Добавил:
Sekretar
kiopkiopkiop18@yandex.ru
t.me/Prokururor I Вовсе не секретарь, но почту проверяю
Опубликованный материал нарушает ваши авторские права? Сообщите нам.
Вуз:
Предмет:
Файл:Ординатура / Хирургия / @xirurgi_2025 / @xirurgi_2025 - 1293 - файл
.pdf
132 9 Personality—What Can We Learn from Ourselves and Others?
https://t.me/med1917
Haidar M, Ridha F, Ling J, Akhter M, Kueny L, Sabbagh O, Kim C, Chin Loy K. Myers-Briggs type
indicator personality types of ophthalmology residents. J Academ Ophthal. 2021;13(02):e158–
62.
https://doi.org/10.1055/s-0041-1732346.
Hoffman BM, Coons MJ, Kuo PC. Personality differences between surgery residents, nonsurgery
residents, and medical students. Surgery. 2010;148(2):187–93.
2010.04.005.
Hughes BD, Perone JA, Cummins CB, Sommerhalder C, Tyler DS, Bowen-Jallow KA, Radhakr-
ishnan RS. Personality testing may identify applicants who will become successful in general
surgery residency. J Surg Res. 2019;233:240–8.
Jang KL, Livesley WJ, Vemon PA. Heritability of the big five personality dimensions and their
facets: a twin study. J Pers. 1996;64(3):577–92.
0522.x.
Jung CG. Psychologische typen. Rascher Verlag; 1921
Lanz JJ, Gregory PJ, Menendez ME, Harmon L. Dr. Congeniality: Understanding the Importance
of Surgeons’ Nontechnical Skills Through 360° Feedback. J Surg Educat 2018;75(4), 984–92.
https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jsurg.2017.12.006
MacDonald DA, Anderson PE, Tsagarakis CI, Holland CJ. Examination of the relation-
ship between the Myers-Briggs type indicator and the neo personality inventory. Psychol
Rep. 1994;74(1):339–44.
McCrae RR, Costa PT. Reinterpreting the Myers-Briggs type indicator from the perspective of the
five-factor model of personality. J Pers. 1989;57(1):17–40.
1989.tb00759.x.
Mullola S, Hakulinen C, Presseau J, Ruiz G, de Porras D, Jokela M, Hintsa T, Elovainio M.
Personality traits and career choices among physicians in Finland: employment sector, clinical
patient contact, specialty and change of specialty. BMC Med Educ. 2018;18(1):52.
org/10.1186/s12909-018-1155-9.
Nawaiseh M, Haddadin R, Al Droubi B, Nawaiseh H, Alarood S, Aborajooh E, Abufaraj M,
Abu-Yaghi N. The association between personality traits and specialty preference among
medical students in Jordan. Psychol Res Behav Manag. 2020;13:599–607.
2147/PRBM.S262062.
Prins DJ, van Vendeloo SN, Brand PLP, Van der Velpen I, de Jong K, van den Heijkant F, Van
der Heijden FMMA, Prins JT. The relationship between burnout, personality traits, and medical
specialty. A national study among Dutch residents. Medical Teacher, 2019;41(5), 584–590.
https://doi.org/10.1080/0142159X.2018.1514459.
Quenk NL. Was that really me? Davies-Black Publishing; 2002
Ramachandran V, Loya A, Shah KP, Goyal S, Hansoti EA, Caruso AC. Myers-Briggs type indi-
cator in medical education: a narrative review and analysis. Health Professions Education.
2020;6(1):31–46.
Sier VQ, Schmitz RF, Schepers A, van der Vorst JR. Exploring the surgical personality. The Surgeon.
2023;21(1):1–7.
Sliwa JA, Shade-Zeldow Y. Physician personality types in physical medicine and rehabilitation as
measured by the Myers-Briggs type indicator. Am J Phys Med Rehabil. 1994;73(5):308–12.
https://doi.org/10.1097/00002060-199409000-00002.
Stienen MN, Scholtes F, Samuel R, Weil A, Weyerbrock A, Surbeck W. Different but similar:
personality traits of surgeons and internists—results of a cross-sectional observational study.
BMJ Open. 2018;8(7): e021310.
Swanson JA, Antonoff MB, D’Cunha J, Maddaus MA. Personality profiling of the modern surgical
trainee: insights into generation X. J Surg Educ. 2010;67(6):417–20.
JSURG.2010.07.017.
Taylor AD, Clark C, Sinclair AE. Personality types of family practice residents in the 1980s. Acad
Med. 1990;65(3):216–8.
https://doi.org/10.1016/j.surge.2022.01.008.
https://doi.org/10.2466/pr0.1994.74.1.339.
https://doi.org/10.1016/j.hpe.2019.03.002.
https://doi.org/10.1136/bmjopen-2017-021310.
https://doi.org/10.1097/00001888-199003000-00018.
https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jss.2018.08.003.
https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1467-6494.1996.tb0
https://doi.org/10.1016/j.surg.
https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1467-6494.
https://doi.
https://doi.org/10.
https://doi.org/10.1016/J.
References 133
https://t.me/med1917
Whitaker M. The surgical personality: does it exist? The Annals of the Royal College of Surgeons
of England. 2018;100(1):72–7.
Zardouz S, German MA, Wu EC, Djalilian HR. Personality types of otolaryngology resident appli-
cants as described by the Myers-Briggs type indicator. Otolaryngology-Head and Neck Surgery.
2011;144(5):714–8.
https://doi.org/10.1177/0194599810397793.
https://doi.org/10.1308/rcsann.2017.0200.
Conclusion—What Have We Learned?
https://t.me/med1917
I have really enjoyed exploring surgery in ‘three boxes’ through these three ‘Parts’ and
I hope you have learned as much as I have. It is clear that ‘They have good hands’
is entirely insufficient when it comes to describing a good surgeon. Focussing on
improving those hands will be of limited benefit in the pursuit of excellence. It is
complex and there is no magic trick, app or life hack. It is about slow deliberate
formation in the direction of ‘virtuosity’ and every surgery, every surgical decision
and manoeuvre will help or hinder you in your quest.
I hope I have demonstrated how the boxes over lap and influence one another.
For example, from Part I I can take home several of the techniques from Sports
Psychology, specifically imagery and goal setting and apply these to the Lean
approach to surgery from Part II. This feels very comfortable and natural for me
as a ‘J’ and ‘T’ on MBTI and my high conscientiousness and low openness on the
Big 5 from Part III. Further I can apply the micro technique from Part I and lean in
Part II and apply it to several realms, from post-surgery review and audit in Parts II
and III, exposing heuristics and cognitive bias and challenging System 1 in Part III,
to embracing and learning from failure back in Part II. You may well have taken very
different lessons and perspectives away as might your trainee/boss, enjoy discussing
them over coffee.
These are of course limited perspectives and there are others. For example, try
reading the book as a patient. What is of value to you now as you read each part? What
remains relevant but what becomes irrelevant and why? What is your motivation i n
becoming a surgeon or practicing as a surgeon and how does this influence your
reading of the book? Does Lean offer increased productivity, increased profitability
or simply increased kudos?
I hope that in reading this book, in owning a copy with scribbles in the margins and
coffee stains on the pages acquired during robust and diverse post-surgery discussions
with colleagues that go well beyond your ‘hands’, you can venture into territory well
beyond my limited perspectives, away from the concrete, the boardwalks, the sands
and the shallows into the deep! Have fun!
© The Editor(s) (if applicable) and The Author(s), under exclusive license
to Springer Nature Switzerland AG 2024
S. Lash, Improving Surgical Skills and Outcomes,
https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-031-66690-2
135
Index
https://t.me/med1917
A
Anchoring heuristic, 99
Automatic pilot, 91, 98, 124
Availability heuristic, 52, 98–104, 106, 108
C
Catastrophe model, 4–6, 8, 40, 116, 119
Cognitive bias, 97, 98, 105, 107, 108, 110,
127
Cognitive Load Theory (CLT), 29, 89
Continuous improvement, 47, 50, 56
D
Deliberate practice, 35, 37
F
Fear of failure, 3, 4, 34, 55, 63, 82, 108
G
Goal setting theory, 10, 11, 41, 42, 73, 82,
103
H
Health psychology, 60
K
Kaizen, 47, 50, 55, 56, 61, 103
L
Lean production, 48, 50
© The Editor(s) (if applicable) and The Author(s), under exclusive license
to Springer Nature Switzerland AG 2024
S. Lash, Improving Surgical Skills and Outcomes,
https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-031-66690-2
Lean Surgery, 47, 48, 72, 82
Locus of Control (LOC), 6, 48, 58–61, 106,
108, 110, 122
Loss aversion, 99, 101–103, 108
M
Multidimensional Health Locus of Control
Scale (MHLC),
Musicians, 8, 33–35, 37, 38, 41, 42, 47, 48
Myers Briggs Type Indicator (MBTI), 113
114, 122
P
Patient outcomes, 64
Practice regimes, 34
Proactive focus, 61
Prospect theory, 99, 101, 102, 105
R
Reactive focus, 61
Reflective practice, 56
Representative heuristic, 98, 100, 108, 110
Risk aversion, 18, 52, 99, 101–103, 105,
126
S
Seven wastes, 47
Simulation-based training, 28
Simulators, 17–20, 21–23, 26–30, 33, 34,
47, 73, 91
Spectrum of failure, 73
Sports Psychology, 3, 17, 33, 34, 41, 47, 61
60
,
137
138 Index
https://t.me/med1917
Surgeon selection, 10
Surgeon’s performance, 33, 34, 39
Surgeon’s responsibility, 4, 51, 59, 73, 94
Surgery, 3, 4, 6–11, 13, 14, 17–23, 26–30,
33–43, 47, 48, 50–65, 69, 71, 73, 74,
78, 80, 82, 87–95, 97–105, 108–110,
113, 114, 116, 117, 121, 122, 124,
125, 128, 129
Surgery improvement, 40, 47, 50
Surgical decision-making, 5, 20, 73, 79, 109
Surgical heuristics, 104
Surgical personality, 114, 116, 118, 119,
130, 131
Surgical training, 17, 19, 23, 77, 91, 117,
125
System 1 thinking, 88–90, 93, 99, 109
System 2 thinking, 88, 89, 93, 95, 100, 103,
110, 121
T
Taiichi Ohno, 49
Technical prowess, 35
The Big 5, 113, 114, 117, 121, 125, 126,
128, 129
Соседние файлы в папке @xirurgi_2025