TY - JOUR
T1 - Biosensors, Biomarkers and Biometrics
T2 - A Bootcamp Perspective
AU - Welsh Surgical Research Initiative
AU - James, Osian P.
AU - Robinson, David B.T.
AU - Hopkins, Luke
AU - Bowman, Chris
AU - Powell, Arfon G.M.T.
AU - Brown, Chris
AU - Bailey, Damian M.
AU - Egan, Richard J.
AU - Lewis, Wyn G.
AU - Aston, Joshua
AU - Barlow, Emma
AU - Bee, Charlotte
AU - Britton, Danielle
AU - Campion, Alice
AU - Clarkson, Martin
AU - Evans, Victoria
AU - Jambulingam, Raja
AU - Jawad, Zayd
AU - Jeffreys, Sam
AU - Krishna, Arun
AU - Lee, Jet
AU - Li, Zoe
AU - Lygas, Anna
AU - Mazumdar, Eshan
AU - McKenna, Matthew
AU - Miller, Clara
AU - Morris, Simon
AU - Solari, Francesca
AU - Wallace, Jennifer
N1 - Funding Information:
Funding This research received no specific grant from any funding agency in the public, commercial or not-for-profit sectors. OPJ is supported by a Joint Surgical Research Fellowship from the Royal College of Surgeons of England and Health Education and Improvement Wales. DMB is supported by a Royal Society Wolfson Research Fellowship (#WM170007), Royal Society International Exchanges Award (IES\R2\192137) and Japan Society for the Promotion of Science Research Fellowship (#JSPS/OF317).
Publisher Copyright:
© 2021 BMJ Publishing Group. All rights reserved.
PY - 2021/6/1
Y1 - 2021/6/1
N2 - Introduction Competitive physical performance is routinely monitored by wearable technology (biosensors), yet professional healthcare is not, despite high prevalence of trainee stress and burnout, notwithstanding the corresponding risk to patient safety. This study aimed to document the physiological stress response of UK Core Surgical Trainees (CSTs) during simulation training. Methods CSTs (n=20, 10 male) were fitted with Vital Scout Wellness Monitors (VivaLNK, Campbell, California, USA) for an intensive 3-day training bootcamp. In addition to physiological parameters, CST demographics, event diaries and Maslach Burnout Inventory scores were recorded prospectively during exposure to three scenarios: interactive lectures, clinical skills simulation and non-technical (communication) training. Results Baseline heart rate (BHR, 60 bpm (range 39-81 bpm)) and baseline respiratory rate (14/min (11-18/min)) varied considerably and did not correlate (rho 0.076, p=0.772). BHR was associated with weekly exercise performed (66 bpm (<1 hour) vs 43 bpm (>5 hour), rho-0.663, p=0.004). Trainee response (standardised median heart rate vs BHR) revealed heart rate was related proportionately to lectures (71 bpm, p<0.001), non-technical skills training (79 bpm, p<0.001) and clinical skills simulation (88 bpm, p<0.001). Respiratory rate responded similarly (p<0.001 in each case). Heart rate during clinical skills simulation was associated with emotional exhaustion (rho 0.493, p=0.044), but maximum heart rate was unrelated to CSTs' perceived peak stressors. Discussion Stress response, as derived from positive sympathetic heart rate drive varied over two-fold, with a direct implication on oxygen uptake and energy expenditure, and highlighting the daily physical demands placed upon clinicians.
AB - Introduction Competitive physical performance is routinely monitored by wearable technology (biosensors), yet professional healthcare is not, despite high prevalence of trainee stress and burnout, notwithstanding the corresponding risk to patient safety. This study aimed to document the physiological stress response of UK Core Surgical Trainees (CSTs) during simulation training. Methods CSTs (n=20, 10 male) were fitted with Vital Scout Wellness Monitors (VivaLNK, Campbell, California, USA) for an intensive 3-day training bootcamp. In addition to physiological parameters, CST demographics, event diaries and Maslach Burnout Inventory scores were recorded prospectively during exposure to three scenarios: interactive lectures, clinical skills simulation and non-technical (communication) training. Results Baseline heart rate (BHR, 60 bpm (range 39-81 bpm)) and baseline respiratory rate (14/min (11-18/min)) varied considerably and did not correlate (rho 0.076, p=0.772). BHR was associated with weekly exercise performed (66 bpm (<1 hour) vs 43 bpm (>5 hour), rho-0.663, p=0.004). Trainee response (standardised median heart rate vs BHR) revealed heart rate was related proportionately to lectures (71 bpm, p<0.001), non-technical skills training (79 bpm, p<0.001) and clinical skills simulation (88 bpm, p<0.001). Respiratory rate responded similarly (p<0.001 in each case). Heart rate during clinical skills simulation was associated with emotional exhaustion (rho 0.493, p=0.044), but maximum heart rate was unrelated to CSTs' perceived peak stressors. Discussion Stress response, as derived from positive sympathetic heart rate drive varied over two-fold, with a direct implication on oxygen uptake and energy expenditure, and highlighting the daily physical demands placed upon clinicians.
KW - Non-Technical Skills
KW - Simulation Training
KW - Stress
KW - Surgical Education
KW - Training
U2 - 10.1136/bmjstel-2020-000631
DO - 10.1136/bmjstel-2020-000631
M3 - Article
C2 - 35516828
AN - SCOPUS:85095577035
SN - 2056-6697
VL - 7
SP - 188
EP - 193
JO - BMJ Simulation and Technology Enhanced Learning
JF - BMJ Simulation and Technology Enhanced Learning
IS - 4
ER -