Matthew D Timberlake1, Dimitrios Stefanidis2, Aimee K Gardner3. 1. Department of Urology, University of Texas Southwestern Medical Center, Dallas, TX, USA. 2. Department of Surgery, Indiana University, Indianapolis, IN, USA. 3. Department of Surgery, School of Allied Health Sciences, Baylor College of Medicine, MS: BCM115, DeBakey Building, M108K, One Baylor Plaza, Houston, TX, 77030, USA. aimee.gardner@bcm.edu.
Abstract
BACKGROUND: We examined how problem-solving coaching impacts trainee skill acquisition and physiologic stress as well as how trainee sensitivity to feedback, known as self-monitoring ability, impacts coaching effectiveness. METHODS: Medical students completed a pre-training demographics questionnaire, a 12-item self-monitoring ability scale (1 = always false, 5 = always true), and baseline FLS Task 5 with physiologic sensors. After watching a laparoscopic suturing instructional video, students practiced the task for 30 min, either with a surgical coach, or alone, depending on condition. The coach logged frequency of coaching behaviors according to a task-specific coaching script. Trainees then completed FLS Task 5 with physiologic sensors, a post-training questionnaire, and a 12-item coaching quality evaluation (1 = poor, 5 = very good). RESULTS:Twenty-four students (age 24.5 ± 1.4; 54% men; 58% MS4) participated in the study. All were fairly high self-monitors (3.8 ± 0.76). No differences in baseline suturing skills between the groups emerged. Improvement in the coaching group's suturing (N = 12; 285.0 ± 79.9) was significantly higher than the control group (N = 12; 200.9 ± 110.3). One measure of physiologic stress (rMSSD) was significantly higher in the coaching group. Trainees who received more coaching demonstrated larger improvements (r = 0.7, p < 0.05). Overall ,perceived quality of the coaching relationship was high (4.4 ± 0.6). There was no correlation between trainee self-monitoring ability and skill improvement. CONCLUSIONS: This work suggests that coaching may increase heart rate variability of trainees, indicating coping well with training. Trainee disposition toward feedback did not play a role in this relationship.
RCT Entities:
BACKGROUND: We examined how problem-solving coaching impacts trainee skill acquisition and physiologic stress as well as how trainee sensitivity to feedback, known as self-monitoring ability, impacts coaching effectiveness. METHODS: Medical students completed a pre-training demographics questionnaire, a 12-item self-monitoring ability scale (1 = always false, 5 = always true), and baseline FLS Task 5 with physiologic sensors. After watching a laparoscopic suturing instructional video, students practiced the task for 30 min, either with a surgical coach, or alone, depending on condition. The coach logged frequency of coaching behaviors according to a task-specific coaching script. Trainees then completed FLS Task 5 with physiologic sensors, a post-training questionnaire, and a 12-item coaching quality evaluation (1 = poor, 5 = very good). RESULTS: Twenty-four students (age 24.5 ± 1.4; 54% men; 58% MS4) participated in the study. All were fairly high self-monitors (3.8 ± 0.76). No differences in baseline suturing skills between the groups emerged. Improvement in the coaching group's suturing (N = 12; 285.0 ± 79.9) was significantly higher than the control group (N = 12; 200.9 ± 110.3). One measure of physiologic stress (rMSSD) was significantly higher in the coaching group. Trainees who received more coaching demonstrated larger improvements (r = 0.7, p < 0.05). Overall ,perceived quality of the coaching relationship was high (4.4 ± 0.6). There was no correlation between trainee self-monitoring ability and skill improvement. CONCLUSIONS: This work suggests that coaching may increase heart rate variability of trainees, indicating coping well with training. Trainee disposition toward feedback did not play a role in this relationship.
Authors: Martin Buchheit; A Chivot; J Parouty; D Mercier; H Al Haddad; P B Laursen; S Ahmaidi Journal: Eur J Appl Physiol Date: 2009-12-22 Impact factor: 3.078
Authors: Yue-Yung Hu; Laura M Mazer; Steven J Yule; Alexander F Arriaga; Caprice C Greenberg; Stuart R Lipsitz; Atul A Gawande; Douglas S Smink Journal: JAMA Surg Date: 2017-04-01 Impact factor: 14.766
Authors: Mikael L Soucisse; Kerianne Boulva; Lucas Sideris; Pierre Drolet; Michel Morin; Pierre Dubé Journal: J Surg Educ Date: 2016-10-05 Impact factor: 2.891
Authors: Kivanc Atesok; Shepard Hurwitz; Donald D Anderson; Richard Satava; Geb W Thomas; Ted Tufescu; Michael J Heffernan; Efstathios Papavassiliou; Steven Theiss; J Lawrence Marsh Journal: Adv Orthop Date: 2019-09-02