Relationship between Emotional Intelligence and Resilience among Surgical Residents

Abstract

Background and Objective:

Surgical residents face many challenges and stressors during their training. Some residents can cope better with such difficult situations, whereas others experience burnout and anxiety. Emotional intelligence (EI) and resilience are personality traits that may be associated with a better response to adverse situations.

Methodology:

A cross-sectional analytical study using validated questionnaires the Schutte Self-report EI Test (SSEIT) and the Connor–Davidson Resilience Scale (CD-RISC-25) was conducted to assess EI and resilience among the participants. Data were collected through the hard copies of the questionnaires, compiled using Microsoft Excel and analyzed using SPSS version 26. P < 0.5 was considered significant. The scores of EI and resilience were compared to evaluate the relationship between them.

Results:

A correlation analysis was performed between EI and resilience by comparing the scores obtained from SSEIT and CD-RISC. Our analysis revealed a strong positive correlation between EI and resilience (r = 0.59, P < 0.0001).

Conclusion:

Based on our results, we can say that EI and resilience are positively correlated. This means that an emotionally intelligent person should exhibit a resilient behavior.

INTRODUCTION

Residents often perceive surgical residency programs as a highly demanding and stressful time of their life and career. A systematic review of the nonphysical effects of a surgical career revealed a higher prevalence of burnout, depression, and overall psychiatric morbidity among surgeons in comparison to the general population.[1] Therefore, one should possess the ability to adapt to unforeseen and difficult situations. In the health-care sector, especially in a surgical career, many situations arise where there are challenges or setbacks, and individuals or organizations should be able to recover for their own good.

Resilience is defined as “the internal strength and capacity to tolerate stresses, challenges and adverse conditions and an ability to continue functioning at the individual, and team and organizational level through personal attributes unique to the individual,”[2] whereas emotional intelligence (EI) is defined as “the ability to perceive, value, and express emotions accurately; to access and/or generate feelings that facilitate thinking; to understand emotions and emotional knowledge; and to regulate emotions by promoting emotional and intellectual growth.”[3]

Both resilience and EI are unique for different individuals, which may help them to successfully adapt to the various challenges or stressors to which they are exposed in their day-to-day life experiences.[4] Understandably, owing to the nature of their work, both terms are relevant for surgical residents. However, the association between EI and resilience, particularly among surgical residents, is not well established.

METHODOLOGY

This cross-sectional study was conducted for 3 months. Residents of the surgical disciplines who were willing to participate were included in this study. Individuals with known psychiatric disorders were excluded from this study. Assuming a correlation coefficient (r = 0.500), a significance level of 0.05, and a power of 90%, the total sample size was calculated to be 38. Expecting a 10% nonresponse rate, a final sample size of 42 was used in this study.

A simple random sampling method was used. A list of residents working in the various surgical disciplines was obtained from the academic section, and a particular number was assigned to each resident. Forty-two random numbers were generated from a computer, and these were included in the study.

This survey was conducted by the principal investigator using a hard copy of a validated and structured questionnaire, that is, the Schutte Self-report EI Test (SSEIT) and Connor–Davidson Resilience Scale (CD-RISC-25). The SSEIT comprises 33 self-referencing statements and requires subjects to rate the extent to which they agree or disagree with each statement on a five-point scale. A total score is derived by summing up the item responses. The CD-RISC-25 is a 25-item scale, with higher scores being an indicator of high resilience with a total possible score ranging from 0 to 100.

The participants were intimated about the purpose of the study over the telephone and after obtaining informed consent, they were called for an interview. Each session took approximately 40 min, that is, 15 min for the SSEIT score followed by 10 min break and 15 min for the CD-RISC-25 score.

Data were collected through hard copies of the questionnaires and compiled using Microsoft Excel. Statistical analysis was performed using SPSS version 26 (IBM SPSS Statistics 26.0). P < 0.5 was considered significant. The EI and resilience scores were compared to evaluate the association between them.

RESULTS

The general characteristics of participants, including age, sex, department, and year of residency, are shown in Table 1. Participants in the age group 26–31 constitute 73.8% of the study. Among the 42 participants, 52.4% (22/42) were males and Female 47.6% (20/42). The overall mean and standard deviation of SSEIT and CD-RISC scores are 115 ± 19.6 and 70.9 ± 17.7, respectively [Table 2]. The highest and lowest EI score as per SSEIT questionnaires is 165 and 73 with a median of 118. Similarly, the maximum and minimum resilience score for the CD-RISC questionnaires is 100 and 24, respectively, with a median of 74.5. Our analysis revealed a strong positive correlation between SSEIT and CD-RISC scores (r = 0.59, P < 0.0001) [Table 3]. A scatter plot diagram of SSEIT and CD-RISC shows a positive correlation [Figure 1].

Table 1.

Descriptive table showing the general characteristics of the participants (n=42)

General characteristics	Frequency (%)
Age category (years)
20–25	11 (26.2)
26–31	31 (73.8)
Gender
Female	17 (40.5)
Male	25 (59.5)
Department
General surgery	13 (31)
ENT	4 (9.5)
Maxillofacial surgery	4 (9.5)
OBG	10 (23.8)
Ophthalmology	4 (9.5)
Orthopedics	7 (16.7)
Year of residency
1st	14 (33.3)
2nd	20 (47.6)
3rd	8 (52.4)

ENT=Otolaryngology, OBG=Otolaryngology and obstetrics & gynaecology

Table 2.

Emotional intelligence and resilience score as per Schutte Self-report Emotional Intelligence Test and Connor–Davidson Resilience Scale questionnaire

	SSEIT (total)	CD RISC (total)
Participants	42	42
Maximum score	165	100
Minimum score	73	24
Median	118	74.5
Mean±SD	115±19.6	70.9±17.7

SSEIT=Schutte Self-report Emotional Intelligence Test, CD RISC=Connor–Davidson Resilience Scale, SD=Standard deviation

Table 3.

Measure of correlation between emotional intelligence and resilience

Variables	Pearson correlation coefficient	Coefficient of correlation, r2
Scores obtained from SSEIT versus CD RISC to assess EI and resilience	0.59, P<0.0001	0.348

EI=Emotional intelligence, SSEIT=Schutte Self-report EI Test, CD RISC=Connor–Davidson Resilience Scale

Figure 1.

Scatter plot diagram between the Schutte Self-report Emotional Intelligence Test and Connor–Davidson Resilience Scale. SSEIT = Schutte Self-report Emotional Intelligence Test, CD RISC = Connor–Davidson Resilience Scale

DISCUSSION

Emotions are generally perceived as intense sentiments toward any person or incident and are not necessarily related to any inciting events. It can be expressed in the form of disconcertment, affection, annoyance, fright, sorrow, pleasure, aversion, and humiliation etcetera. It has been observed that some individuals are better at keeping track of their own emotions than those of others.

The intelligence quotient (IQ) is the most commonly employed scoring system for measuring the intelligence of an individual. It has been observed that persons with high IQ are academically brilliant. Nonetheless, they face problems in their professional and personal lives due to the dearth of self-awareness and the inability to manage distressing emotions.[5] The application of a wider sphere of intelligence enables us to overcome these shortcomings in routine activities.

One of the earliest clues to EI can be linked to Charles Darwin’s elucidation of the significance of emotional utterance on survivorship and acclimatization.[6] In 1920, Thorndike used the term “social intelligence” to describe the importance of being compassionate and empathetic toward others.[7] The term EI was first introduced by Salovey and Mayer in 1990.[8] However, the worldwide recognition of this term can be attributed to the landmark publication of “EI: Why it matters more than IQ” by Goleman in 1996.[9]

In health-care sector, the interplay of human emotions takes place every day. In fact, this sector is impregnated with a complete panorama of interpersonal and organizational antagonism. Thus, the need for a reasonable level of EI among health-care workers cannot be underestimated. In addition, it has been established that the EI of medical personnel is linked to their overall performance.[10,11,12,13] Ealias and George established a positive correlation between EI and employee job satisfaction.[14] Oriole and Cooper stated that understanding and managing emotions are important for achieving success in both personal and professional life.[15] Thus, it is often hypothesized that if you have high a IQ, you can get a job easily, but to become a successful employee, you need to exhibit a high level of EI.[5]

Another important characteristic that health-care professionals should possess is the ability to bounce back from nerve-racking or negative life events. Resilience in professional life can be described as the ability to maintain quality work, adapt to different conditions, and preserve a sense of professional and personalized accomplishment. In real life, distressing events customarily lead to adaptative defiance, which can compromise the individual’s potential to handle any challenging scenarios. Furthermore, the occurrence of multiple incidents can cause amalgam distress, leading to anxiety, depression, and burnout.[16] Thus, even one negative occurrence may hamper an individual’s ability to manage other sets to unnerve adventure. Such a scenario can make anybody particularly vulnerable to initiating a cascade of unprecedented crises. Understandably, such behavior can have disastrous consequences in the health-care sector.

Interestingly, such episodes can have long-lasting effects in some individuals. Others may only be affected for a relatively short period. However, some may not show any significant concern and will return to near normal in the shortest possible time and such individuals are considered resilient.[17]

Emotionally, insightful individuals show adaptive responses to in various distressing conditions. EI helps lessen the repercussions of unpleasant experiences by means of emotional introspection, proclamation, and management. Thus, it is not difficult to imagine that such personality traits will become less distracted by these circumstances; hence they will display resilient behavior.

The majority of the research in this field demonstrates that people with higher EI also have higher resilience, which is relevant to the relationship between EI and resilience. Schneider et al.,[18] in particular, showed how EI supports stress resilience. Manago et al.[19] also demonstrated that EI has a significant impact on resilience. Similar to this, Armstrong et al.[20] found a connection between EI and psychological toughness. These writers contend that having a higher EI makes one more resilient under pressure. According to Salovey et al.,[21] those with higher EI are better able to handle the emotional demands of stressful situations because they are able to “accurately perceive and appraise their emotions, know how and when to express their feelings, and can effectively regulate their mood states.” Finally, Cejudo et al.[22] demonstrate that individuals with high levels of EI exhibit higher levels of resilience, with the strongest association (among the several EI characteristics) between emotion healing and resilience.

Furthermore, this hypothesis is supported by the results of this study, as we found a positive correlation between the EI and resilience among surgical residents. Even the General Medical Council of the UK has admitted the need to nurture resilience among doctors to reduce their suicide rates and advocated that all medical institutions should impart training on EI.[23]

CONCLUSION

The importance of EI has already been established in almost all field. Similarly, the advantages of resilient characteristics in any professional field are beyond doubt. This study established a positive correlation between EI and resilience among surgical residents, which further exemplifies the clout of EI in every aspect of life, including the surgical discipline.

Financial support and sponsorship

Nil.

Conflicts of interest

There are no conflicts of interest.