Woman or surgeon – Not both: Perceptions of support, enablers and barriers in general surgery

IF 1.4 Q3 SURGERY
Kelda M.O. Sheridan, Naomi D. Quinton
{"title":"Woman or surgeon – Not both: Perceptions of support, enablers and barriers in general surgery","authors":"Kelda M.O. Sheridan,&nbsp;Naomi D. Quinton","doi":"10.1016/j.sopen.2024.10.002","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<div><h3>Introduction</h3><div>The General Surgery (GS) educational community of practice faces crisis. Recruitment is challenged by cultural norms of postponing post-foundation training; and retention with perceptions of elitism, discrimination and inflexibility (UK Shape of Training Steering Group, 2017; Kennedy, 2021) [<span><span>1</span></span>,<span><span>45</span></span>]. Surgical pedagogy has been examined through skill acquisition but what of the hidden curriculum (Brown et al., 2019) [<span><span>26</span></span>]. Three research aims were posed: who is a General Surgeon, what are the enablers or barriers to pursuing this career and is our current UK training system fit for purpose.</div></div><div><h3>Methods</h3><div>Qualitative methodology within a constructivist research paradigm was utilised. Recruitment included representative sampling of junior doctors, including men, women and those from diverse ethnic backgrounds. Individual semi-structured interviews explored participant perspectives of training, recruitment and work-life balance. Data was transcribed, familiarised, de-constructed and generated. Latent data analysis, coding and development, maintained reflexivity. ‘Data sets’ were transformed to a thematic map and key themes identified.</div></div><div><h3>Results and discussion</h3><div>Foundation, specialty doctors, core and higher surgical trainees were included (60 % men, 40 % women). Fundamental themes of support, attitudes and sacrifice were identified, interacting to influence educational narrative. Support comprised personal, institutional, academic and cultural forms. Attitudes of elitism, implicit and explicit gender bias, microaggressions and overt discrimination concealed as surgical tradition. An overarching concept of sacrifice was noted: personal, professional, fiscal and emotional, the so-called surgical currency.</div></div><div><h3>Conclusions</h3><div>The study explored phenotype, motivation, intellect and philosophy within GS. Highlighting issues in the system surrounding negative attitudes, cultures and behaviours, education is a powerful tool which can be used to challenge perceptions and improve training.</div></div>","PeriodicalId":74892,"journal":{"name":"Surgery open science","volume":"22 ","pages":"Pages 3-12"},"PeriodicalIF":1.4000,"publicationDate":"2024-10-11","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Surgery open science","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S2589845024001234","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q3","JCRName":"SURGERY","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

Introduction

The General Surgery (GS) educational community of practice faces crisis. Recruitment is challenged by cultural norms of postponing post-foundation training; and retention with perceptions of elitism, discrimination and inflexibility (UK Shape of Training Steering Group, 2017; Kennedy, 2021) [1,45]. Surgical pedagogy has been examined through skill acquisition but what of the hidden curriculum (Brown et al., 2019) [26]. Three research aims were posed: who is a General Surgeon, what are the enablers or barriers to pursuing this career and is our current UK training system fit for purpose.

Methods

Qualitative methodology within a constructivist research paradigm was utilised. Recruitment included representative sampling of junior doctors, including men, women and those from diverse ethnic backgrounds. Individual semi-structured interviews explored participant perspectives of training, recruitment and work-life balance. Data was transcribed, familiarised, de-constructed and generated. Latent data analysis, coding and development, maintained reflexivity. ‘Data sets’ were transformed to a thematic map and key themes identified.

Results and discussion

Foundation, specialty doctors, core and higher surgical trainees were included (60 % men, 40 % women). Fundamental themes of support, attitudes and sacrifice were identified, interacting to influence educational narrative. Support comprised personal, institutional, academic and cultural forms. Attitudes of elitism, implicit and explicit gender bias, microaggressions and overt discrimination concealed as surgical tradition. An overarching concept of sacrifice was noted: personal, professional, fiscal and emotional, the so-called surgical currency.

Conclusions

The study explored phenotype, motivation, intellect and philosophy within GS. Highlighting issues in the system surrounding negative attitudes, cultures and behaviours, education is a powerful tool which can be used to challenge perceptions and improve training.
妇女或外科医生 - 两者不可兼得:对普外科支持、促进因素和障碍的看法
导言普通外科(GS)教育实践社区面临危机。招聘面临着推迟基础培训后的文化规范的挑战;留住人才则面临着精英主义、歧视和缺乏灵活性的看法(英国培训形态指导小组,2017 年;肯尼迪,2021 年)[1,45]。外科教学法已通过技能学习进行了研究,但隐性课程的情况如何(Brown 等人,2019 年)[26]。我们提出了三个研究目标:谁是普通外科医生,从事这一职业的有利因素或障碍是什么,以及我们目前的英国培训体系是否符合目的。招募对象包括具有代表性的初级医生,包括男性、女性和来自不同种族背景的人。个人半结构式访谈探讨了参与者对培训、招聘和工作与生活平衡的看法。对数据进行了转录、熟悉、解构和生成。潜在数据分析、编码和发展保持了反思性。将 "数据集 "转化为主题图,并确定关键主题。结果与讨论包括基础、专科医生、核心和高级外科受训人员(男性占 60%,女性占 40%)。确定了支持、态度和牺牲等基本主题,这些主题相互作用,影响着教育叙事。支持包括个人、机构、学术和文化形式。精英主义的态度、隐性和显性的性别偏见、微观诽谤和公开歧视掩盖了外科手术的传统。该研究探讨了 GS 中的表型、动机、智力和理念。教育是一种强有力的工具,可用于挑战观念和改善培训。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 求助全文
来源期刊
CiteScore
1.30
自引率
0.00%
发文量
0
审稿时长
66 days
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
确定
请完成安全验证×
copy
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
右上角分享
点击右上角分享
0
联系我们:info@booksci.cn Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。 Copyright © 2023 布克学术 All rights reserved.
京ICP备2023020795号-1
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术官方微信