Cited by 13Healthcare professionals’ stress and burnoutStress and Burnout ResearchInnovations in Medical Education

Enhanced Stress Resilience Training for UK Surgical Trainees; Effect and Evolution Evaluated

Open access
Luton, Oliver W., James, Osian P., Mellor, Katie, Eley, Catherine, Hopkins, Luke, Robinson, David B.T., Barlow, Emma, Lebares, Carter C. +2 more·2023·Journal of Surgical Education

Abstract

Core Surgical Training (CST) programs are associated with high burnout. This study aimed to assess the influence of Enhanced Stress Resilience Training (ESRT) over a 2-year period in a single UK Statutory Education Body. CSTs participated in 5-weeks of formal ESRT to address work stressors. The primary outcome measure was career progression related to curriculum metrics and National Training Number (NTN) appointment. Secondary measures related to burnout using validated psychological inventories. Of 42 CSTs, 13 engaged fully with ESRT (31.0%; male 8, female 5, median age 28 year.), 11 engaged partially, and 18 did not. ESRT engagement was associated with better NTN appointment (ESRT 8/13 (61.5%) vs. not 1/18 (5.6%), p = 0.025), less burnout [aMBI; mean 5.14 (SD ± 2.35) vs. 3.14 (±2.25), F 6.637, p = 0.002, ηp2=0.167], less stress [PSS-10; 19.22 (±5.91) vs. 15.79 (±5.47), F 8.740, p < 0.001, ηp2=0.200], but more mindfulness [CAMS-R; 19.22 (±5.91) vs. 20.57 (±2.93), F 3.201, p = 0.047, ηp2=0.084]. On multivariable analysis, Improving Surgical Training (run-through CST) program (OR 5.2 (95% CI 1.42-28.41, p = 0.022), MRCS pass (OR 17.128 (95% CI 1.48-197.11, p = 0.023) and ESRT engagement (OR 13.249, 95% CI 2.08-84.58, p = 0.006) were independently associated with NTN success. ESRT was associated with less stress and burnout, better mindfulness, and most importantly 13-fold better career progression.

Integrity signals

Registry

Crossref · 10.1016/j.jsurg.2023.07.017

Cites

18 of 18 references verified0 citation errors · 0 not checkable

Statistics

Recomputing p-values needs the paper’s full text.

Claims the paper makes

We couldn’t retrieve this paper’s full text, so its claims and self-check weren’t run. The registry and citation checks still apply.

Claims other papers make about this one

Each is checked against this paper’s own text: does it say what the citing paper says it does?

Cites

Flagged first, then by citations

Cited by

Sorted by citations

Authors
Luton, O. W., James, O. P., Mellor, K., Eley, C., Hopkins, L., Robinson, D. B. T., Barlow, E., Lebares, C. C., Lewis, W. G., & Egan, R. J.
Affiliations
  • National Health Service Wales (GB)
  • University of California, San Francisco (US)
  • University Hospital of Wales (GB)
  • Swansea Bay University Health Board (GB)
Corresponding author
James, Osian P.
Venue
Journal of Surgical Education
Publisher
Elsevier BV
Published
2023-10
Volume
80
Issue
10
Pages
1395-1402
ISSN
  • 1878-7452 (ISSN-L)
  • 1931-7204
OpenAlex
W4385693274
Cited by
13
References
18
Citations by year
2026: 2 · 2025: 10 · 2024: 1
FWCI
4.58
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
Locations
  • Journal of surgical education (publishedVersion, cc-by)
  • PubMed (publishedVersion)
  • ORCA Online Research @Cardiff (Cardiff University) (submittedVersion)
Funders
Bangor University
Topics
  • Health Sciences › Health Professions › General Health Professions › Healthcare professionals’ stress and burnout
  • Social Sciences › Psychology › Social Psychology › Stress and Burnout Research
  • Health Sciences › Medicine › Public Health, Environmental and Occupational Health › Innovations in Medical Education
Keywords
surgical residents, core surgical training, burnout, occupational stress, mindfulness, career development, occupational stressors, psychological well-being, Royal College of Surgeons of England, Royal College of Surgeons
MeSH terms
Occupational Stress, Adult, Burnout, Professional, Curriculum, Education, Medical, Graduate, Female, United Kingdom, Humans, Internship and Residency, Male, Stress, Psychological, General Surgery, Resilience, Psychological

About these checks

Registry, retraction, Cites and statistics results are computed, not judged, with one exception: a printed reference that no index lists is read once by a model before it counts as a citation error. Claims are extracted by a model and kept only when their quote appears verbatim in the text; each cited source is then checked, with a model’s help, for whether it says what the claim relies on. Those verdicts can be wrong — read the claim’s quote and the cited source before relying on one.

Statistics and arithmetic are recomputed, not judged.

Confidence bands are shown only for fields calibrated on our annotated test set. None is calibrated yet, so no band is shown.

What counts as a claim ›How we measure confidence ›How we check this ›

Are you an author, or do you see a problem with this page? Request a review