Abstract
Background
It has become challenging for cardiovascular fellows-in-training (FIT) to determine which national cardiovascular conference (NCC) to attend given the broad range of meetings and the breadth of information offered. The aim of this study was to report our own experiences of the utility and individual strengths of the NCCs and to further understand the interventional cardiology (IC) FITs’ viewpoint regarding the benefits of the individual NCCs.
Methods
A survey was formulated with questions and scenarios regarding topics deemed to be of highest importance for an IC-FIT. The survey emphasized experiences regarding the utility and benefits of the NCCs, time management, optimization of acquired education, and specific interests in clinical and research topics. The completely anonymous survey was sent via an email format to a total of 234, majority of IC (fourth and fifth years) and a minority of general (third year), FITs.
Results
A completed survey response was received from 131 of the fellows (56%). The results demonstrated that the IC-FITs endorsed that the small, focused sub-specialty interventional meetings vs. the large society general meetings were more beneficial in regard to the didactic education offered. In addition, the IC-FITs indicated that pre-planning for the meetings is the most beneficial approach in optimizing one’s education and that the caliber of expert faculty, case-based and live-case presentations are among the most important aspects of the meetings.
Conclusions
Interventional cardiology FITs prefer the small sub-specialty interventional meetings over the large society general NCCs in regard to the benefits of didactic learning.
1
Introduction
National cardiovascular conferences (NCCs) organized by various cardiovascular societies are significant avenues for growth in the rapidly advancing career of a cardiovascular fellow-in-training (FIT). The largest NCCs include those organized by the major cardiovascular societies, such as the American College of Cardiology (ACC) and the American Heart Association (AHA). The ACC and AHA are the main comprehensive NCCs held annually. Furthermore, the interventional cardiology (IC) sub-specialty NCCs, including the Transcatheter Cardiovascular Therapeutics (TCT), Cardiovascular Research Technologies (CRT), and the Society for Cardiovascular Angiography and Interventions (SCAI), have been steadily attracting an increasing number of FITs interested in IC. Furthermore, the overall FIT landscape in these five conferences has changed over the past several years due to the increased impact of the sub-specialty conferences and the increased interest in various sub-specialty careers. It has become challenging for FITs to determine which conference to attend given the broad range of meetings and the breadth of information offered. We report the main factors – from the IC-FITs’ perspective – that may potentially influence the choice of meeting attendance, including: 1) our own experiences of the utility and individual strengths of the NCCs and 2) the best approach in optimizing an FIT’s education during the meetings, which is supported by findings from a FIT survey addressing pertinent factors regarding the NCCs.
2
The IC-FITs’ perspective and method of the FIT survey
Many anecdotal stories and experiences have accumulated from informal discussions among our FIT colleagues regarding the utility of NCCs attended throughout our residency, cardiology and IC fellowship training years. In an effort to specifically understand the IC-FIT’s perspective and to potentially help future conference attendees, we prepared a comprehensive survey with a formulated set of questions and scenarios regarding topics deemed to be of highest importance for a IC-FIT, including: experiences regarding the utility and benefits of NCCs, time management, optimization of acquired education, and specific interests in clinical and research topics. We anonymously sent the survey, via an email format by utilizing SurveyMonkey®, to a total of 234, majority of IC (fourth and fifth years) and a minority of general (third year), FITs who had attended the CRT 2015 annual symposium. A subsequent response was received from 131 of the fellows (56%). As a limitation, we recognize that these responses may be biased to our specific IC sub-specialty. However, given that the survey was sent in an email format from a general, non-specific source and was completely anonymous, it was deemed that the following responses may be of benefit for our selected topic.
2
The IC-FITs’ perspective and method of the FIT survey
Many anecdotal stories and experiences have accumulated from informal discussions among our FIT colleagues regarding the utility of NCCs attended throughout our residency, cardiology and IC fellowship training years. In an effort to specifically understand the IC-FIT’s perspective and to potentially help future conference attendees, we prepared a comprehensive survey with a formulated set of questions and scenarios regarding topics deemed to be of highest importance for a IC-FIT, including: experiences regarding the utility and benefits of NCCs, time management, optimization of acquired education, and specific interests in clinical and research topics. We anonymously sent the survey, via an email format by utilizing SurveyMonkey®, to a total of 234, majority of IC (fourth and fifth years) and a minority of general (third year), FITs who had attended the CRT 2015 annual symposium. A subsequent response was received from 131 of the fellows (56%). As a limitation, we recognize that these responses may be biased to our specific IC sub-specialty. However, given that the survey was sent in an email format from a general, non-specific source and was completely anonymous, it was deemed that the following responses may be of benefit for our selected topic.
3
Paradigm shift in the realm of NCCs
The balance between time allotted and the quality of learning is becoming the cornerstone in the decision to attend an NCC. Other explanations that may contribute to the variability of FIT conference attendance are the growth of digital and virtual technologies, such as video conferences and recorded presentations, and research social networks (e.g. researchgate.net ) that allow teaching and sharing science without the need for long and expensive travel, or invitation for an abstract presentation. Moreover, many IC-FITs prefer the sub-specialized, rather than general meetings for their didactic learning, which are more focused on IC ( Fig. 1 ). Of note, the general attendance at the largest NCCs over the past few years has recently declined from about 19,000 attendees in 2011 to about 17,000 in 2014 for the AHA and from about 20,000 in 2014 to about 19,000 attendees in 2015 for the ACC . Conversely, the sub-specialty IC meetings appear to be stable or increasing in attendance including: 10,300 participants in 2014 vs. 11,000 in 2015 for TCT and 1500 participants in 2013 vs. 2000 in 2015 for the CRT ; and the SCAI meeting attendance also increased by 25% from 2013 to a total of 1800 in 2014 .
