Results of a Post Graduate Survey of Prior OBGYN Hospitalists Fellows

Introduction: OBGYN hospitalist fellowships have been in existence since 2013 and there are currently 18 active fellowships listed on the Society of OBGYN Hospitalist’s (SOGH) website. Several of these fellowships were created in recent years, while other programs launched and shortly closed due to insufficient recruitment. OBGYN hospitalist fellowships are designed to train future leaders in inpatient obstetric and gynecologic care, particularly in acute and emergent settings. In addition to clinical training, fellowships focus on leadership development, simulation-based education, and research experience. To date, there is no published literature on fellows’ satisfaction with their training and career trajectory following fellowship completion.

Objective: Our study has two objectives: first, to assess past fellows’

overall satisfaction with their training programs and across key requirements—advanced clinical skills, research, quality improvement, simulation, and leadership; second, to examine and describe post-graduation career paths and to evaluate leadership positions attained by fellowship graduates.

Methods: The study was approved by the NYU Langone Long Island IRB as an expedited study. The survey was additionally approved by the SOGH Fellowship Committee and the SOGH Board of Directors prior to distribution. The 18-question survey was first sent on 3/19/26, with two subsequent reminder emails sent to nonrespondents. Valid email addresses were available for 32 of 35 fellowship graduates. The survey collected demographics, career characteristics, leadership roles, and satisfaction with fellowship, both overall and by training domain, using a 5-point Likert scale. Survey responses were collected securely in RedCap.

Results: Of 32 survey invitations, 16 were completed (50% response rate). Mean age was 38.3 (SD 3.68), 81.3% identified as female, and fellows most commonly did fellowship in the West (n=8, 50%). Neither gender nor residency training location had any statistically significant differences on survey results. Overall, 87.5% reported being satisfied or very satisfied with fellowship training. Fellowship training was perceived to have a very positive

or extremely positive impact on job opportunities by 81.3% of respondents, and 81.3% also reported feeling very or extremely prepared for their first position following fellowship. Mentorship was the most frequently cited strength of fellowship training, whereas research experience was the least valuable component. When asked to rate their training, fellows scored quality improvement training the highest mean rating (4.00 ± 0.73), followed closely by education/teaching (3.94 ± 0.93). Although leadership training was scored the lowest mean (3.38 ± 1.02), 56.3% of graduates held at least one leadership position following graduation. Leadership positions held by graduates were quite varied and included division director, associate program director, fellowship program director and various medical director roles.

Discussion: Fellows were overall satisfied with their training and over half assumed leadership roles after fellowship. Mentorship and training in quality improvement were both reviewed favorably by fellows, suggesting that these may be key elements for those seeking to build a successful hospitalist fellowship program. Given that fellows identified research education as the lowest-value domain, strategic improvement in this area may be key in enhancing future fellow recruitment. Future studies should explore whether modifications to research curricula could improve fellow satisfaction and program attractiveness. Limitations include the small sample size, potential response bias, and reliance on self-reported outcomes.