virtual interviews (66.7% applicants, 88.9% faculty). After interviews, most participants strongly agreed that they were able to assess education (66.7% applicants, 77.8% faculty), clinical experience (70.4% applicants, 77.8% faculty), and research potential (70.4% applicants, 88.9% faculty) through the virtual platform. Only 44.4% of each group strongly agreed that they could assess "overall fit" equally as well. Most faculty (6/9, 66.7%), but fewer applicants (10/27, 37.0%), were willing to completely eliminate in-person interviews. Conclusion: Virtual interviews may be an acceptable alternative to in-person interviews in times of COVID-19 and beyond. Offering a virtual format may help to eliminate costs associated with in-person visits while adequately assessing the fit of a program for both applicants and faculty, though applicants still desire an in-person option.