Surgical Trainee Feedback-Seeking Behavior in the Context of Workplace-Based Assessment in Clinical Settings.

PURPOSE To investigate surgical trainee feedback-seeking behaviors-directly asking for feedback (inquiry) and observing and responding to situational clues (monitoring)-in the context of workplace-based assessment (WBA). METHOD A hypothetical model of trainee feedback-seeking behavior was developed using existing literature. A questionnaire, incorporating previously validated instruments from organizational psychology, was distributed to general surgical trainees at 23 U.K. hospitals in 2012-2013. Statistical modeling techniques compared the data with 12 predetermined hypothetical relationships between feedback-seeking behaviors and predictive variables (goal orientation, supervisory style) through mediating variables (perceptions of personal benefits and costs of feedback) to develop a final model. RESULTS Of 235 trainees invited, 178 (76%) responded. Trainees completed 48 WBAs/year on average, and 73% reported receiving feedback via WBA. The final model was of good fit (chi-square/degree of freedom ratio = 1.620, comparative fit index = 0.953, root mean square error of approximation = 0.059). Modeled data showed trainees who perceive personal benefits to feedback use both feedback inquiry and monitoring to engage in feedback interactions. Trainees who seek feedback engage in using WBA. Trainees' goal orientations and perceptions of trainers' supervisory styles as supportive and instrumental are associated with perceived benefits and costs to feedback. CONCLUSIONS Trainees actively engage in seeking feedback and using WBA. Their perceptions of feedback benefits and costs and supervisory style play a role in their feedback-seeking behavior. Encouraging trainees to actively seek feedback by providing specific training and creating a supportive environment for feedback interactions could positively affect their ability to seek feedback

Prevalence and clinical characteristics of non-malignant CT detected incidental findings in the SUMMIT lung cancer screening cohort

Background Pulmonary and extrapulmonary incidental findings are frequently identified on CT scans performed for lung cancer screening. Uncertainty regarding their clinical significance and how and when such findings should be reported back to clinicians and participants persists. We examined the prevalence of non-malignant incidental findings within a lung cancer screening cohort and investigated the morbidity and relevant risk factors associated with incidental findings. We quantified the primary and secondary care referrals generated by our protocol.Methods The SUMMIT study (NCT03934866) is a prospective observational cohort study to examine the performance of delivering a low-dose CT (LDCT) screening service to a high-risk population. Spirometry, blood pressure, height/weight and respiratory history were assessed as part of a Lung Health Check. Individuals at high risk of lung cancer were offered an LDCT and returned for two further annual visits. This analysis is a prospective evaluation of the standardised reporting and management protocol for incidental findings developed for the study on the baseline LDCT.Results In 11 115 participants included in this analysis, the most common incidental findings were coronary artery calcification (64.2%) and emphysema (33.4%). From our protocolised management approach, the number of participants requiring review for clinically relevant findings in primary care was 1 in 20, and the number potentially requiring review in secondary care was 1 in 25.Conclusions Incidental findings are common in lung cancer screening and can be associated with reported symptoms and comorbidities. A standardised reporting protocol allows systematic assessment and standardises onward management