Operative experience at UCLA is getting better every year as they are very proactive about improving it. UCSF's SF General experience is brutal and you spend like 3 mos there every year... ya SF is a good city but you won't get to experience it much. Out of those 3, I'd say UCLA is the strongest as has no issues with its reputation IMO.

Operative experience at UCLA is getting better every year as they are very proactive about improving it. UCSF's SF General experience is brutal and you spend like 3 mos there every year... ya SF is a good city but you won't get to experience it much. Out of those 3, I'd say UCLA is the strongest as has no issues with its reputation IMO.

Btw, these are just simple opinions based on personal experience and are likely not shared by everyone. All 3 of the programs are outstanding and you'd be honored to train at any of them.

So I rotated at UCSF, and interviewed at the others.

I rotated at SFGH for the month and I've gotta tell you...it aint that bad. Sure its bad for the students because they're killing themselves because they're trying to make the cut, but from a residents perspective I think its okay. They round early, and take a lot of call in their second year, but who doesn't? Its a level one county facility. I would say if you don't want to go to a trauma heavy program you might consider rotating somewhere else but I don't think its much harder than other, legitimate programs.

I interviewed at Stanford and loved it aswell. The only thing that worried me is what you've eluded to. When I talked to my mentors from my home programs they said "haven't heard good things about stanford" and "I've heard thats a fellow heavy program" which scared me.

UCLA was a good experience but I had similar conversations with my chairmen about them. My Chairmen sat us all down and said "be very cautious about UCLA" which I don't know is warranted or not...but that is the national perception of that program. When you're coming out of residency for Fellowship that isn't what you want YOUR perception to be.

JMO though so don't blast me.

I rotated at UCSF, interviewed at UCSF and UCLA.

I thought UCSF was a great program, however one thing to consider is that they seem to interview less than 50% of rotators. Just something to consider. I think if you do not have the paper application to get an interview there, having a great rotation may not rescue you from that.

That said, I agree with all the pro's about UCSF. As far as the cost of living, they do provide a housing stipend so that might help. I disagree about less cohesive residents - I thought the residents at UCSF got along very well in the hospital. Having rotated other places you can feel the tension when its there and at UCSF I didn't get that vibe at all. I was at SFGH so I met like 15 different residents during my time there and I liked all of them personality wise.

In terms of the lifestyle issue, as I said I was at SFGH, and it didn't seem brutal to me at all, at least by the standards of ortho residency. I can only compare it to the other places I rotated - of the 3 places I rotated, UCSF had by far the best lifestyle. The other thing is, to me lifestyle is not just # of hours, but also working conditions. At SFGH, the attendings all seemed pretty reasonable and non malignant.

As far as UCLA, I don't know where you heard their reputation was not the best. It is one of the most prestigious residencies in the country. It is another place though, that places a lot of emphasis on the paper app, even if you rotate there. I heard this both from current residents on my interview day and from faculty advisors at my home school. So if you don't have good stats I don't know if I would recommend rotating there.

I ranked both of these places highly. Guess I'll find out next week whether they liked me back.

Concerns about UCLA may be due to their ongoing chairman issues. The most recent permanent chairman lasted about a year from what I was told, then either resigned or was forced out. Doesn't speak well of the department as a whole, but may not be as important to the residency training per se if the rest of the faculty is stable. Operative experience, again from what I was told, is still an issue but may be getting a little better. LA is a nice place to live.

Stanford is improving as well, but remains the least academic of the three (which might be a good thing for some) and has the least strong reputation according to faculty I trust. Residents still get good fellowships in spite of this. It is gradually becoming more "hard core", but still has a ways to go before it has the same national rep as the other two. Institutional "memory" takes a while to fade, and Stanford used to be a very cush, lifestyle over academics program. PA is a little too suburban for me, but another nice place to live.

UCSF has the reputation of having the best operative experience, particularly early in training (seems to be true from what I saw and what rotators and residents say). As is often mentioned in other threads, the chief residents in this program can really operate with confidence. Agree with what the others have said about the lack of brutality--maybe the work hours rules are an equalizer of sorts. Also agree that the resident and faculty research was strongest here. The residents I worked with were all terrific, really enjoyed (and were proud of) being at UCSF, and liked hanging out with each other. SF is one of the coolest cities in the world, and the residents do have time to enjoy it. UCSF was the best fit for me--hope I did well enough to match there. Don't know about prior years, but was told that this year they interviewed between two-thirds and three-quarters of the rotators--way better odds than something like 5% for non-rotators.

Can any current UCLA med students or residents chime in?

Not really sure about Stanford or UCLA having poor reputations. Although word is certainly out about UCLA's recent, now former, uber-douchy chairman that was previously mentioned in this thread.

All three programs, esp UCLA and UCSF, screen hard with their paper application process, but still let you rotate even if you are bad on paper. Then they simply don't invite you back, even if you do a great job and everybody loves you

Regarding Stanford vs UCSF, they have different strengths. Stanford is suburban, and much stronger at Sports and Upper Extremity, whereas UCSF is stronger at Arthroplasty and Spine (reconstruction and trauma's not bad either).

UCLA, on paper, is ranked the highest (per the past US N&W rankings) for ortho hospitals. for whatever its worth

reviving this thread. i am interested in these programs and also USC.

i am decent on paper for my application. i have a 265 step 1, mostly honors in M3, all pass (p/f school) for my preclinical years. i have a first author non ortho basic science publication, a dozen basic science abstracts/posters, and a couple of drafted manuscripts in plastic surgery that i'm trying to get published now (i'll be first author).

given my overall application, what would people recommend for away rotations? i have already done a 2 week rotation at my home program, and i'll do another 1 month with my home program before doing 1-2 aways. i'll have 2 well known attendings from my home program writing letters from me, so i'm mostly targeting programs so i can get interviews/match rather than get letters. only weird thing about my application is that i'm not from california (new england growing up, undergrad, med school). i am couples matching with my SO who is from california and wants to be closer to her family (she is applying rads, her credentials similar to mine). i have no preference geographically, i just want to be well trained.

thoughts on UCLA, USC, UCSF, Stanford for aways? also anyone hear of people rotating at UCLA or USC then not getting interviewed from the other program in LA for not rotating with them? anything like that with stanford vs UCSF?

thanks!

Just my opinion:

This isn't even close. UCSF is the best residency on the West Coast. Stanford and UCLA are two of the worst. UCSF has a great fellowship list and they operate a ton. They, along with UCI have the reputation at the most operative residencies in the West.

I have friends currently at and just recently graduated from UCLA and Stanford. A chief at Stanford once told me, "the only part of a case I feel comfortable with is the post-op orders." He was miserable there. Sports and hand are strong there. Upper extremity/SE is not. Their trauma service is a constant battle between Belino and Lowenberg (sp?). The same chief told me it was like being a child and hearing mommy and daddy fight all the time.

UCLA has long been known as a non-op residency but from what I hear it is getting better. However, I wouldn't consider it a "top notch place." Their fellowship list isn't great, and from what I hear its just getting worse.

Unfortunately the West Coast is struggling a bit. UCSF remains the strongest. UW and USC are struggling with faculty turnover and leadership issues. I've heard good things about UCI's operative experience but not an academic place. UCSD also having problems. Haven't heard much on Oregon.

I couldn't disagree more with the post above.

I interviewed/rotated at UCSF, had friends who rotated, and have current friends who are there. I am also at a residency with people who rotated/interview at UCSF. It has a strong brand name, with good operative experience, but most of the people I talked with were underwhelmed. Some ranked this near the bottom. Trauma is ~4 months per year, but many of the attendings are double-boarded and will do sports/spine/joints cases. I didn't see one tibial plateau my entire month there, but what you see is so variable as you only spend one month there.

UCLA has a strong brand name, anything to the contrary seems ridiculous. I interviewed there and was really impressed. Some of my friends are PGY-2s there, and are doing scoli cases with attending, each doing their side. They are doing hemis by themselves with the attending not even in the room, and just heard their OITE scores were off the charts.

UW was amazing. I rotated there and loved it. There has been a lot of faculty turnover and a recent lawsuit against the chairman that has made things complicated. On trauma I definitely felt as though the attendings were doing >50% of the cases, but their volume is unmatched, and their residents are some of the smartest I encountered.

USC has great operative experience, probably the best out of all. But they had a mass exodus of faculty, and their didactics are terrible. Their OITE scores are generally very poor, and the program is very trauma based.

I did not interview at Stanford nor do I know anyone who is currently there. I have a few friends who rotated there, with half loving it and half saying it was terrible. It's hard to make a judgement as I haven't been there.

I would say tread lightly when listening to advice from people who are not residents at the program, who did not interview there, or who did not directly rotate. Out of UCSF, UCLA, USC, and Stanford, I would probably pick UCLA. I also completely disagree that the west coast is hurting, as many of the east coast programs were underwhelming, and many of my friends that are there are unhappy. That's not to say there aren't amazing east coast programs. Choose the right program for you.

Thanks elbowpod. It's posts like these that create and embellish unwarranted rumors about programs. All of these programs mentioned are top notch where you'll be competitive for a great fellowship. Anyone who just completed interviews knows the similarities between programs vastly outweigh the differences. We have a habit of trying to portray programs as black and white to justify our decisions in this tedious process, but that's the wrong way to go about it. If you're looking at these programs to choose an away, start with location- do you want to be in santa monica, east LA, palo alto, or SF? Trust me, when the time comes to make your rank list, this will be a much more important factor than what "orthoguy11" wrote on orthogate when you were a third year medical student. So in summary, (1) these actually are all top notch programs; (2) anything you hear about some resident who said this or that is garbage; (3) start with location when choosing an away. For completeness, (4) the best resources for individual programs are current residents- don't be afraid to call a coordinator and ask to speak with a current resident (contrary to what some will inevitably say, you will not get "blacklisted" if you just ask to speak with a resident and then don't end up rotating, unless of course you're rude) OR find residents who came from your med school and get in touch with them. Best of luck.

I couldn't agree more with bdz281.

Thanks for the advice all. I'm glad I can't go wrong with any of those programs. At the end of the day, I'll probably end up having to pick the programs for aways that have open spots when I have elective time in my fourth year. Glad there's a lot of supportive folks out there.

Currently on medicine now... fourth year and surgical electives/aways can't come soon enough!

UCLA, on paper, is ranked the highest (per the past US N&W rankings) for ortho hospitals. for whatever its worth

this could not be more meaningless to your experience as a resident.

UCLA by far has the street cred, but having passed through, I'm glad I chose another program. A lot of drama, back room politics and power struggles between the co-chairs at the spine clinic. Rounds are one thing, hands in the OR - not a chance. And maybe it's because of the lawsuits. Used a lot of BMP in there. And when I questioned the indications, I got a look that -- well, I never knew not to bring it up. USC was great, really liked the program and the open forum that they had between the grunts and the senior staff. There was a real environment of exchange and opportunity. Stanford - ah well... bit too rigid for me. UCSF... by far a great place all around.