Pain Medicine, a field that was once considered primarily a specialty of opioid medication management, evolved into a multimodal care model with the goal of limiting reliance on pain medications. Now, we see another revolution-the advancement from percutaneous procedures to minimally invasive surgical procedures. Despite these changes, Pain Medicine fellowships have consistently been recognized as a competitive subspecialty with more applicants than the number of available positions - until now. The most recent pain fellowship match suggests an abrupt change to the popularity of the specialty (with over 61 unmatched positions and over 35 unfilled programs) for applicants expected to matriculate in the year 2024 [1]. Unfilled positions have risen from 5% to 15% in the past three years. Similarly, unfilled programs have risen from 10% to 30% in the past three years. Several reasons for this sudden change in popularity have been proposed, including a lucrative general anesthesiology market, increasing difficulties with insurance coverage and reimbursement for procedures, and a dearth of advanced pain procedures performed at academic medicine programs. The field is at a critical juncture, necessitating ongoing discussions and collaboration among stakeholders to ensure that trainees are attracted to this dynamic field and are ultimately equipped to meet the evolving needs of patients.

Introduction

Applicants to chronic pain medicine fellowship programs often express confusion regarding the importance of various selection criteria. This study sought to elucidate program directors' considerations in applicant selection for fellowship interviews and ranking and to correlate these criteria with match statistics to provide a guide for prospective candidates.

Methods

An electronic survey was sent to all Accreditation Council for Graduate Medical Education-accredited chronic pain fellowship directors. The importance of various applicant characteristics were evaluated and compared with recent match data.

Results

Fifty-seven program directors completed the survey. The most important factors involved in applicant interview selection were perceived commitment to the specialty, letters of recommendation from pain faculty, scholarly activities, and leadership experiences. Although completion of a pain rotation was valued highly, experience with procedures was of relatively low importance. There was no preference if rotations were completed within the responders' department. Variability was noted when considering internal applicants or the applicant's geographic location. When citing main factors in ranking applicants, interpersonal skills, interview impression and applicant's fit within the institution were highly ranked by most responders.

Discussion

Assessment of an applicant's commitment to chronic pain is challenging. Most responders prioritize the applicant's commitment to chronic pain as a specialty, scholarly activity, participation in chronic pain rotations, pain-related conferences and letters of recommendation from pain faculty. Chronic pain medicine fellowship candidates should establish a progressive pattern of genuine interest and involvement within the specialty during residency training to optimize their fellowship match potential.