Enhanced stress-resilience training for surgical trainees.

INTRODUCTION: Core surgical training programmes are associated with a high risk of burnout. This study aimed to assess the influence of a novel enhanced stress-resilience training (ESRT) course delivered at the start of core surgical training in a single UK statutory education body. METHOD: All newly appointed core surgical trainees (CSTs) were invited to participate in a 5-week ESRT course teaching mindfulness-based exercises to develop tools to deal with stress at work and burnout. The primary aim was to assess the feasibility of this course; secondary outcomes were to assess degree of burnout measured using Maslach Burnout Inventory (MBI) scoring. RESULTS: Of 43 boot camp attendees, 38 trainees completed questionnaires, with 24 choosing to participate in ESRT (63.2 per cent; male 13, female 11, median age 28 years). Qualitative data reflected challenges delivering ESRT because of arduous and inflexible clinical on-call rotas, time pressures related to academic curriculum demands and the concurrent COVID-19 pandemic (10 of 24 drop-out). Despite these challenges, 22 (91.7 per cent) considered the course valuable and there was unanimous support for programme development. Of the 14 trainees who completed the ESRT course, nine (64.3 per cent) continued to use the techniques in daily clinical work. Burnout was identified in 23 trainees (60.5 per cent) with no evident difference in baseline MBI scores between participants (median 4 (range 0-11) versus 5 (1-11), P = 0.770). High stress states were significantly less likely, and mindfulness significantly higher in the intervention group (P < 0.010); MBI scores were comparable before and after ESRT in the intervention cohort (P = 0.630, median 4 (range 0-11) versus 4 (1-10)). DISCUSSION: Despite arduous emergency COVID rotas ESRT was feasible and, combined with protected time for trainees to engage, deserves further research to determine medium-term efficacy.

Predictive value of Altmetric score on citation rates and bibliometric impact.

BACKGROUND: Bibliometric and Altmetric analyses provide different perspectives regarding research impact. This study aimed to determine whether Altmetric score was associated with citation rate independent of established bibliometrics. METHODS: Citations related to a previous cohort of 100 most cited articles in surgery were collected and a 3-year interval citation gain calculated. Citation count, citation rate index, Altmetric score, 5-year impact factor, and Oxford Centre for Evidence-Based Medicine levels were used to estimate citation rate prospect. RESULTS: The median interval citation gain was 161 (i.q.r. 83-281); 74 and 62 articles had an increase in citation rate index (median increase 2.8 (i.q.r. -0.1 to 7.7)) and Altmetric score (median increase 3 (0-4)) respectively. Receiver operating characteristic (ROC) curve analysis revealed that citation rate index (area under the curve (AUC) 0.86, 95 per cent c.i. 0.79 to 0.93; P < 0.001) and Altmetric score (AUC 0.65, 0.55 to 0.76; P = 0.008) were associated with higher interval citation gain. An Altmetric score critical threshold of 2 or more was associated with a better interval citation gain when dichotomized at the interval citation gain median (odds ratio (OR) 4.94, 95 per cent c.i. 1.99 to 12.26; P = 0.001) or upper quartile (OR 4.13, 1.60 to 10.66; P = 0.003). Multivariable analysis revealed only citation rate index to be independently associated with interval citation gain when dichotomized at the median (OR 18.22, 6.70 to 49.55; P < 0.001) or upper quartile (OR 19.30, 4.23 to 88.15; P < 0.001). CONCLUSION: Citation rate index and Altmetric score appear to be important predictors of interval citation gain, and better at predicting future citations than the historical and established impact factor and Oxford Centre for Evidence-Based Medicine quality descriptors.

Proof of surgical publication prowess: prospective observational study of factors associated with surrogate markers of academic reach.

BACKGROUND: In the UK, general surgery higher surgical trainees (HSTs) must publish at least three peer-reviewed scientific articles (as first, second or corresponding author) to qualify for certification of completion of training (CCT). This study aimed to identify the factors associated with success in this arena. METHODS: Deanery rosters supplemented with data from the Intercollegiate Surgical Curriculum Programme, PubMed and ResearchGate were used to identify the profiles of consecutive HSTs. Primary outcomes were publication numbers at defined points in higher training (speciality training year (ST) 3-8); secondary outcomes were the Hirsch index and ResearchGate scores. RESULTS: Fifty-nine consecutive HSTs (24 women, 35 men) were studied. The median publication number was 3 (range 0-30). At least three published articles were obtained by 30 HSTs (51 per cent), with 19 (38 per cent) of 50 HSTs achieving this by ST4 (of whom 15 (79 per cent) had undertaken out of programme for research (OOPR) time) and 24 (80 per cent) by ST6. Thirteen HSTs (22 per cent) (ST3, 6; ST4, 4; ST5, 2; ST8, 1) had yet to publish at the time of writing. OOPR was associated with achieving three publications (24 of 35 (69 per cent) versus 6 of 24 (25 per cent) with no formal research time; P = 0·001), higher overall number of publications (median 6 versus 1 respectively; P < 0·001), higher ResearchGate score (median 23·37 versus 5·27; P < 0·001) and higher Hirsch index (median 3 versus 1; P < 0·001). In multivariable analysis, training grade (odds ratio (OR) 1·89, 95 per cent c.i. 0·01 to 3·52; P = 0·045) and OOPR (OR 6·55, 2·04 to 21·04; P = 0·002) were associated with achieving three publications. CONCLUSION: If CCT credentials are to include publication profiles, HST programmes should incorporate research training in workforce planning.

ANTECEDENTES: En el Reino Unido, para obtener el título de especialista (certification of completion of training, CCT), los residentes de cirugía general durante la etapa de formación específica (higher general surgical trainees, HST) deben publicar, al menos, tres artículos científicos en revistas con sistema de revisión por pares (peer review) (como primer o segundo autor o como autor para la correspondencia). Este estudio tuvo como objetivo identificar los factores asociados con el éxito en este aspecto. MÉTODOS: Se identificaron las reseñas de HST consecutivos, mediante datos propios de cada institución y del Intercollegiate Surgical Curriculum Programme, PubMed y ResearchGate. La variable principal fue el número de publicaciones en puntos definidos de la etapa de formación específica (ST3-8); las variables secundarias fueron los índices de Hirsch y las puntuaciones de ResearchGate. RESULTADOS: Se analizó la actividad científica de 59 HST consecutivos (24 mujeres, 35 varones). La mediana del número de publicaciones fue de 3 (rango 0-33). Treinta HST (50,8%) lograron >3 publicaciones; 19 (38,0%) lo lograron en ST4 (78,9% durante el período de investigación al margen del programa de formación quirúrgica (Out of Programme Research (OOPR)), y 24 (80,0% de la totalidad de la cohorte) en ST6. Trece HST (22,0%) no habían publicado ningún trabajo hasta el momento de la redacción de este artículo (6 ST3, 4 ST4, 2 ST5 y 1 ST8). El OOPR se asoció con la consecución de las 3 publicaciones (68,6% versus 25,0%, P = 0,001), con un mayor número de publicaciones (mediana 6 versus 1, P < 0,001), con puntuaciones ResearchGate más elevadas (23,37 versus 5,27, P < 0,001) e índices de Hirsch más altos (3 versus 1, P < 0,001). En el análisis multivariable, el año de residencia (razón de oportunidades, odds ratio, OR 1,890, i.c. del 95% 0,014-3,522, P = 0,045) y el OOPR (OR 6,545, i.c. del 95% 2,037-21,036, P = 0,020) se asociaron con la consecución de las tres publicaciones. CONCLUSIÓN: Si la CCT exige un número de publicaciones, los programas de los HST deberían incorporar formación en investigación dentro de la actividad laboral habitual.