Orthopaedic surgery residents with a mentor report greater self-assessed theoretical and practical preparedness than residents without a mentor

Abstract

Purpose

The purpose of the study was to investigate the effect of mentorship on self-perceived theoretical and practical skill levels of German-speaking residents affiliated to a scientific society with a focus on sports medicine. It was hypothesized that orthopaedic surgery residents with a mentor would report higher subjective theoretical and practical skills and less apprehension towards performing surgeries unsupervised compared to those without mentors.

Methods

A 35-item questionnaire was distributed among resident members of AGA—Society for Arthroscopy and Joint-Surgery. The survey explored the current status of mentoring and self-assessed theoretical and practical skill levels as well as apprehension towards performing surgeries unsupervised (1–10 scale with higher values indicating higher skill level or greater apprehension).

Results

In total, 115 residents were included, of which 46 (40.0%) had a mentor. The majority of residents without a mentor (65.7%) reported the desire to have a mentor. Residents with a mentor reported significantly higher self-assessed theoretical (p = 0.003) and practical skill levels (p < 0.001) and less apprehension towards performing surgeries unsupervised (p < 0.001) compared to residents without a mentor. The presence of formal mentorship programs increased the likelihood of having a mentor significantly (odds ratio [OR] 7.17, p < 0.001). Male and female participants did not differ significantly in self-assessed skill level or apprehension towards performing surgeries unsupervised.

Conclusion

Residents with a mentor reported greater subjective skill levels and stated less apprehension towards performing surgeries unsupervised compared to residents without a mentor. The majority of residents without a mentor stated that they would like to have a mentor. This may be achieved by establishing more formal mentorship programs as they facilitate mentorship.

Level of Evidence

Level IV, cross-sectional study.