Cited by 69Surgical Simulation and TrainingSimulation-Based Education in HealthcareHealthcare professionals’ stress and burnout

Surgeons' and surgical trainees' acute stress in real operations or simulation: A systematic review

Georgiou, Konstantinos, Larentzakis, Andreas, Papavassiliou, Athanasios G.·2017·The Surgeon

Abstract

Background and purpose Acute stress in surgery is ubiquitous and has an immediate impact on surgical performance and patient safety. Surgeons react with several coping strategies; however, they recognise the necessity of formal stress management training. Thus, stress assessment is a direct need. Surgical simulation is a validated standardised training milieu designed to replicate real-life situations. It replicates stress, prevents biases, and provides objective metrics. The complexity of stress mechanisms makes stress measurement difficult to quantify and interpret. This systematic review aims to identify studies that have used acute stress estimation measurements in surgeons or surgical trainees during real operations or surgical simulation, and to collectively present the rationale of these tools, with special emphasis in salivary markers.Methods A search strategy was implemented to retrieve relevant articles from MEDLINE and SCOPUS databases. The 738 articles retrieved were reviewed for further evaluation according to the predetermined inclusion/exclusion criteria.Results Thirty-three studies were included in this systematic review. The methods for acute stress assessment varied greatly among studies with the non-invasive techniques being the most commonly used. Subjective and objective tests for surgeons' acute stress assessment are being presented.Conclusion There is a broad spectrum of acute mental stress assessment tools in the surgical field and simulation and salivary biomarkers have recently gained popularity. There is a need to maintain a consistent methodology in future research, towards a deeper understanding of acute stress in the surgical field.

Integrity signals

Registry

Crossref · 10.1016/j.surge.2017.06.003

Cites

103 of 103 references verified0 citation errors · 0 not checkable

Statistics

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

Claims the paper makes

This paper’s full text isn’t openly available, 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
Georgiou, K., Larentzakis, A., & Papavassiliou, A. G.
Affiliations
National and Kapodistrian University of Athens (GR)
Corresponding author
Larentzakis, Andreas
Venue
The Surgeon
Publisher
Elsevier BV
Published
2017-12
Volume
15
Issue
6
Pages
355-365
ISSN
1479-666X (ISSN-L)
OpenAlex
W2734399071
Cited by
69
References
101
Citations by year
2026: 5 · 2025: 4 · 2024: 17 · 2023: 7 · 2022: 10 · 2021: 10 · 2020: 8 · 2019: 6 · 2018: 2
FWCI
0.93
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
closed
Locations
  • The Surgeon (publishedVersion)
  • PubMed (publishedVersion)
Topics
  • Health Sciences › Medicine › Surgery › Surgical Simulation and Training
  • Health Sciences › Medicine › Physiology › Simulation-Based Education in Healthcare
  • Health Sciences › Health Professions › General Health Professions › Healthcare professionals’ stress and burnout
Keywords
acute stress, surgeons, surgical residents, surgical simulation, salivary biomarkers, stress measurement, stress management, surgical performance, patient safety, coping strategies
MeSH terms
Simulation Training, Workforce, Acute Disease, Clinical Competence, Education, Medical, Graduate, Humans, Stress, Psychological, General Surgery, Surgical Procedures, Operative, Training Support, Surgeons

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