Mindfulness Training for Young Neurosurgeons: A Virtual Multicenter Prospective Pilot Study
Abstract
Objective Burnout is prevalent among neurosurgeons and can negatively impact both technical and nontechnical skills and subsequent patient care. Mindfulness training has previously been shown to ameliorate the effects of burnout and improve performance in health care workers and high-stress occupations, but no such evaluation has been formally conducted for neurosurgeons. We aimed to determine the effectiveness and feasibility of a virtual mindfulness-based intervention (MBI) in neurosurgeons. Methods A prospective trial of an MBI was implemented and hosted from our tertiary academic unit, running virtually from October to December 2020. Practicing neurosurgeons of all grades were recruited from 9 neurosurgical centers. Participants underwent 8 weeks of 90-minute MBI classes and suggested daily practice. Psychometric measures related to burnout, stress, wellbeing, and mindfulness competencies were assessed at baseline and on course completion. Results Twenty-one neurosurgeons participated in the study (attendings = 2, residents = 18, interns = 1, mean age = 30.3 [standard deviation 3.9] years). Significant improvements after intervention were present in perceived stress (Z = -2.54, P = 0.04) and emotional exhaustion (Z = -2.41, P = 0.04). Mindfulness training was associated with improved mindfulness skills (Z = -2.58, P = 0.006), self-compassion (t = -4.4, P = 0.002), resilience (Z = -3.18, P = 0.004), and choice response times (Z = -2.13, P = 0.03). All neurosurgeons who completed the postintervention assessment stated they would recommend the course and agreed that it was relevant to their surgical practice. Conclusions Preliminary evidence from this trial cautiously supports the effectiveness and feasibility of a virtual MBI for dealing with stress, burnout, and improving dexterity among young neurosurgeons. Further research is warranted to validate these findings.
Integrity signals
Registry
Cites
Statistics
Claims the paper makes
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?
In the meditation intervention subgroup, depersonalization (DP) was not significantly reduced: Cohen's d SMD -0.10 (95% CI -0.28 to 0.07, p = 0.25, I2 = 0%).
“In the subgroup of meditation intervention studies [50–58], the Cohen’s d SMD was found to be non-statistically significant in EE (-0.30, 95% CI -0.61 to 0.02, p = 0.25, I2 = 63.1%) and DP (-0.10, 95% CI -0.28 to 0.07, p = 0.25, I2 = 0%), but statistically significant in PA (0.22, 95% CI 0.03 to 0.40, p = 0.02, I2 = 0%).”
From Individual and organizational interventions to reduce burnout in resident physicians: a systematic review and meta-analysis (2024) · cites this paper as [53]
In the meditation intervention subgroup, personal accomplishment (PA) was significantly improved: Cohen's d SMD 0.22 (95% CI 0.03 to 0.40, p = 0.02, I2 = 0%).
“In the subgroup of meditation intervention studies [50–58], the Cohen’s d SMD was found to be non-statistically significant in EE (-0.30, 95% CI -0.61 to 0.02, p = 0.25, I2 = 63.1%) and DP (-0.10, 95% CI -0.28 to 0.07, p = 0.25, I2 = 0%), but statistically significant in PA (0.22, 95% CI 0.03 to 0.40, p = 0.02, I2 = 0%).”
From Individual and organizational interventions to reduce burnout in resident physicians: a systematic review and meta-analysis (2024) · cites this paper as [53]
In the meditation intervention subgroup, emotional exhaustion (EE) was not significantly reduced: Cohen's d SMD -0.30 (95% CI -0.61 to 0.02, p = 0.25, I2 = 63.1%).
“In the subgroup of meditation intervention studies [50–58], the Cohen’s d SMD was found to be non-statistically significant in EE (-0.30, 95% CI -0.61 to 0.02, p = 0.25, I2 = 63.1%) and DP (-0.10, 95% CI -0.28 to 0.07, p = 0.25, I2 = 0%), but statistically significant in PA (0.22, 95% CI 0.03 to 0.40, p = 0.02, I2 = 0%).”
From Individual and organizational interventions to reduce burnout in resident physicians: a systematic review and meta-analysis (2024) · cites this paper as [53]
The citation lists haven’t been fetched yet
References 45 · Cited by 14
- Authors
- Pandit, A. S., Reka, A., Layard Horsfall, H., & Marcus, H. J.
- Affiliations
- National Hospital for Neurology and Neurosurgery (GB)
- University College London (GB)
- Corresponding author
- Pandit, Anand S.
- Venue
- World Neurosurgery
- Publisher
- Elsevier BV
- Published
- 2022-08
- Volume
- 164
- Pages
- e446-e457
- ISSN
- 1878-8750 (ISSN-L)
- OpenAlex
- W4229002491
- Cited by
- 14
- References
- 45
- Citations by year
- 2026: 3 · 2025: 2 · 2024: 4 · 2023: 4 · 2022: 1
- FWCI
- 2.52
- Type
- journal article
- Language
- en
- Open access
- closed
- Licence
- Locations
- World Neurosurgery (publishedVersion)
- PubMed (publishedVersion)
- Funders
- Wellcome Trust
- The National Brain Appeal
- Engineering and Physical Sciences Research Council (NS/A000050/1)
- Topics
- Social Sciences › Psychology › Clinical Psychology › Mindfulness and Compassion Interventions
- Health Sciences › Health Professions › General Health Professions › Healthcare professionals’ stress and burnout
- Social Sciences › Psychology › Social Psychology › Stress and Burnout Research
- Keywords
- mindfulness training, burnout, neurosurgeons, virtual intervention, perceived stress, emotional exhaustion, self-compassion, resilience, surgical dexterity, well-being, surgical residents
- MeSH terms
- Neurosurgeons, Adult, Burnout, Professional, Humans, Pilot Projects, Prospective Studies, Mindfulness
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