Haven't seen a lot of reviews for trauma fellowships, and so I figured I'd put in my 2 cents after having just finished. Warning, these are just personal opinions, so take them all with a grain of salt. PM me if you have any burning questions, and good luck to the next batch of applicants!
Shock Trauma
Pros: Bob O'Toole is a fantastic program director, and seems to really value the education of fellows. Volume is great, with over 300 pelvis cases (tabs/rings) per year. The fellows seem to be treated as colleagues, and educational atmosphere is amazing.
Cons: No singular pelvis guru like Routt or Sagi. Baltimore isn't the greatest location to bring your family. Also, be aware that they interview pretty much every applicant.
Houston
Pros: Volume is crazy here (highest in the country), with 5-7 ORs running Monday-Friday. Chip Routt is one of the premier pelvis guys and seems like a fantastic educator. Houston seems like a decent city, and is pro family. Their previous fellows seem to get whatever jobs they want.
Cons: Brinker rotation (malunion/nonunion) for 4 months seems a bit much, and the fellows didn't seem to love working with him. Was also told that on the Routt rotation, this is strictly an observe type relationship. The chief resident makes the fellows' schedule, which seemed a bit odd.
UW
Pros: Sagi is a huge get for the program, and he seems like an amazing person to learn from. The UW faculty seemed really great, and the history and volume are awesome.
Cons: Benirschke rotation with a foot and ankle fellow seems suboptimal, especially with one fellow saying he did 22 calc fractures that were each 8-9 hours, all watching. Rumors that this fellowship is a lot of watching persist, though I have no first hand knowledge of this.
Tampa
Pros: Sanders seems like someone who really has your back for the rest of your career. There is also a ton of autonomy at this place. Hassan Mir seems like a great addition, and was amazing to talk with.
Cons: Volume seems to have dipped a bit, with the fellows advocating for 2 instead of 3 fellows. Also, the loss of Sagi is big.
CMC:
Pros: Sims and Bosse are huge names, and the facilities at CMC are amazing. It was nice that they interviewed only ~24 people for 3 spots, saying in their interview that they carefully prescreen the applicants. Seemed like a great group of mentors.
Cons: The volume did not seem to merit having 3 fellows. Also, there is a weird dynamic between the residents, where it is an unspoken rule that residents get to do a lot, especially pelvis cases if they are interested in trauma.
Vandy
Pros: Obremsky seemed like a great academic guy, who really supported the fellows. The volume is awesome for just 2 fellows, and Collinge is a fantastic addition to the faculty.
Cons: I don't know how much this matters, but they did not match a fellow in the past. They also maybe don't have the name recognition of the big programs, which may or may not be important to some.
UC Davis
Pros: Lee seemed like a great program director. Sacramento is very family friendly. Great history at this place.
Cons: Volume didn't really seem to be there. Their interview day seemed very haphazardly put together.
HSS:
Pros: Helmet seems like a great mentor. New York City could be a huge plus for some.
Cons: Volume just isn't there, and is a very gentleman's program. People go there for the connections more than the experience it seemed.
