USC vs. Cedars Sinai vs UCLA

[Katheudontas parateroumen]

hey friends, any new information on any of these programs? Got some above from UCI; how about USC? Thanks!

---

Members don't see this ad.

 

[purpledragon1]

Any thoughts on USC vs. Cedars vs. Loma Linda vs. Harbor-UCLA? USC vs. Cedars in particular?

 

[deleted162650]

If it were me I'd go Loma Linda (if I had to pick between those 4). Harbor should be last. USC v. Cedars is a toss up.

 

[Katheudontas parateroumen]

Having interviewed at each of those places I'd say Loma Linda >USC > Cedars >>Harbor-UCLA. Loma Linda in my opinion only suffers from location and probably not well known academic university. I felt residents and faculty were friendly and that they did bring in good faculty for structured periop echo and they definitely get the breadth of training especially in peds. Biggest positive was definitely seeing anesthesia department as strong in the hospital and pushing for perioperative medicine. USC also not academic or research heavy but I thought you see tons of trauma and overall cases at LA County, but I did not like the feel residents said they had of the malignant Keck training. Also, intern year is surgical, although half the year is essentially elective time. Residents stated they did not gain anything from surgical internship. Cedars definitely has all the cases you could want (including lots of ICU) but just did not get a good vibe from faculty. The 1 on 1 does not seem to be an issue but still can't get the stigma out of my mind that it's still supervision and you're always answering to the attending. It's just the culture there that I just did not gel with. Harbor was certainly the weakest. Only real thing they could hang their cap on is trauma but that can be seen in any of the previous places. Another positive is that you can have high potential resident salary (I heard some clearing 100K haha) due to tons of moonlighting. Have to do outside rotations for a few things like ICU. Probably good reason why they don't fill. Just my take overall.

 

[misteratoz]

IDK. I really liked Cedars. It seems people have a huge problem with the program but I got a good vibe from the place overall. It seems that the one-to-one thing is blown way out of proportion and outside of that people have no real complaints about the place. They match well into fellowship , have great clinical exposure, and are in an awesome area. Am I missing something here?

 

[Katheudontas parateroumen]

IDK. I really liked Cedars. It seems people have a huge problem with the program but I got a good vibe from the place overall. It seems that the one-to-one thing is blown way out of proportion and outside of that people have no real complaints about the place. They match well into fellowship , have great clinical exposure, and are in an awesome area. Am I missing something here?

No, I think you're right. Like I said, seems like a great place on paper but I just still don't like the idea that at the end of the day, these are private practice attendings and essentially their cases. I know there are teaching and non-teaching, but I'm sure it's not always like that. But I'm also sure other institutions have similar situations as well. So idk, just came down to gut feeling. This is a place that I should have considered doing an away to really get a feel of the program. All in all, I still think that UCLA and UCSD in Socal have the upper-hand but would be wondering where cedars fits along with UCI and USC-- hence this forum haha.

 

[misteratoz]

No, I think you're right. Like I said, seems like a great place on paper but I just still don't like the idea that at the end of the day, these are private practice attendings and essentially their cases. I know there are teaching and non-teaching, but I'm sure it's not always like that. But I'm also sure other institutions have similar situations as well. So idk, just came down to gut feeling. This is a place that I should have considered doing an away to really get a feel of the program. All in all, I still think that UCLA and UCSD in Socal have the upper-hand but would be wondering where cedars fits along with UCI and USC-- hence this forum haha.

I guess. But I also buy what the chairman said: if they're giving up money to teach they probably really love to teach. The residents seemed universally happy with their learning. But yes, it is a gut feeling and if you don't like it, certainly rank accordingly.

 

[by604]

did an away at cedars and was set up in rooms with 'teaching faculty'. Some were helpful, some were terrible and sat on their computers looking at stocks barely saying a word to me. More were not into teaching than were into teaching. Probably similar to any other residency, but just because they having teaching faculty dont mean nothing

 

[IAmTheOne1]

As at any institution, not EVERY attending is going to be outstanding and jumping up and down at every opportunity to teach. That being said, there are some phenomenal attendings at cedars who truly do love to teach. And all are more than willing to teach those who are eager to learn. If you want to be spoon fed everything, cedars may not be for you (and truthfully, neither is anesthesia or residency at all for that matter). Cedars is really a unique hospital on account of its shear size and the number and breadth/variety of cases it sees. It has an entire building dedicated to ICU (with 24-bed neuro-ICU, 24 bed MICU, 24 SICU, 24 CSICU, Pediatric ICU). More heart transplants than any other hospital in the country. Thriving liver transplant program. Several thousand OB deliveries per year. Huge orthopedic program (lots of regional opportunity). Very busy inpatient pain service. Fully paid trips every year for the entire residency class to both ASA and WARC (Western Anesthesia Research Conference). Ample moonlighting in OB and Pain. Every fellowship is offered (except Peds - everyone in LA goes to CHLA for anything peds). State of the art simulation center. PD Dr Yumul cares deeply about academics and regularly holds several full day educational sessions (run solely by her) in anticipation of ITE exams, basic exam, and advanced exams. This is a complete program all around. The 1:1 pairing is a huge advantage, not a disadvantage. The attendings are actually there to teach and you will get to learn a hundred different ways to do any given procedure. When attendings are in the room it's usually because they are bored and want to socialize

 

[sirwaltersays]

Anyone else have an issue with the "ramp up" educational philosophy that seems to be present at USC? When I interviewed, it sounded like CA-3 was the "hardest" anesthesia year, which wasn't my favorite thing. I'd rather get thrown in CA-1/CA-2 and use CA-3 to develop interests or skills outside of the OR such as research, management, or QI/QA. Not to mention the burnout I may/may not feel by CA-3. I also felt like the culture of USC as an institution was more of a surgery-first place. The department didn't seem to have much bureaucratic buy-in from the rest of the institution, relative to some other programs. Interested in what others thought of this.

These are some of the reasons why I felt Cedars had a slight advantage over USC. USC obviously has incredible clinical variety due to County + Keck, but I felt like the training was somewhat limited to clinical OR experiences. No room for exploration of interests outside the OR, whereas it seemed like Cedars was more willing to be flexible with time during CA-3.

Both programs are obviously much more clinical than UCLA, which is a lot more academic. I felt that UCLA was clearly the most comprehensive program of the three, but its culture definitely wasn't as welcoming as USC's or Cedar's. More of a sink or swim type of environment.

 

[DrOwnage]

As someone who is currently an anesthesia intern at UCLA I couldn't disagree more. I've always felt welcome, never uncomfortable in any way, shape or form. Dr. Turner, our program director is one of the biggest resident advocates.

 

[rakotomazoto]

@sirwaltersays, thank you for giving me and some of the other UCLA CA-2's a good laugh yesterday from reading your "sink or swim" comment. There is a department T-shirt design contest going on right now and I have been searching for an idea. I think I will submit a picture of a resident slipping beneath the waves with "UCLA Anesthesiology: Sink or Swim!" underneath.

I would be happy to address anything that led to your conclusion about the program, feel free to PM me.

We like to think that we are a work hard, play hard group of residents overall. The honest truth is that we don't work as much as we like to think, average work hours are 55/week, which is nothing compared to many other residency programs and many practicing attendings. Maybe we do work a little harder than some, although I think residents (and human beings in general) just like to complain and if we were working 45 hours a week on average, we would be complaining that it wasn't 40. With the exception of a couple of prickly attendings (which you will find in any large department), I have never felt uncomfortable. And by prickly, I mean that there were a couple of people that don't like the way you are taping the tube as a CA-1 and re-do it. Nothing major.

The education office is fabulous and very involved, led by Dr. Turner and assistant resident program directors, Dr. Buckley and Dr. Methangkool. The program is very responsive to feedback and is always trying to improve/optimize resident training and experience. I have personally worked with our department chair Dr. Mahajan in the cardiac room 4-5 times and he actually stayed in the room and taught for a majority of the case, which I though was a pleasant surprise given how busy he is. All of the attendings here are more than willing to share their experience and knowledge. They ask me how my kids are doing in the hallways, this is not a malignant place. The residency classes all seem to be pretty social and on good terms with one another. Class size is 25, so it is easy to find people that share interests. We all have lives outside of the OR, too.

Bottom line: I would still rank here #1 without hesitation if I was matching again based on my experiences here. Like I said, feel free to PM me if you have more specific questions.

 

[deleted162650]

If you want to do residency in LA, then you should go to UCLA if that's an option for you. The other LA programs are a tier or 2 below. I can count on 0 fingers the number of USC and Cedars residents my practice has interviewed/hired - not saying it won't ever happen, but we don't go looking at those places when we need someone.

 

[dumbmedstudent]

If you want to do residency in LA, then you should go to UCLA if that's an option for you. The other LA programs are a tier or 2 below. I can count on 0 fingers the number of USC and Cedars residents my practice has interviewed/hired - not saying it won't ever happen, but we don't go looking at those places when we need someone.

Yikes.............................................................................................................................................. Was thinking of USC as my number 1

 

[nimbus]

Yikes.............................................................................................................................................. Was thinking of USC as my number 1

In my little corner of Southern California PP land you'll get more attention coming from a program like UW or a top east coast program than USC.

 

[deleted162650]

In my little corner of Southern California PP land you'll get more attention coming from a program like UW or a top east coast program than USC.

Yup. If you wanna train in CA then go to UCSF, Stanford, UCLA, or UCSD (in geographical order only). The others are viewed as 2nd rate whether they should be or not.

 

[Katheudontas parateroumen]

Yikes.............................................................................................................................................. Was thinking of USC as my number 1

Still think it's a good idea especially if you wanna stay in CA. USC definitely sees everything at County and see private side of Keck. I think USC are trained very well and well rounded. Liked the PD a lot. People get fellowships as they want as well and also lots of in-house fellowships too.

 

[OB1🤙]

I spent time at both UCLA and USC. Both are fine institutions, but there are differences. Anybody interested in detailed thoughts can feel free to PM me.

I will say that you can become an excellent anesthesiologist at either place. I will also say that the atmosphere at UCLA is much friendlier than you would think given the reputation it sometimes gets, to echo some of the above sentiments.

 

[blackbolt]

Does anyone know why fellowship rates are generally lower at UCLA and USC vs east coast programs? I noticed that UCLA/USC hovered around 55% or less of the class did fellowships, whereas other top east coast programs had like 80% fellowship rates? Are there just better/more job offers in SoCal or do these residencies not push/support going for fellowships as much?

 

[deleted162650]

Does anyone know why fellowship rates are generally lower at UCLA and USC vs east coast programs? I noticed that UCLA/USC hovered around 55% or less of the class did fellowships, whereas other top east coast programs had like 80% fellowship rates? Are there just better/more job offers in SoCal or do these residencies not push/support going for fellowships as much?

Plenty of support if you want to do a fellowship. The West Coast does not suffer from the plague that is the AMC movement and most PP jobs are legit and not overtly predatory like you see back East. Thus less incentive to pursue fellowship instead of just going to work.

 

[nimbus]

Does anyone know why fellowship rates are generally lower at UCLA and USC vs east coast programs? I noticed that UCLA/USC hovered around 55% or less of the class did fellowships, whereas other top east coast programs had like 80% fellowship rates? Are there just better/more job offers in SoCal or do these residencies not push/support going for fellowships as much?

As Saltydog said above, if you are coming out of residency and you have good references and are ready for prime time, you just get a job. Unless you want to do peds, hearts or pain. We've actually hired some regional and ICU fellows from the local residency and they were if anything weaker than the fresh residency grads from the same program.

 

[deleted162650]

Do you, or any other attending on here know about said above movement in regards to the midwest and south? Everyone on here seems to be on the coasts and as such I don't see much forum convo about the midwest or south. Gracias, doc.

Well I have no first hand knowledge of those markets, but as a general rule, AMC's have a harder time penetrating markets where MD only is the predominant practice model. The prospect of a buyout is less attractive when the loot has to be split equally amongst everybody (I'm talking quality egalitarian groups here).