Limits...
Mentorship in surgical training: current status and a needs assessment for future mentoring programs in surgery.

Sinclair P, Fitzgerald JE, Hornby ST, Shalhoub J - World J Surg (2015)

Bottom Line: A total of 48.7 % of respondents reported that they have a surgical mentor, with no significant gender difference (p = 0.65).The majority want mentoring on professional topics during their training and would additionally be willing to peer-mentor colleagues, although few have received training for this.Despite an identified need, there is currently no structure for organising this and little national provision for mentoring.

View Article: PubMed Central - PubMed

Affiliation: Association of Surgeons in Training, 35-43 Lincoln's Inn Fields, London, WC2A 3PE, UK, piriyah.s@gmail.com.

ABSTRACT

Aims: Mentoring has been used extensively in the business world to enhance performance and maximise potential. Despite this, there is currently a paucity of literature describing mentoring for surgical trainees. This study examined the current extent of mentoring and investigated future needs to support this.

Methods: An electronic, 47-item, self-administered questionnaire survey was distributed via national and regional surgical mailing lists and websites through the Association of Surgeons in Training and Specialty Associations in the UK and Republic of Ireland.

Results: Overall, 565 fully completed responses were received from trainees in all specialties, grades and training regions. A total of 48.7 % of respondents reported that they have a surgical mentor, with no significant gender difference (p = 0.65). Of respondents, 52.5 % considered their educational supervisor and 45.5 % their current consultant as mentors. Modal duration of mentoring relationships was 1-2 years (24.4 %). A total of 90.2 % of mentors were in the same specialty, 60.7 % in the same hospital, and 88.7 % in the same training region. Mentors covered clinical and professional matters (99.3 %) versus pastoral and non-clinical matters (41.1 %). Mentoring was commonly face to face or via email and not documented (64.7 %). Of the 51.3 % without a mentor, 89.7 % would like a clinical mentor and 51.0 % a pastoral mentor (p < 0.001). Priority mentoring areas included career progression (94.9 %), research (75.2 %), clinical skills (66.9 %) and clinical confidence (58.4 %). A total of 94.3 % would be willing to act as a peer mentor. Only 8.7 % had received mentoring training; 83 % wish to undertake this.

Conclusions: Less than half of surgical trainees identified a mentor. The majority want mentoring on professional topics during their training and would additionally be willing to peer-mentor colleagues, although few have received training for this. Despite an identified need, there is currently no structure for organising this and little national provision for mentoring.

Show MeSH

Related in: MedlinePlus

How has the mentoring you have received influenced you personally and professionally?
© Copyright Policy
Related In: Results  -  Collection


getmorefigures.php?uid=PMC4300424&req=5

Fig2: How has the mentoring you have received influenced you personally and professionally?

Mentions: The modal duration of the mentoring relationship was 1–2 years (24.4 %), although there was a distribution between 1–3 months and 7 years (Fig. 1b). There was a wide variation in frequency of mentoring sessions (Fig. 1c). Mentoring was most commonly face to face (89.1 %); email and telephone were also popular media for a mentoring relationship (Fig. 1d). Mentoring was performed informally without any documentation by 64.7 %, formally with documentation by 3.3 %, whilst 32 % used a combination of both methods. Most mentors provide mentoring related to clinical and professional matters (99.3 %) versus pastoral and non-clinical matters (41.1 %). Figure 2 demonstrates how trainees perceived mentoring had influenced their personal and professional lives, with career progression being influenced most positively. Of the trainees, 42.9 % rated the usefulness of mentoring as strongly positive, whilst 52.7 % rated it as positive, 4.0 % neutral and 0.4 % strongly negative.Fig. 2


Mentorship in surgical training: current status and a needs assessment for future mentoring programs in surgery.

Sinclair P, Fitzgerald JE, Hornby ST, Shalhoub J - World J Surg (2015)

How has the mentoring you have received influenced you personally and professionally?
© Copyright Policy
Related In: Results  -  Collection

Show All Figures
getmorefigures.php?uid=PMC4300424&req=5

Fig2: How has the mentoring you have received influenced you personally and professionally?
Mentions: The modal duration of the mentoring relationship was 1–2 years (24.4 %), although there was a distribution between 1–3 months and 7 years (Fig. 1b). There was a wide variation in frequency of mentoring sessions (Fig. 1c). Mentoring was most commonly face to face (89.1 %); email and telephone were also popular media for a mentoring relationship (Fig. 1d). Mentoring was performed informally without any documentation by 64.7 %, formally with documentation by 3.3 %, whilst 32 % used a combination of both methods. Most mentors provide mentoring related to clinical and professional matters (99.3 %) versus pastoral and non-clinical matters (41.1 %). Figure 2 demonstrates how trainees perceived mentoring had influenced their personal and professional lives, with career progression being influenced most positively. Of the trainees, 42.9 % rated the usefulness of mentoring as strongly positive, whilst 52.7 % rated it as positive, 4.0 % neutral and 0.4 % strongly negative.Fig. 2

Bottom Line: A total of 48.7 % of respondents reported that they have a surgical mentor, with no significant gender difference (p = 0.65).The majority want mentoring on professional topics during their training and would additionally be willing to peer-mentor colleagues, although few have received training for this.Despite an identified need, there is currently no structure for organising this and little national provision for mentoring.

View Article: PubMed Central - PubMed

Affiliation: Association of Surgeons in Training, 35-43 Lincoln's Inn Fields, London, WC2A 3PE, UK, piriyah.s@gmail.com.

ABSTRACT

Aims: Mentoring has been used extensively in the business world to enhance performance and maximise potential. Despite this, there is currently a paucity of literature describing mentoring for surgical trainees. This study examined the current extent of mentoring and investigated future needs to support this.

Methods: An electronic, 47-item, self-administered questionnaire survey was distributed via national and regional surgical mailing lists and websites through the Association of Surgeons in Training and Specialty Associations in the UK and Republic of Ireland.

Results: Overall, 565 fully completed responses were received from trainees in all specialties, grades and training regions. A total of 48.7 % of respondents reported that they have a surgical mentor, with no significant gender difference (p = 0.65). Of respondents, 52.5 % considered their educational supervisor and 45.5 % their current consultant as mentors. Modal duration of mentoring relationships was 1-2 years (24.4 %). A total of 90.2 % of mentors were in the same specialty, 60.7 % in the same hospital, and 88.7 % in the same training region. Mentors covered clinical and professional matters (99.3 %) versus pastoral and non-clinical matters (41.1 %). Mentoring was commonly face to face or via email and not documented (64.7 %). Of the 51.3 % without a mentor, 89.7 % would like a clinical mentor and 51.0 % a pastoral mentor (p < 0.001). Priority mentoring areas included career progression (94.9 %), research (75.2 %), clinical skills (66.9 %) and clinical confidence (58.4 %). A total of 94.3 % would be willing to act as a peer mentor. Only 8.7 % had received mentoring training; 83 % wish to undertake this.

Conclusions: Less than half of surgical trainees identified a mentor. The majority want mentoring on professional topics during their training and would additionally be willing to peer-mentor colleagues, although few have received training for this. Despite an identified need, there is currently no structure for organising this and little national provision for mentoring.

Show MeSH
Related in: MedlinePlus