The Surgical Hazardous Attitudes Reflection Profile (SHARP) Instrument - A Prototype Study

Reliability of Uncertainty Tolerance Scales Implemented Among Physicians and Medical Students: A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis

PURPOSE

Uncertainty tolerance (UT) is a construct describing individuals' perceptions of, and responses to, uncertainty across their cognition, emotion, and behavior. Various UT scales have been designed for physician and medical student populations. However, links between UT and other variables (e.g., training stages) are inconsistent, raising concerns about scale reliability and validity. As reliability is a precondition for validity, a necessary first step in assessing UT scales' efficacy is evaluating their reliability. Accordingly, the authors conducted a meta-analysis of the reliability of UT scales designed for, and implemented among, physician and medical student populations.

METHOD

In 2020, the authors searched 4 electronic databases alongside a citation search of previously identified UT scales. They included English-language, peer-reviewed studies that implemented UT scales in physician and/or medical student populations and reported reliability evidence. A meta-analysis of studies' Cronbach's alphas evaluated aggregated internal consistency across studies; subgroup analyses evaluated UT scales by named scale, population, and item characteristics.

RESULTS

Among 4,124 records screened, 35 studies met the inclusion criteria, reporting 75 Cronbach's alphas. Four UT scales appeared in at least 3 included studies: Physicians' Reactions to Uncertainty scale 1990 (PRU1990) and 1995 (PRU1995) versions, Tolerance for Ambiguity scale (TFA), and Tolerance of Ambiguity in Medical Students and Doctors scale (TAMSAD). The scores from these scales ranged in reliability from very good (PRU1990: 0.832, PRU1995: 0.818) to respectable (TFA: 0.761, TAMSAD: 0.711). Aggregated internal consistency was significantly higher ( P < .001) among physicians (0.797) than medical students (0.711).

CONCLUSIONS

UT scales generally demonstrated respectable internal consistency when administered among physicians and medical students, yet the reliability among medical students was significantly lower. The authors caution against using UT scores for decision-making purposes (e.g., applicant selection, program evaluation), especially among medical student populations. Future research should explore the reasons underlying these observed population differences.

Crisis recovery in surgery: Error management and problem solving in safety-critical situations

BACKGROUND

Surgical crises, both clinical and executive, carry risk of harm to patients, staff, and organizations. Once stabilized and contained, crisis recovery requires complex decision-making and problem-solving to address primary failures (errors) and their consequences. In contrast to other safety-critical professions, surgeons may lack access to crisis recovery strategies and tools that go beyond the technical aspects of clinical practice. This study aims to develop a framework for surgical crisis recovery based on problem-solving interventions used by pilots in commercial aviation.

METHODS

This study undertook observational fieldwork, semistructured interviews, and focus groups with senior airline pilots and health care safety experts. Thematic analysis using the framework method identified key interventions applicable to surgical crisis recovery. Subsequently, expert group consensus adapted and content validated this model for clinical use.

RESULTS

Qualitative data from 22 aviation and health care safety experts informed surgical crisis resolution. This consisted of 3 strategies: (1) building cognitive capacity by improving situational awareness and workload management; (2) using checklists in abnormal situations to implement emergency operating procedures; (3) undertaking structured decision-making using analysis-based problem-solving cycles (eg, T-DODAR framework). Twelve tools were validated and adapted to aid implementation of these strategies.

CONCLUSION

Once stabilized, surgical crises may be resolved using 3 sequential strategies derived from commercial aviation.

Different approaches to selection of surgical trainees in the European Union

BACKGROUND

There is an increasing global interest in selection processes for candidates to surgical training. The aim of the present study is to compare selection processes to specialist surgeon training in the European Union (EU). A secondary goal is to provide guidance for evidence-based methods by a proposed minimum standard that would align countries within the EU.

METHODS

Publications and grey literature describing selection strategies were sought. Correspondence with Union Européenne des Médecins Specialists (UEMS) Section of Surgery delegates was undertaken to solicit current information on national selection processes. Content analysis of 13 semi-structured interviews with experienced Swedish surgeons on the selection process. Two field trips to Ireland, a country with a centralized selection process were conducted. Based on collated information typical cases of selection in a centralized and decentralized setting, Ireland and Sweden, are described and compared.

RESULTS

A multitude of methods for selection to surgical training programs were documented in the 27 investigated countries, ranging from locally run processes with unstructured interviews to national systems for selection of trainees with elaborate structured interviews, and non-technical and technical skills assessments. Associated with the difference between centralized and decentralized selection systems is whether surgical training is primarily governed by an employment or educational logic. Ireland had the most centralized and elaborate system, conducting a double selection process using evidence-based methods along an educational logic. On the opposite end of the scale Sweden has a decentralized, local selection process with a paucity of evidence-based methods, no national guidelines and operates along an employment logic, and Spain that rely solely on examination tests to rank candidates.

CONCLUSION

The studied European countries all have different processes for selection of surgical trainees and the use of evidence-based methods for selection is variable despite similar educational systems. Selection in decentralized systems is currently often conducted non-transparent and subjectively. A suggested improvement towards an evidence-based framework for selection applicable in centralized and decentralized systems as well as educational and employer logics is suggested.