Mentorship in Surgical Training: A Systematic Review

Abstract

Objective This review systematically examines the literature regarding mentor-mentee relationships in surgery. Background The usefulness of mentorship in surgical training has been expressed in many articles. However, to date, there has been no systematic review on mentoring surgical trainees. This surgical environment is different from other areas of medicine and requires young surgeons to learn skills not readily available from textbooks. Instead, mentors are a valuable mode of transferring this knowledge to the next generation of surgeons. Thus, mentorship is a worthy area of research and attention. Methods We identified all articles discussing mentorship in surgery between January 1985 and August 2010 using PubMed and ISI Web of Knowledge. Predetermined exclusion and inclusion criteria were used to screen articles by title, abstract, and full text in sequence. We extracted the relevant data, and then analyzed the prevalence of major surgical mentoring themes in the literature. Results Of the 1,091 unique articles found during our original literature search, 38 were selected for review. The majority (68%) were commentary/editorial articles. The most discussed themes include the desirable qualities of a surgical mentor, the structure of mentor-mentee relationships, and advice for overcoming barriers to mentoring. Much less discussed themes include the desirable traits in a mentee and the appreciation of generational and cultural differences in mentorship.Conclusions Several barriers to effective surgical mentoring were identified, such as time constraints and a lack of female mentors. By focusing on the positive traits found in this review, for example, developing formal programs to alleviate time constraints, these barriers can be overcome and effective mentor-mentee relationships can be built. Many articles draw attention to the dying art of mentorship in surgical training programs, and currently, the literature on mentorship in surgery is somewhat scarce. These concerns should serve as motivation to revive mentorship in surgery education and to expand the literature regarding underexplored themes and overcoming the current barriers. Although mentorship may not always take on a structured form, it should not be treated casually because proper mentorship is the foundation for training quality surgeons.

Toward an Interprofessional Mentoring Program in Palliative Care - A Review of Undergraduate and Postgraduate Mentoring in Medicine, Nursing, Surgery and Social Work

“…Surgery: Three surgical reviews described use of formal mentoring approaches [17,27,32]. Healy et al reported that residents preferred formal mentoring approaches given its structured approach, the availability of trained mentors and the presence of clear mentoring objectives [17].…”

Eliminating Mentors in Favor of Collaborators: Review and Challenge of Current Mentorship Literature

“…Other factors associated with having a mentor include increased (professional or personal?) support (31), increased publication rate (32), status in the medical community (32), empowerment, a sense of community (11), and increased visibility (33).…”

“…Barriers to advancement include lack of mentorship (34), difficulty in networking (6), time constraints (32), and ineffective mentoring (17). Consistently, only about half of survey respondents report having a formal mentor program (3,18,32) or having a mentor at all (14).…”

“…Collaborative mentorship involves small groups of peers who meet regularly, plan career, and provide feedback to one another (10). Formal mentorship programs, mentor matching (2,3,8,9,19,33) Mentor accessibility (time, distance, location, etc) a (1,5,34) Initiated by mentees (3,11,16,32) Mentor played active role (e.g. role model, career advice and advancement, work-life balance, etc) (5,14,34,39,43) Mentor prestige…”

“…a Of note, presence/availability of female mentors had no association with mentee satisfaction in some studies (4,5) and had a positive association in some studies (28,32,36). b Female mentors were perceived as less accessible and more controlling.…”