PulseExploreJournal ClubDebatesTrendingResearchersJournals
Instagram
HomeExploreJournal ClubTrending
Synapse
⌘+K
Synapse
May 7, 2026Plastic & Reconstructive Surgery Global Open1 citationsOpen Access

Faculty Recruitment and Retention in Academic Plastic Surgery

View Full Paper
AEAbdulaziz ElemoshoAMAmy M. MooreJJJeffrey E. Janis

Key Points

  • The study aims to analyze factors affecting faculty recruitment and retention in academic plastic surgery programs.
  • Distributed a 29-item electronic survey to plastic surgery program chairs and chiefs
  • Assessed trends in hiring, resignation, compensation, mentorship, and retention strategies over the past decade
  • Achieved a 43.8% response rate from 35 programs
  • Faculty recruitment primarily at assistant professor level, averaging 1.7 new hires annually
  • Retention rates dropped from 95.8% at 1 year to 61.1% at 10 years
  • Top reasons for departure included family considerations (54.3%) and inadequate compensation (34.3%)
  • Formal retention committees present in only 8.6% of programs

Abstract

Background: Academic plastic surgery continues to face challenges in recruiting and retaining faculty. Although prior studies have reported rising faculty attrition, updated national data in academic plastic surgery reflecting recent workforce and institutional changes are lacking. Methods: A 29-item electronic survey was distributed in March to April of 2025 to chairs and chiefs of Accreditation Council for Graduate Medical Education-accredited plastic surgery programs. The survey assessed trends during the past decade in faculty hiring, resignation, compensation, mentorship, benefits, and retention strategies. Results: Thirty-five programs (43.8% response rate) were included. Faculty recruitment was concentrated at the assistant professor level, with an average of 1.7, 4.3, and 6.5 faculty added during the past 1, 5, and 10 years, respectively. Concurrently, faculty losses averaged 0.4, 2.2, and 3.0, with turnover rates of 4.2%, 29.1%, and 38.9% during the past 1, 5, and 10 years, respectively. Retention rates declined over time, from 95.8% at 1 year to 61.1% at 10 years, with only 8.6% of programs having a formal retention committee. Family considerations (54.3%) and inadequate compensation (34.3%) were the most cited reasons for faculty departure. Reported retention strategies included competitive compensation packages (80.0%), professional development initiatives (74.3%), mentorship programs (65.7%), and work-life balance accommodations (45.7%), awards and recognition (37.1%), and flexible scheduling (28.6%). Conclusions: Despite continued faculty growth, long-term retention remains a significant challenge in academic plastic surgery. Compensation alone does not seem sufficient to ensure faculty longevity. Broader institutional strategies, including formal retention committee creation, are needed to sustain faculty engagement and ensure workforce stability in the decade ahead.

Ask AI
Helpful
Bookmark
Share
View Full Paper

Cite This Study

Elemosho et al. (2026) studied this question.

synapsesocial.com/papers/69fbe357164b5133a91a286ehttps://doi.org/10.1097/gox.0000000000007681
Ask AI
Helpful
Bookmark
Share
View Full Paper

Also Consider

Synapse has enriched 5 closely related papers on similar clinical questions. Consider them for comparative context:

  1. 1Reimagining Recruitment and Retention in Academic Plastic Surgery2026
  2. 2Compensation Structures, Job Satisfaction, and Retention of Facial Plastic Surgeons in Academic Practices2026
  3. 3A Work in Progress: Women's Status in the Plastic Surgery Workforce and Recommendations for Success2024 · 8 citations
  4. 4Salary Disparities in Academic Plastic Surgery2025
  5. 525. Building the Plastic Surgeon-Scientist Pipeline: MD/PhD Recruitment and Representation in U.S. Plastic Surgery Residency Programs2026