Development of a standardised training curriculum for robotic surgery: a consensus statement from an international multidisciplinary group of experts
Kamran Ahmed
(1)
,
Reenam Khan
(1)
,
Alexandre Mottrie
(2)
,
Catherine Lovegrove
(1)
,
Ronny Abaza
(3)
,
Rajesh Ahlawat
(4)
,
Thomas Ahlering
(5)
,
Goran Ahlgren
(6)
,
Walter Artibani
(7)
,
Eric Barret
(8)
,
Xavier Cathelineau
(8)
,
Ben Challacombe
(1)
,
Patrick Coloby
(9)
,
M S Khan
(1)
,
Jacques Hubert
(10, 11)
,
Maurice Stephan Michel
(12)
,
Francesco Montorsi
(13)
,
Peter Murphy
(14, 15)
,
Joan Palou
(16)
,
Vipul Patel
(17)
,
Pierre-Thierry Piechaud
(18)
,
Hendrik van Poppel
(19)
,
Pascal Rischmann
(20)
,
Rafael Sanchez-Salas
(8)
,
Stefan Siemer
(21)
,
Michael Stoeckle
(21)
,
Jens-Uwe Stolzenburg
(22)
,
Jean-Etienne Terrier
(23)
,
Joachim Thüroff
(24)
,
Christophe Vaessen
(25)
,
Henk van Der Poel
(26)
,
Ben van Cleynenbreugel
(19)
,
Alessandro Volpe
(2, 27)
,
Christian Wagner
(28)
,
Peter Wiklund
(29)
,
Timothy Wilson
(30)
,
Manfred Wirth
(31)
,
Jörn Witt
(29)
,
Prokar Dasgupta
(1)
1
King‘s College London
2 OLVG Hospital
3 OSU - The Ohio State University [Columbus]
4 Medanta [The Medicity]
5 UC Irvine - University of California [Irvine]
6 Skane University Hospital [Lund]
7 Azienda ospedaliera universitaria integrata di Verona [Italy]
8 Service d'urologie [Institut Mutualiste Montsouris]
9 Service d'urologie [CH René Dubos Pontoise]
10 IADI - Imagerie Adaptative Diagnostique et Interventionnelle
11 Service d'Urologie [CHRU Nancy]
12 University Hospital Mannheim
13 Department of urology
14 Peter MacCallum Cancer Centre
15 The Royal Melbourne Hospital
16 servicio de urologia
17 Florida Hospital Celebration Health
18 Clinique Saint Augustin
19 University Hospitals Leuven [Leuven]
20 Département d'Urologie-Andrologie et Transplantation Rénale [CHU Toulouse]
21 Universitätsklinikum des Saarlandes
22 Department of Urology [Leipzig]
23 Service d'urologie et de transplantation rénale [Suresnes]
24 Universitätsklinikum Ulm - University Hospital of Ulm
25 CHU Pitié-Salpêtrière [AP-HP]
26 NKI - Netherlands Cancer Institute
27 University of Eastern Piedmont
28 St. Antonius-Hospital Gronau
29 Department of Oncology-Pathology [Karolinska Institutet]
30 City of Hope Medical Center
31 Universitätsklinikum Carl Gustav Carus
2 OLVG Hospital
3 OSU - The Ohio State University [Columbus]
4 Medanta [The Medicity]
5 UC Irvine - University of California [Irvine]
6 Skane University Hospital [Lund]
7 Azienda ospedaliera universitaria integrata di Verona [Italy]
8 Service d'urologie [Institut Mutualiste Montsouris]
9 Service d'urologie [CH René Dubos Pontoise]
10 IADI - Imagerie Adaptative Diagnostique et Interventionnelle
11 Service d'Urologie [CHRU Nancy]
12 University Hospital Mannheim
13 Department of urology
14 Peter MacCallum Cancer Centre
15 The Royal Melbourne Hospital
16 servicio de urologia
17 Florida Hospital Celebration Health
18 Clinique Saint Augustin
19 University Hospitals Leuven [Leuven]
20 Département d'Urologie-Andrologie et Transplantation Rénale [CHU Toulouse]
21 Universitätsklinikum des Saarlandes
22 Department of Urology [Leipzig]
23 Service d'urologie et de transplantation rénale [Suresnes]
24 Universitätsklinikum Ulm - University Hospital of Ulm
25 CHU Pitié-Salpêtrière [AP-HP]
26 NKI - Netherlands Cancer Institute
27 University of Eastern Piedmont
28 St. Antonius-Hospital Gronau
29 Department of Oncology-Pathology [Karolinska Institutet]
30 City of Hope Medical Center
31 Universitätsklinikum Carl Gustav Carus
Résumé
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.