Background: Eight Global Ophthalmology (GO) fellowship programs are available in the United States, and more than 30 U.S. GO fellows are now alumni. There are no standardized learning objectives for these programs, and fellows’ experiences vary widely between institutions. Purpose: To survey GO fellowship program directors in the United States to elucidate differences in learning objectives, duration of time abroad, funding sources, and other differences between GO fellowships. Methods: All program directors at all institutions with current GO fellowship programs in the United States were sent a 25-question questionnaire via email from October through December 2022. The questionnaire included distinct domains regarding the GO fellowship experience, care delivery, didactics, and best practices. Most questionnaire items were quantitative; 3 were qualitative. Responses to the quantitative and qualitative questions items were summarized descriptively. Results: All 10 program directors from the 8 GO fellowship programs that were current at the time of the survey participated. GO fellowship positions at most (88%) institutions were funded, in part, by the billing of care services provided by the fellows, with 50% of programs receiving supplemental funding from donations and 25% from nongovernmental organizations. Non-GO duties at the program home institutions constituted 29.5% of the time spent during the fellowships, on average. Policy advocacy occupies 2.3% of fellowship time, on average. Specific didactic topics covered in the GO programs and director perspectives on the pragmatic best practices for GO outreach varied considerably; however, inclusion of at least some public health topics and ethics appeared to be consistent among all of the programs. Conclusions: These findings provide insights into the landscape of GO fellowship programs in the United States, highlighting variations in funding, formal educational opportunities, and the allocation of time fellows spent working at the program home institution. Establishing standardized core competencies for fellows is recommended.
Bernhisel et al. (Tue,) studied this question.