Please use this identifier to cite or link to this item: http://hdl.handle.net/11434/831
Title: Development of a standardised training curriculum for robotic surgery: a consensus statement from an international multidisciplinary group of experts.
Epworth Authors: Murphy, Declan
Other Authors: Ahmed, Kamran
Khan, Reenam
Mottrie, Alexandre
Lovegrove, Catherine
Abaza, Ronney
Ahlawat, Rajesh
Ahlering, Thomas
Ahlgren, Goran
Artibani, Walter
Barret, Eric
Cathelineau, Xavier
Challacombe, Benjamin
Coloby, Patrick
Khan, Muhammed
Hubert, Jacques
Michel, Maurice
Montorsi, Francesco
Palou, Joan
Patel, Vipul
Piechaud, Pierre-Thierry
Van Poppel, Hendrik
Rischmann, Pascal
Sanchez-Salas, Rafael
Siemer, Stefan
Stoeckle, Michael
Stolzenburge, Jens-Uwe
Terrier, Jean-Etienne
Thuroff, Joachim
Vaessen, Christophe
Van der Poel, Henk
Van Cleynenbreugel, Ben
Volpe, Alessandro
Wagner, Christian
Wiklund, Peter
Wilson, Timothy
Wirth, Manfred
Witt, Jorn
Dasgupta, Prokar
Keywords: Robotic Surgery
Training
Implementation
Curriculum
Education
Learning Needs
Robotics
Validation
Expert Opinion
Survey
Epworth Prostate Centre, Epworth HealthCare, Melbourne, Victoria, Australia.
UroRenal, Vascular Clinical Institute, Epworth HealthCare, Victoria, Australia
Issue Date: Jul-2015
Publisher: Wiley
Citation: BJU Int. 2015 Jul;116(1):93-101.
Abstract: OBJECTIVES: To explore the views of experts about the development and validation of a robotic surgery training curriculum, and how this should be implemented. MATERIALS AND METHODS: An international expert panel was invited to a structured session for discussion. The study was of a mixed design, including qualitative and quantitative components based on focus group interviews during the European Association of Urology (EAU) Robotic Urology Section (ERUS) (2012), EAU (2013) and ERUS (2013) meetings. After introduction to the aims, principles and current status of the curriculum development, group responses were elicited. After content analysis of recorded interviews generated themes were discussed at the second meeting, where consensus was achieved on each theme. This discussion also underwent content analysis, and was used to draft a curriculum proposal. At the third meeting, a quantitative questionnaire about this curriculum was disseminated to attendees to assess the level of agreement with the key points. RESULTS: In all, 150 min (19 pages) of the focus group discussion was transcribed (21 316 words). Themes were agreed by two raters (median agreement κ 0.89) and they included: need for a training curriculum (inter-rater agreement κ 0.85); identification of learning needs (κ 0.83); development of the curriculum contents (κ 0.81); an overview of available curricula (κ 0.79); settings for robotic surgery training ((κ 0.89); assessment and training of trainers (κ 0.92); requirements for certification and patient safety (κ 0.83); and need for a universally standardised curriculum (κ 0.78). A training curriculum was proposed based on the above discussions. CONCLUSION: This group proposes a multi-step curriculum for robotic training. Studies are in process to validate the effectiveness of the curriculum and to assess transfer of skills to the operating room.
URI: http://hdl.handle.net/11434/831
DOI: 10.1111/bju.12974
PubMed URL: https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/25359658
ISSN: 1464-4096
1464-410X
Journal Title: BJU International
Type: Journal Article
Affiliated Organisations: Department of Urology, Medical Research Council (MRC) Centre for Transplantation, King's College London, Guy's Hospital, London, UK.
Department of Urology, OLV Vattikuti Robotic Surgery Institute, OLV Hospital, Aalst, Belgium.
Department of Urology, The Ohio State University Comprehensive Cancer Center, Arthur G James Cancer Hospital & Richard J Solove Research Institute, Columbus, OH, USA.
Medanta - The Medicity, Gurgaon, Haryana, India.
Department of Urology, University of California, Irvine, Orange, CA, USA.
Department of Urology, Lund University Hospital, Lund, Sweden.
Urology Clinic, A.O.U.I. Verona, Verona, Italy.
Department of Urology, Institut Mutualiste Montsouris, Paris, France.
Service d'Urologie, Centre Hospitalier René-Dubos, Cergy-Pontoise, France.
Service d'Urologie, CHRU Nancy, Vandoeeuvre-lès-Nancy, France.
University Hospital, Mannheim, Germany.
Department of Urology, San Raffaele Scientific Institute, Milan, Italy.
Peter MacCallum Cancer Centre and the Royal Melbourne Hospital, Melbourne, Vic., Australia.
Department of Urology, Fundació Puigvert, Universitat Autònoma de Barcelona, Barcelona, Spain.
Global Robotics Institute, Florida Hospital Celebration Health, Celebration, FL, USA.
Clinique Saint-Augustin, Bordeaux, France.
Department of Urology, University Hospital, KU Leuven, Leuven, Belgium.
Service de Chirurgie Urologique, CHU Purpan, Toulouse, France.
Klinik für Urologie und Kinderurologie, Universitätsklinikum des Saarlandes, Homburg/Saar, Germany.
Department of Urology, University of Leipzig, Leipzig, Germany.
Department of Urology, Foch Hospital, Suresnes, France.
Department of Urology, Ulm University Medical Center, Ulm, Germany.
Service D'Urologie et de Transplantation Réno-Pancréatique, Hôpital Pitié-Salpêtrière, Paris, France
Department Urology, Netherlands Cancer Institute, Amsterdam, The Netherlands.
University of Eastern Piedmont, Novara, Italy.
St. Antonius-Hospital Gronau, Gronau, Germany.
Department of Oncology and Pathology, Karolinska Institute, Stockholm, Sweden.
Division of Urology, City of Hope, Duarte, CA, USA.
Department of Urology, University Hospital Carl Gustav Carus, Technical University of Dresden, Dresden, Germany.
Type of Clinical Study or Trial: Exploratory Qualitative Design
Appears in Collections:Clinical Education & Simulation
UroRenal, Vascular

Files in This Item:
There are no files associated with this item.


Items in EKB are protected by copyright, with all rights reserved, unless otherwise indicated.