Influencing factors in surgical decision-making: a qualitative analysis of colorectal surgeons' experiences of postoperative complications.

AIM: When making anastomotic decisions in rectal cancer surgery, surgeons must consider the risk of anastomotic leakage, which bears implications for the patient's quality of life, cancer recurrence and, potentially, death. The aim of this study was to investigate the views of colorectal surgeons on how their individual attributes (e.g. experience, personality traits) may influence their decision-making and experience of complications. METHOD: This qualitative study used individual interviews for data collection. Purposive sampling was used to invite certified UK-based colorectal surgeons to participate. Participants were recruited until ongoing data review indicated no new codes were generated, suggesting data sufficiency. Data were analysed thematically following Braun and Clarke's six-step framework. RESULTS: Seventeen colorectal surgeons (eight female, nine male) participated. Two key themes with relevant subthemes were identified: (1) personal attributes influencing variation in decision-making (e.g. demographics, personality) and (2) the influence of complications on decision-making. Surgeons described variation in the management of complications based upon their personal attributes, which included factors such as gender, experience and subspeciality interests. Surgeons described the detrimental impact of anastomotic leakage on their mental and physical health. Experience of anastomotic leakage influences future decision-making and is associated with changes in practice even when a technical error is not identified. CONCLUSION: Colorectal surgeons consider anastomotic leaks to be personal 'failures', which has a negative impact on surgeon welfare. Better understanding of how surgeons make difficult decisions, and how surgeons respond to and learn from complications, is necessary to identify 'personalized' methods of supporting surgeons at all career stages, which may improve patient outcomes.

Surgeon perceptions of personality as an influencing factor on anastomotic decision-making: A qualitative analysis.

AIM: Surgeon personality is a factor influencing rectal anastomotic decision-making. However, it is unclear how or why this may be the case, or what aspects of personality are involved. The aim of this study was to investigate the views of colorectal surgeons on how their individual personality may influence variation in anastomotic decision-making. METHOD: Purposive sampling was used to invite certified UK-based colorectal surgeons to participate, with individual interviews used for data collection. Participants were recruited until ongoing data review indicated no new codes were generated (i.e. data sufficiency). Data were analysed thematically following Braun and Clarke's six-step framework. RESULTS: Seventeen colorectal surgeons (eight female, nine male) participated. Two key themes relating to personality and decision-making were identified: (1) surgeon development and training and (2) patient-surgeon interactions, each with relevant subthemes. Surgeons described how their personality may influence patients' postoperative outcomes (e.g. decision-making, team working and communication) and potential mechanisms for how their personality may influence operative risk-taking. Following anastomotic leakage, surgeons described a disproportionate sense of guilt and responsibility. There appears to be a significant transition in responsibility from trainee to newly appointed consultant, which may be part of the 'hidden curriculum' of surgical training. CONCLUSION: Colorectal surgeons have described their perceptions of how personality traits may impact variation in decision-making and patient outcomes for the first time. Early career surgeons felt ill-prepared for the level of guilt experienced when managing complications. Surgeons appear open to personality assessment if this was through an educational lens, with the aim of improving decision-making following complications and overall performance.

Translating government policy into practice: How new UK medical schools enact widening participation.

INTRODUCTION: Increasing the diversity of medical students, or widening participation (WP), is critical for social justice and healthcare delivery, and many governments are setting policies to encourage WP. However, establishing policy is only the first step in an educational change process: we also need to know "how" policy is enacted or how medical schools interpret and put into practice WP policy. Addressing this gap, the aim of this study was to examine policy enactment in six new UK medical schools with an explicit WP mandate. METHODS: This qualitative study, underpinned by social constructivism, used semi-structured interviews to explore the experiences of key actors (6 Deans and 14 Admissions staff) of putting policy into practice when setting up a new medical school. Data coding and analysis were initially inductive, using thematic analysis. We then applied Ball's theory of policy enactment to organise the data into four contextual dimensions of 'situation', 'professional', 'material' and 'external'. RESULTS: On the surface, there were many similarities across the six schools in terms of the four dimensions. However, how these dimensions interacted illuminated tensions and differences. For example, some schools found themselves increasingly subjected to local and extra-local rule systems, including pressure to follow host university norms and hosts struggling to accept that medical schools are heavily regulated. There were also tensions between the new medical schools and the medical education "establishment", including lack of power and being judged by overly narrow outcomes. DISCUSSION: Different contexts seem to influence the enactment of WP to medicine in different places, even in the same country, even in medical schools established at the same time. That policy enactment is a complex, non-linear process of enactment is important to acknowledge: context is critical. Our findings will inform future policies and practices that aim to increase WP in medicine.

A meta-study analysing the discourses of discourse analysis in health professions education.

INTRODUCTION: Discourse analysis has been used as an approach to conducting research in health professions education (HPE) for many years. However, because there is no one 'right' interpretation of or approach to it, quite what discourse analysis is, how it could or should be used, and how it can be appraised are unclear. This ambiguity risks undermining the trustworthiness and coherence of the methodology and any findings it produces. METHOD: A meta-study review was conducted to explore the current state of discourse analysis in HPE, to guide researchers engaging using the methodology and to improving methodological, analytical and reporting rigour. Structured searches were conducted, returns were filtered for inclusion and 124 articles critically analysed. RESULTS: Of 124 included articles, 64 were from medical education, 51 from nursing and 9 were mutli-disciplinary or from other HPE disciplines. Of 119 articles reporting some sort of data, 50 used documents/written text as the sole data source, while 27 were solely based on interview data. Foucault was the most commonly cited theorist (n = 47), particularly in medical education articles. The quality of articles varied: many did not provide a clear articulation what was meant by discourse, definitions and methodological choices were often misaligned, there was a lack of detail regarding data collection and analysis, and positionality statements and critiques were often underdeveloped or absent. DISCUSSION: Seeking to address these many lacunae, the authors present a framework to facilitate rigorous discourse analysis research and transparent, complete and accurate reporting of the same, to help readers assess the trustworthiness of the findings from discourse analysis in HPE. Scholars are encouraged to reflect more deeply on the applications and practices of discourse analysis, with the ultimate aim of ensuring more breadth and depth when using discourse analysis for understanding and constructing meaning in our field.

Medical school selection is a sociohistorical embedded activity: A comparison of five countries.

INTRODUCTION: The medical school selection literature comes mostly from a few countries in the Global North and offers little opportunity to consider different ways of thinking and doing. Our aim, therefore, was to critically consider selection practices and their sociohistorical influences in our respective countries (Brazil, China, Singapore, South Africa and the UK), including how any perceived inequalities are addressed. METHODS: This paper summarises many constructive dialogues grounded in the idea of he er butong () (harmony with diversity), learning about and from each other. RESULTS: Some practices were similar across the five countries, but there were differences in precise practices, attitudes and sociohistorical influences thereon. For example, in Brazil, South Africa and the UK, there is public and political acknowledgement that attainment is linked to systemic and social factors such as socio-economic status and/or race. Selecting for medical school solely on prior attainment is recognised as unfair to less privileged societal groups. Conversely, selection via examination performance is seen as fair and promoting equality in China and Singapore, although the historical context underpinning this value differs across the two countries. The five countries differ in respect of their actions towards addressing inequality. Quotas are used to ensure the representation of certain groups in Brazil and regional representation in China. Quotas are illegal in the UK, and South Africa does not impose them, leading to the use of various, compensatory 'workarounds' to address inequality. Singapore does not take action to address inequality because all people are considered equal constitutionally. DISCUSSION: In conclusion, medical school selection practices are firmly embedded in history, values, societal expectations and stakeholder beliefs, which vary by context. More comparisons, working from the position of acknowledging and respecting differences, would extend knowledge further and enable consideration of what permits and hinders change in different contexts.

Who should proof my paper?

This column is intended to address the kinds of knotty problems and dilemmas with which many scholars grapple in studying health professions education. In this article, the authors address the challenges in proofreading a manuscript. Emerging researchers might think that someone in the production team will catch any errors. This may not always be the case. We emphasize the importance of guiding mentees to take the process of preparing a manuscript for submission seriously.

I'd like to use a questionnaire (sub-text: this will be an easy way to get data. Right?).

This column is intended to address the kinds of knotty problems and dilemmas with which many scholars grapple in studying health professions education. In this article, the authors address the question of using questionnaires in education research, considering the why, when, and how, as well as its potential pitfalls. The goal is to guide supervisors and students who are considering whether to develop and use a questionnaire for research purposes.

Should I do a synthesis (i.e. literature review)?

This column is intended to address the kinds of knotty problems and dilemmas with which many scholars grapple in studying health professions education. In this article, the authors address the question of whether one should conduct a literature review or knowledge synthesis, considering the why, when, and how, as well as its potential pitfalls. The goal is to guide supervisors and students who are considering whether to embark on a literature review in education research.

Setting up and operationalizing a health professions education research (HPER) unit: AMEE Guide No.170.

In the same way as clinical medicine, health professions education should be evidence-based rather than based on tradition and convenience. Health professions education research (HPER), an academic area that first emerged in the 1950s, is essential for identifying new and better ways to educate health professionals. Again, just as with clinical research, setting up sustainable HPER units is critical to coordinate research efforts and facilitate the production of clear and strategic HPER. In this AMEE guide we draw upon the scholarly and grey literature and our own experiences as HPER unit leaders in several different global contexts to provide practical guidance on establishing and sustaining a HPER unit. We outline the multiple elements and considerations required to set up and operationalize a successful HPER unit, from engagement of key stakeholders and documentation of milestones to the production of programmatic research and its implementation. These are considered under the areas of  â€¢ Who do you need to partner with?  â€¢ Setting the agenda - or What will your unit be known for?  â€¢ Your most valuable resource - people!  â€¢ Operationalizing your HPER agenda  â€¢ Leading the way  We provide concrete tips on each of the above and illustrate these key steps with examples from our own experiences or the wider literature. Whether the reader is beginning, maintaining, or seeking to renew their HPER unit, we hope that the guidance we provide is as useful as it has been to us during our own research program building endeavours.

Data sharing and big data in health professions education: Ottawa consensus statement and recommendations for scholarship.

Changes in digital technology, increasing volume of data collection, and advances in methods have the potential to unleash the value of big data generated through the education of health professionals. Coupled with this potential are legitimate concerns about how data can be used or misused in ways that limit autonomy, equity, or harm stakeholders. This consensus statement is intended to address these issues by foregrounding the ethical imperatives for engaging with big data as well as the potential risks and challenges. Recognizing the wide and ever evolving scope of big data scholarship, we focus on foundational issues for framing and engaging in research. We ground our recommendations in the context of big data created through data sharing across and within the stages of the continuum of the education and training of health professionals. Ultimately, the goal of this statement is to support a culture of trust and quality for big data research to deliver on its promises for health professions education (HPE) and the health of society. Based on expert consensus and review of the literature, we report 19 recommendations in (1) framing scholarship and research through research, (2) considering unique ethical practices, (3) governance of data sharing collaborations that engage stakeholders, (4) data sharing processes best practices, (5) the importance of knowledge translation, and (6) advancing the quality of scholarship through multidisciplinary collaboration. The recommendations were modified and refined based on feedback from the 2022 Ottawa Conference attendees and subsequent public engagement. Adoption of these recommendations can help HPE scholars share data ethically and engage in high impact big data scholarship, which in turn can help the field meet the ultimate goal: high-quality education that leads to high-quality healthcare.

A qualitative study of social accountability translation: from mission to living it.

BACKGROUND: Medical schools are increasingly adopting socially accountable mission and curricula, the realisation of which are dependent on engaging individuals to embody the mission's principles in their everyday activities as doctors. However, little is known about how graduates perceive the efforts taken by their medical school to sensitise them to social accountability values, and how they translate this into their working lives. Our aim was to explore and understand graduate perceptions of how their medical school influenced them to embody a social accountability mission in their working lives. METHODS: This was a qualitative interview study carried out with graduates/alumni [n = 51] of Christian Medical College, Vellore [CMCV], India, a school with a long-established and explicit social-accountability mission. Data coding and analysis were initially inductive and thematic using Braun and Clarke's six step framework. MacIntyre's virtue ethics theory framed secondary analysis, allowing us to consider the relationships between individual and contextual factors. RESULTS: Our participants perceived that CMCV invested heavily in selecting personal qualities aligned with the CMCV mission. They saw that these qualities were reinforced through various practices: [e.g., placements in resource limited and/or remote and rural settings]; community engagement and expectations [e.g., student self-governance]; role modelling [staff and more senior students]. Much emphasis was placed on sustaining these traditions and practices over time, creating a strong sense of identity and belonging among participants, traditions which were fostered further by the alumni network and continued engagement with CMCV post-graduation. CONCLUSIONS: Ensuring social accountable medical education depends on alignment and interactions over time between context and structures, systems and human agents. Further studies are needed to extend understanding of how students from diverse contexts experience socially accountable medical education and translate their educational experience into their thinking and practice after graduation.

The impact of disability on recruitment to higher surgical specialty training: A retrospective cohort study.

BACKGROUND: UK examining bodies are required to eliminate discrimination against people with protected characteristics. To achieve this in surgery, differential attainment (DA) in assessments used as gatekeepers to career progression must be ruled out. This study investigated the impact of disability status on the likelihood of success at national selection for Higher Surgical Training (HST). METHODS: A retrospective cohort study of all UK graduates in the UKMED database (https://www.ukmed.ac.uk) who underwent selection for HST (ST3) from 2012 to 2019 (n = 2875). Univariate analysis identified differences in success rates at first-application. Logistic regression models identified whether disability was a predictor of success after adjusting for sociodemographic factors and prior MRCS performance. RESULTS: There was no significant difference in success rates between candidates with and without disabilities (all p > 0.05) for any surgical specialty. Disability status was not a statistically significant predictor of success. Female candidates were 25 % more likely to be successful (OR 1.25 [95%CI 1.05 to 1.49]) and Non-White candidates were 20 % less likely to be successful (OR 0.80 [95%CI 0.68 to 0.96]). Candidates who passed MRCS Part A and Part B at the first attempt were 49 % (OR 1.49 [95%CI 1.25 to 1.77]) and 90 % (OR 1.90 [95%CI 1.58 to 2.28]) more likely to be successful. CONCLUSION: No significant difference was found in the likelihood of being successful at HST selection for any surgical specialty between applicants with and without disabilities, regardless of type of disability. DA was identified between other sociodemographic groups which requires further exploration.

Navigating Confidentiality Dilemmas in Student Support: An Institutional Ethnography Informed Study.

Introduction: School-level student support programmes provide students with pastoral care and support for academic, wellbeing and other issues often via a personal tutor (PT). PT work is a balancing act between respecting the confidential information divulged by students and doing what is expected in terms of accountability and duty of care. We aimed to explore how tutors manage this tension, with the aim of advancing understanding of student support programmes. Methods: This qualitative study was informed by an Institutional Ethnography approach. We conducted 11 semi-structured interviews with PTs from one medical school in Singapore. We considered how they worked in relation to relevant national and institutional-level policy documents and reporting guidelines. Data collection and analysis were iterative. Results: We crafted two composite accounts to illustrate the dilemmas faced by PTs. The first depicts a PT who supports student confidentiality in the same way as doctor-patient confidentiality. The second account is a PT who adopted a more mentoring approach. Both tutors faced confidentiality challenges, using different strategies to "work around" and balance tensions between accountability and maintaining trust. PTs were torn between school and student expectations. Discussion: Fostering trust in the tutor-student relationship is a priority for tutors but tensions between confidentiality, accountability and governance sometimes make it difficult for tutors to reconcile with doing what they think is best for the student. A more nuanced understanding of the concept of confidentiality may help support PTs and ultimately students.

Preparation for practice: What are students learning for?

BACKGROUND: Junior doctors often feel inadequately prepared for clinical practice. Current approaches to optimising the pre-clinical to clinical transition generally overlook intrinsic factors, yet motivation and emotional engagement are likely to be important in building clinical competence. To address this gap, we explored the attitudes of medical undergraduates and clinicians towards learning and how these attitudes seemed to affect learning motivation. METHODS: We conducted semi-structured individual or group interviews with 22 medical undergraduates and eight clinicians. Interviews were transcribed and thematically analysed. RESULTS: Students and clinicians had differing perspectives on the content and context of learning, as well as divergent attitudes towards learning. Students focused on factual knowledge and examination performance, preferably with simple, clear-cut answers, privileged book learning, and equated medical knowledge with clinical competence. Conversely, clinicians focused on soft skills and clinical reasoning, emphasised learning through observation and experience, assessments that acknowledged complexity and context, and saw knowledge as a foundation for practice. Further, clinicians mostly felt that the pre-clinical curriculum over-emphasised factual recall of knowledge that was neither useful nor relevant for clinical practice. CONCLUSION: We found that students tended to be extrinsically motivated by examination performance, which led to adopting surface learning approaches. This in turn led to a mismatch between the pre-clinical emphasis on factual recall and the higher-order skills necessary for clinical practice. We propose that a shift away from content overload and high-stakes assessment towards patient-centric teaching approaches may help re-orientate students towards intrinsic motivation and more effective learning methods.

"I had no idea the university offered" : The support needs of postgraduate taught students.

This article was migrated. The article was marked as recommended. Introduction Medical schools have a duty to support students to ensure they fulfil their potential. Relatively little is known about the generic, or therapeutic, support needs of postgraduate taught (PGT) students. This is an important gap to address given the literature suggests that "one size does not fit all". Thus, our aim was to explore and understand PGT support needs. Methods This was a qualitative research study using semi-structured focus groups, conducted in one UK university. We recruited medical and science undergraduates as well as PGT participants to get a sense of what was unique to the PGT student experience. Questions were drawn from the literature and local evaluation data. Discussions were audio-recorded and transcribed verbatim for inductive data coding and analysis. Results Six focus groups were conducted with 38 participants. Two main themes each with two sub-themes were identified: Communication (Practicalities; Fulfilled but not tailored) related to the transition into PGT, and Time and Contacts, related to managing the course. Discussion PGT students need to address non-academic, often practical, factors in a timely way to navigate university successfully. Knowing who to ask and informal supports are important. Poor and/or difficult-to-access institutional supports may leave PGT students vulnerable.