• Alexander P Kenigsberg, Roger K Khouri, Amy Kuprasertkul, Daniel Wong, Vishnu Ganesan, and Gary E Lemack.
• Department of Urology, University of Texas Southwestern Medical Center, Dallas, TX.
• Urology. 2020 Sep 1; 143: 55-61.

ObjectiveTo evaluate urology applicants' opinions about the interview process during the COVID-19 pandemic.Material And MethodsAn anonymous survey was emailed to applicants to our institution from the 2019 and 2020 urology matches prior to issuance of professional organization guidelines. The survey inquired about attitudes toward the residency interview process in the era of COVID-19 and which interview elements could be replicated virtually. Descriptive statistics were utilized.ResultsEighty percent of urology applicants from the 2019 and 2020 matches received our survey. One hundred fifty-six people (24% of recipients) responded. Thirty-four percent preferred virtual interviews, while 41% in-person interviews at each program, and 25% regional/centralized interviews. Sixty-four percent said that interactions with residents (pre/postinterview social and informal time) were the most important interview day component and 81% said it could not be replicated virtually. Conversely, 81% believed faculty interviews could be replicated virtually. Eighty-seven percent believed that city visits could not be accomplished virtually. A plurality felt that away rotations and second-looks should be allowed (both 45%).CommentApplicants feel that faculty interviews can be replicated virtually, while resident interactions cannot. Steps such as a low-stakes second looks after programs submit rank lists (potentially extending this window) and small virtual encounters with residents could ease applicant concerns.ConclusionApplicants have concerns about changes to the match processes. Programs can adopt virtual best practices to address these issues.Copyright © 2020 Elsevier Inc. All rights reserved.

21 keywords...

hide…