Exploring the perception of venous disease within vascular surgery

Background: Biases and gender disparities influence career pathways within medicine, and vascular surgery is no exception. Venous disease comprises an estimated 1% to 3% of total health care expenditures. However, its value among vascular surgeons is poorly understood. This study aims to investigate the factors that influence vascular surgeons' current perceptions of superficial and deep venous disease treatments. Methods: An anonymous survey was distributed electronically to practicing vascular surgeons in December 2021. The respondents were stratified by gender and practice breakdown. A venous-heavy practice was defined as a practice with venous work comprising >= 25% of the total volume. Changes in practice patterns over the respondent's career were also explored. Descriptive, univariate, and multivariate analyses were performed using STATA (StataCorp). Results: A total of 315 practicing vascular surgeons responded, with 81.5% from the United States. Their mean age was 46.6 +/- 9.6 years, and most identified as men (63.3%). The race and ethnicity breakdown was as follows: White (non-Hispanic), 63.0%; Asian or Asian Indian, 17.1%; Hispanic, Latinx, or Spanish, 8.4%; Black, 1.6%; and unknown, 9.9%. The practice settings were academic for 47.0%, private practice for 26.5%, hospital employed for 23.3%, and other for 3.2%. The female respondents were significantly younger (P < .0001), with fewer years in practice (P < .0001) and were more likely to perceive a gender bias within a career encompassing venous disease compared with the male respondents (P = .02). Of the 315 participants, 143 (45.4%) had a venous-heavy practice. No differences were found in age or gender between the venous-heavy and venous-light practices. Those with a venous-heavy practice had significantly more years in practice statistically (P = .02), had sought more venous training after graduation (P < .0001), were more likely to be in private practice (P < .0001), and were more likely to desire a practice change (P = .001) compared with those with a venous-light practice. Overall, 74.3% of respondents indicated that venous work might be less "valued" than arterial work in the field of vascular surgery. On multivariable regression, the predictors for the perception of venous work being less valued were female gender (odds ratio, 2.01; 95% confidence interval, 1.14-4.03) and completion of a vascular surgery fellowship (odds ratio, 2.0; 95% confidence interval, 1.15-3.57). Conclusions: Vascular surgeons overwhelmingly perceived the management of venous disease to be of less value than that of arterial disease, particularly by women and fellowship-trained vascular surgeons. The prevalence of venous disease, as measured by its proportion of the U.S. healthcare budget, cannot be overstated. Thus, efforts to elevate the importance of chronic venous disease within the scope of vascular surgery practices are essential to ensure patients are provided with appropriate specialty care.