1
|
Kisielewski M, Pisarska-Adamczyk M, Dowgiałło-Gornowicz N, Nawacki Ł, Serednicki W, Wierdak M, Wilczek J, Safiejko K, Juchimiuk M, Domurat M, Pierko J, Mucha M, Fiedorowicz W, Wysocki M, Ladziński M, Zdrojewski M, Sachańbiński T, Wojewoda T, Chochla V, Tkaczyński K, Jankowski M, Wysocki WM. Can Ileostomy Reversal Be Safely Performed by Surgical Residents? MEDICINA (KAUNAS, LITHUANIA) 2024; 60:1847. [PMID: 39597032 PMCID: PMC11596465 DOI: 10.3390/medicina60111847] [Citation(s) in RCA: 0] [Impact Index Per Article: 0] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Key Words] [MESH Headings] [Grants] [Track Full Text] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 09/19/2024] [Revised: 10/27/2024] [Accepted: 11/06/2024] [Indexed: 11/29/2024]
Abstract
Background and Objectives: The growing number of colorectal cancer patients has highlighted the importance of surgical education in colorectal surgery. Despite the negative impact of the COVID-19 pandemic on surgical training, recent changes in the Polish surgical training program have increased the number of intestinal procedures required to be completed by residents. This study aims to assess the safety of ileostomy reversal procedures performed by surgical residents. Materials and Methods: A multicenter prospective cohort study, the LILEO study, was conducted from October 2022 until December 2023 across 20 Polish surgical departments. The study included 199 patients who underwent ileostomy reversal and were divided into two groups: 139 patients operated by specialist surgeons and 60 patients operated by surgical residents. The primary outcomes measured were postoperative complications, length of hospital stay (LOS), and 30-day reoperation rate. Secondary outcomes included the severity of perioperative complications assessed using the Clavien-Dindo classification and a focused analysis of loop ileostomy reversal outcomes. Results: The median LOS was significantly shorter in the resident group (5.5 days vs. 6 days, p < 0.05). Although the overall complication rate was lower in the resident group (21.7% vs. 33.1% in the specialist surgeon group), this difference was not statistically significant (p = 0.105). The 30-day reoperation rate was 3.3% in the resident group and 8.6% in the specialist surgeon group (p = 0.179). In terms of severity, minor complications (Clavien-Dindo grades 1 and 2) were more common in the specialist group (p < 0.05). The analysis of loop ileostomy reversals revealed no significant differences in postoperative outcomes between the two groups. Conclusions: Ileostomy reversal procedures performed by surgical residents under supervision are safe and feasible, with outcomes comparable to those performed only by specialist surgeons. These findings support ileostomy reversal as a valuable procedure for developing surgical residents' skills and do not negatively affect postoperative outcomes.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Michał Kisielewski
- Chair of Surgery of the Faculty of Medicine and Health Sciences, Andrzej Frycz Modrzewski University, 30-705 Krakow, Poland
- Department of General and Oncological Surgery, 5th Military Clinical Hospital, 30-901 Krakow, Poland
| | - Magdalena Pisarska-Adamczyk
- Department of General and Oncological Surgery, 5th Military Clinical Hospital, 30-901 Krakow, Poland
- Department of Medical Education, Medical College, Jagiellonian University, 30-688 Krakow, Poland
| | - Natalia Dowgiałło-Gornowicz
- Department of General, Minimally Invasive and Elderly Surgery, University of Warmia and Mazury, 10-719 Olsztyn, Poland
| | - Łukasz Nawacki
- Collegium Medicum, Jan Kochanowski University, 25-317 Kielce, Poland
| | - Wojciech Serednicki
- 2nd Department of General Surgery, Jagiellonian University, 30-688 Krakow, Poland
| | - Mateusz Wierdak
- 2nd Department of General Surgery, Jagiellonian University, 30-688 Krakow, Poland
| | - Jerzy Wilczek
- Department of Oncological Surgery, Specialist Hospital, 36-200 Brzozow, Poland
| | - Kamil Safiejko
- Colorectal Cancer Unit, Maria Skłodowska-Curie Białystok Oncology Center, 15-027 Białystok, Poland
| | - Marcin Juchimiuk
- Colorectal Cancer Unit, Maria Skłodowska-Curie Białystok Oncology Center, 15-027 Białystok, Poland
| | - Marian Domurat
- Colorectal Cancer Unit, Maria Skłodowska-Curie Białystok Oncology Center, 15-027 Białystok, Poland
| | - Jacek Pierko
- Colorectal Cancer Unit, Maria Skłodowska-Curie Białystok Oncology Center, 15-027 Białystok, Poland
| | - Mateusz Mucha
- Colorectal Cancer Unit, Maria Skłodowska-Curie Białystok Oncology Center, 15-027 Białystok, Poland
| | - Wojciech Fiedorowicz
- Colorectal Cancer Unit, Maria Skłodowska-Curie Białystok Oncology Center, 15-027 Białystok, Poland
| | - Michał Wysocki
- Department of General Surgery and Surgical Oncology, Ludwik Rydygier Memorial Hospital, 31-826 Krakow, Poland
| | | | | | - Tomasz Sachańbiński
- Oncological Surgery Department with a Sub-Department of Breast Diseases, Tadeusz Koszarowski Oncology Centre, 45-061 Opole, Poland
- Institute of Medical Sciences, Faculty of Medicine, University of Opole, 45-040 Opole, Poland
| | - Tomasz Wojewoda
- Chair of Surgery of the Faculty of Medicine and Health Sciences, Andrzej Frycz Modrzewski University, 30-705 Krakow, Poland
- Department of Oncological Surgery, 5th Military Hospital, 30-901 Krakow, Poland
| | - Victoria Chochla
- Chair of Surgery of the Faculty of Medicine and Health Sciences, Andrzej Frycz Modrzewski University, 30-705 Krakow, Poland
| | - Karol Tkaczyński
- Department of Surgical Oncology, Oncology Center, Prof. Franciszek Łukaszczyk Memorial Hospital, 85-796 Bydgoszcz, Poland
| | - Michał Jankowski
- Department of Surgical Oncology, Oncology Center, Prof. Franciszek Łukaszczyk Memorial Hospital, 85-796 Bydgoszcz, Poland
- Chair of Surgical Oncology, Ludwik Rydygier’s Collegium Medicum in Bydgoszcz, Nicolaus Copernicus University, 87-100 Toruń, Poland
| | - Wojciech M. Wysocki
- Chair of Surgery of the Faculty of Medicine and Health Sciences, Andrzej Frycz Modrzewski University, 30-705 Krakow, Poland
- Department of Oncological Surgery, 5th Military Hospital, 30-901 Krakow, Poland
- National Institute of Oncology, Maria Skłodowska-Curie Memorial, 02-781 Warsaw, Poland
| |
Collapse
|
2
|
Larkins K, Quirke N, Ong HI, Mohamed JE, Heriot A, Warrier S, Mohan H. The deconstructed procedural description in robotic colorectal surgery. J Robot Surg 2024; 18:147. [PMID: 38554192 PMCID: PMC10981632 DOI: 10.1007/s11701-024-01907-9] [Citation(s) in RCA: 0] [Impact Index Per Article: 0] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Key Words] [MESH Headings] [Grants] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 01/08/2024] [Accepted: 03/05/2024] [Indexed: 04/01/2024]
Abstract
Increasing robotic surgical utilisation in colorectal surgery internationally has strengthened the need for standardised training. Deconstructed procedural descriptions identify components of an operation that can be integrated into proficiency-based progression training. This approach allows both access to skill level appropriate training opportunities and objective and comparable assessment. Robotic colorectal surgery has graded difficulty of operative procedures lending itself ideally to component training. Developing deconstructed procedural descriptions may assist in the structure and progression components in robotic colorectal surgical training. There is no currently published guide to procedural descriptions in robotic colorectal surgical or assessment of their training utility. This scoping review was conducted in June 2022 following the PRISMA-ScR guidelines to identify which robotic colorectal surgical procedures have available component-based procedural descriptions. Secondary aims were identifying the method of development of these descriptions and how they have been adapted in a training context. 20 published procedural descriptions were identified covering 8 robotic colorectal surgical procedures with anterior resection the most frequently described procedure. Five publications included descriptions of how the procedural description has been utilised for education and training. From these publications terminology relating to using deconstructed procedural descriptions in robotic colorectal surgical training is proposed. Development of deconstructed robotic colorectal procedural descriptions (DPDs) in an international context may assist in the development of a global curriculum of component operating competencies supported by objective metrics. This will allow for standardisation of robotic colorectal surgical training and supports a proficiency-based training approach.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Kirsten Larkins
- Department of Cancer Surgery, Peter MacCallum Cancer Centre, Melbourne, VIC, Australia
- International Medical Robotics Academy, North Melbourne, VIC, Australia
- Department of Surgery, University of Melbourne, Melbourne, VIC, Australia
| | - Ned Quirke
- University College Dublin School of Medicine, Dublin, Ireland
| | - Hwa Ian Ong
- Department of Surgery, University of Melbourne, Melbourne, VIC, Australia.
- Department of Colorectal Surgery, Austin Health, Heidelberg, Australia.
| | - Jade El Mohamed
- International Medical Robotics Academy, North Melbourne, VIC, Australia
| | - Alexander Heriot
- Department of Cancer Surgery, Peter MacCallum Cancer Centre, Melbourne, VIC, Australia
- International Medical Robotics Academy, North Melbourne, VIC, Australia
- Department of Surgery, University of Melbourne, Melbourne, VIC, Australia
| | - Satish Warrier
- Department of Cancer Surgery, Peter MacCallum Cancer Centre, Melbourne, VIC, Australia
- International Medical Robotics Academy, North Melbourne, VIC, Australia
- Department of Surgery, University of Melbourne, Melbourne, VIC, Australia
- Department of Colorectal Surgery, Alfred Health, Melbourne, VIC, Australia
| | - Helen Mohan
- Department of Cancer Surgery, Peter MacCallum Cancer Centre, Melbourne, VIC, Australia
- International Medical Robotics Academy, North Melbourne, VIC, Australia
- Department of Surgery, University of Melbourne, Melbourne, VIC, Australia
- Department of Colorectal Surgery, Austin Health, Heidelberg, Australia
| |
Collapse
|
3
|
Yim NH, Burns HR, Davis MJ, Selber JC. Robotic Plastic Surgery Education: Developing a Robotic Surgery Training Program Specific to Plastic Surgery Trainees. Semin Plast Surg 2023; 37:157-167. [PMID: 38444955 PMCID: PMC10911909 DOI: 10.1055/s-0043-1771026] [Citation(s) in RCA: 0] [Impact Index Per Article: 0] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Key Words] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Indexed: 03/07/2024]
Abstract
Over the past two decades, the surgical community has increasingly embraced robotic-assisted surgery (RAS) due to its potential to enhance accuracy and decrease surgical morbidity. Plastic surgery as a field has been historically slow to incorporate RAS, with lack of adequate training posing as one of the most commonly cited barriers. To date, robot technology has been utilized for various reconstructive procedures including flap elevation and inset, pedicle dissection, and microvascular anastomosis. As RAS continues to integrate within plastic surgery procedures, the need for a structured RAS curriculum designed for plastic surgery trainees is rising. This article delineates the essential components of a plastic surgery-specific RAS curriculum and outlines current training models and assessment tools utilized across surgical subspecialties to date.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Nicholas H. Yim
- Michael E. DeBakey Department of Surgery, Division of Plastic Surgery, Baylor College of Medicine, Houston, Texas
- Division of Plastic Surgery, Texas Children's Hospital, Houston, Texas
| | - Heather R. Burns
- Michael E. DeBakey Department of Surgery, Division of Plastic Surgery, Baylor College of Medicine, Houston, Texas
- Division of Plastic Surgery, Texas Children's Hospital, Houston, Texas
| | - Matthew J. Davis
- Michael E. DeBakey Department of Surgery, Division of Plastic Surgery, Baylor College of Medicine, Houston, Texas
- Division of Plastic Surgery, Texas Children's Hospital, Houston, Texas
| | - Jesse C. Selber
- Department of Plastic Surgery, Corewell Health, Grand Rapids, Michigan
| |
Collapse
|
4
|
Nathan A, Patel S, Georgi M, Fricker M, Asif A, Ng A, Mullins W, Hang MK, Light A, Nathan S, Francis N, Kelly J, Collins J, Sridhar A. Virtual classroom proficiency-based progression for robotic surgery training (VROBOT): a randomised, prospective, cross-over, effectiveness study. J Robot Surg 2023; 17:629-635. [PMID: 36253574 PMCID: PMC9576128 DOI: 10.1007/s11701-022-01467-w] [Citation(s) in RCA: 3] [Impact Index Per Article: 1.5] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Key Words] [MESH Headings] [Grants] [Track Full Text] [Download PDF] [Figures] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 05/27/2022] [Accepted: 10/10/2022] [Indexed: 11/23/2022]
Abstract
Robotic surgery training has lacked evidence-based standardisation. We aimed to determine the effectiveness of adjunctive interactive virtual classroom training (VCT) in concordance with the self-directed Fundamentals of Robotic Surgery (FRS) curriculum. The virtual classroom is comprised of a studio with multiple audio-visual inputs to which participants can connect remotely via the BARCO weConnect platform. Eleven novice surgical trainees were randomly allocated to two training groups (A and B). In week 1, both groups completed a robotic skills induction. In week 2, Group A received training with the FRS curriculum and adjunctive VCT; Group B only received access to the FRS curriculum. In week 3, the groups received the alternate intervention. The primary outcome was measured using the validated robotic-objective structured assessment of technical skills (R-OSAT) at the end of week 2 (time-point 1) and 3 (time-point 2). All participants completed the training curriculum and were included in the final analyses. At time-point 1, Group A achieved a statistically significant greater mean proficiency score compared to Group B (44.80 vs 35.33 points, p = 0.006). At time-point 2, there was no significant difference in mean proficiency score in Group A from time-point 1. In contrast, Group B, who received further adjunctive VCT showed significant improvement in mean proficiency by 9.67 points from time-point 1 (95% CI 5.18-14.15, p = 0.003). VCT is an effective, accessible training adjunct to self-directed robotic skills training. With the steep learning curve in robotic surgery training, VCT offers interactive, expert-led learning and can increase training effectiveness and accessibility.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Arjun Nathan
- Division of Surgery and Interventional Sciences, University College London, Gower Street, London, WC1E 6BT, UK.
- Royal College of Surgeons of England, London, UK.
- University College London Hospitals NHS Foundation Trust, London, UK.
| | - Sonam Patel
- University College London Medical School, London, UK
| | - Maria Georgi
- University College London Medical School, London, UK
| | | | - Aqua Asif
- Division of Surgery and Interventional Sciences, University College London, Gower Street, London, WC1E 6BT, UK
| | - Alexander Ng
- Division of Surgery and Interventional Sciences, University College London, Gower Street, London, WC1E 6BT, UK
- University College London Medical School, London, UK
| | | | - Man Kien Hang
- University College London Medical School, London, UK
| | - Alexander Light
- Department of Surgery and Cancer, Imperial College London, London, UK
| | - Senthil Nathan
- Division of Surgery and Interventional Sciences, University College London, Gower Street, London, WC1E 6BT, UK
- University College London Hospitals NHS Foundation Trust, London, UK
| | - Nader Francis
- Division of Surgery and Interventional Sciences, University College London, Gower Street, London, WC1E 6BT, UK
| | - John Kelly
- Division of Surgery and Interventional Sciences, University College London, Gower Street, London, WC1E 6BT, UK
- University College London Hospitals NHS Foundation Trust, London, UK
| | - Justin Collins
- Division of Surgery and Interventional Sciences, University College London, Gower Street, London, WC1E 6BT, UK
- University College London Hospitals NHS Foundation Trust, London, UK
| | - Ashwin Sridhar
- Division of Surgery and Interventional Sciences, University College London, Gower Street, London, WC1E 6BT, UK
- University College London Hospitals NHS Foundation Trust, London, UK
| |
Collapse
|
5
|
Harji D, Houston F, Burke J, Griffiths B, Tilney H, Miskovic D, Evans C, Khan J, Soomro N, Bach SP. The current status of robotic colorectal surgery training programmes. J Robot Surg 2023; 17:251-263. [PMID: 35657506 DOI: 10.1007/s11701-022-01421-w] [Citation(s) in RCA: 13] [Impact Index Per Article: 6.5] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Key Words] [MESH Headings] [Grants] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 12/24/2021] [Accepted: 04/30/2022] [Indexed: 10/18/2022]
Abstract
Robotic-assisted colorectal surgery (RACS) is steadily increasing in popularity with an annual growth in the number of colorectal procedures undertaken robotically. Further upscaling of RACS requires structured and standardised robotic training to safeguard high-quality clinical outcomes. The aims of this systematic review were to assess the structure and assessment metrics of currently established RACS training programmes. A systematic review following Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-analysis guidelines was performed. Searches were performed of the Ovid Medline, Embase and Web of Science databases between 2000 and 27th November 2021 to identify studies reporting on training curricula in RACS. Core components of training programmes and their relevant outcome assessment metrics were extracted. Thirteen studies were identified, with all training programmes designed for the da Vinci platform (Intuitive Surgical, Inc., Sunnyvale, CA, USA). Common elements of multimodal programmes included theoretical knowledge (76.9%), case observation (53.8%), simulation (100%) and proctored training (76.9%). Robotic skills acquisition was assessed primarily during the simulation phase (n = 4, 30.1%) and proctoring phase (n = 10, 76.9%). Performance metrics, consisting of time or assessment scores for VR simulation were only mandated in four (30.1%) studies. Objective assessment following proctored training was variably reported and employed a range of assessment metrics, including direct feedback (n = 3, 23.1%) or video feedback (n = 8, 61.5%). Five (38.4%) training programmes used the Global Assessment Score (GAS) forms. There is a broad consensus on the core multimodal components across current RACS training programmes; however, validated objective assessment is limited and needs to be appropriately standardised to ensure reproducible progression criteria and competency-based metrics are produced to robustly assess progression and competence.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Deena Harji
- Department of Colorectal Surgery, Manchester University NHS Foundation Trust, Manchester, UK.
- Robotics and Digital Surgery Initiative, Royal College of Surgeons of England, London, England.
| | | | - Joshua Burke
- Robotics and Digital Surgery Initiative, Royal College of Surgeons of England, London, England
- Leeds Institute Medical Research, University of Leeds, Leeds, UK
| | - Ben Griffiths
- Department of Colorectal Surgery, Manchester University NHS Foundation Trust, Manchester, UK
| | - Henry Tilney
- Department of Colorectal Surgery, Frimley Health NHS Foundation Trust, Frimley, Surrey, England
- Department of Surgery and Cancer, Imperial College, London, UK
| | - Danilo Miskovic
- Department of Colorectal Surgery, St Mark's Hospital, London, UK
| | - Charles Evans
- Department of Colorectal Surgery, University Hospital Coventry and Warwickshire, Coventry, UK
| | - Jim Khan
- Department of Colorectal Surgery, Queen Alexandra Hospital, Portsmouth Hospitals NHS Trust, Portsmouth, UK
- School of Health and Care Professions, University of Portsmouth, Portsmouth, UK
| | - Naeem Soomro
- Robotics and Digital Surgery Initiative, Royal College of Surgeons of England, London, England
- Department of Urology, The Newcastle Upon Tyne Hospitals NHS Foundation Trust, Newcastle, UK
| | - Simon P Bach
- Robotics and Digital Surgery Initiative, Royal College of Surgeons of England, London, England
- Academic Department of Surgery, University of Birmingham, Birmingham, UK
| |
Collapse
|
6
|
Harji D, Aldajani N, Cauvin T, Chauvet A, Denost Q. Parallel, component training in robotic total mesorectal excision. J Robot Surg 2022; 17:1049-1055. [PMID: 36515819 DOI: 10.1007/s11701-022-01496-5] [Citation(s) in RCA: 3] [Impact Index Per Article: 1.0] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Key Words] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 04/16/2022] [Accepted: 11/14/2022] [Indexed: 12/15/2022]
Abstract
There has been widespread adoption of robotic total mesorectal excision (TME) for rectal cancer in recent years. There is now increasing interest in training robotic novice surgeons in robotic TME surgery using the principles of component-based learning. The aims of our study were to assess the feasibility of delivering a structured, parallel, component-based, training curriculum to surgical trainees and fellows. A prospective pilot study was undertaken between January 2021 and May 2021. A dedicated robotic training pathway was designed with two trainees trained in parallel per each robotic case based on prior experience, training grade and skill set. Component parts of each operation were allocated by the robotic trainer prior to the start of each case. Robotic proficiency was assessed using the Global Evaluative Assessment of Robotic Skills (GEARS) and the EARCS Global Assessment Score (GAS). Three trainees participated in this pilot study, performing a combined number of 52 TME resections. Key components of all 52 TME operations were performed by the trainees. GEARS scores improved throughout the study, with a mean overall baseline score of 17.3 (95% CI 15.1-1.4) compared to an overall final assessment mean score of 23.8 (95% CI 21.6-25.9), p = 0.003. The GAS component improved incrementally for all trainees at each candidate assessment (p < 0.001). Employing a parallel, component-based approach to training in robotic TME surgery is safe and feasible and can be used to train multiple trainees of differing grades simultaneously, whilst maintaining high-quality clinical outcomes.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Deena Harji
- Department of Digestive Surgery, Colorectal Unit, Haut-Lévêque Hospital, Bordeaux University Hospital, Pessac, France
| | - Nour Aldajani
- Department of Digestive Surgery, Colorectal Unit, Haut-Lévêque Hospital, Bordeaux University Hospital, Pessac, France
| | - Thomas Cauvin
- Department of Digestive Surgery, Colorectal Unit, Haut-Lévêque Hospital, Bordeaux University Hospital, Pessac, France
| | - Alexander Chauvet
- Department of Digestive Surgery, Colorectal Unit, Haut-Lévêque Hospital, Bordeaux University Hospital, Pessac, France
| | - Quentin Denost
- Department of Digestive Surgery, Colorectal Unit, Haut-Lévêque Hospital, Bordeaux University Hospital, Pessac, France.
| |
Collapse
|
7
|
Kutana S, Bitner DP, Addison P, Chung PJ, Talamini MA, Filicori F. Objective assessment of robotic surgical skills: review of literature and future directions. Surg Endosc 2022; 36:3698-3707. [PMID: 35229215 DOI: 10.1007/s00464-022-09134-9] [Citation(s) in RCA: 11] [Impact Index Per Article: 3.7] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Key Words] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 08/04/2021] [Accepted: 02/13/2022] [Indexed: 01/29/2023]
Abstract
BACKGROUND Evaluation of robotic surgical skill has become increasingly important as robotic approaches to common surgeries become more widely utilized. However, evaluation of these currently lacks standardization. In this paper, we aimed to review the literature on robotic surgical skill evaluation. METHODS A review of literature on robotic surgical skill evaluation was performed and representative literature presented over the past ten years. RESULTS The study of reliability and validity in robotic surgical evaluation shows two main assessment categories: manual and automatic. Manual assessments have been shown to be valid but typically are time consuming and costly. Automatic evaluation and simulation are similarly valid and simpler to implement. Initial reports on evaluation of skill using artificial intelligence platforms show validity. Few data on evaluation methods of surgical skill connect directly to patient outcomes. CONCLUSION As evaluation in surgery begins to incorporate robotic skills, a simultaneous shift from manual to automatic evaluation may occur given the ease of implementation of these technologies. Robotic platforms offer the unique benefit of providing more objective data streams including kinematic data which allows for precise instrument tracking in the operative field. Such data streams will likely incrementally be implemented in performance evaluations. Similarly, with advances in artificial intelligence, machine evaluation of human technical skill will likely form the next wave of surgical evaluation.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Saratu Kutana
- Intraoperative Performance Analytics Laboratory (IPAL), Department of General Surgery, Northwell Health, Lenox Hill Hospital, 186 E. 76th Street, 1st Floor, New York, NY, 10021, USA
| | - Daniel P Bitner
- Intraoperative Performance Analytics Laboratory (IPAL), Department of General Surgery, Northwell Health, Lenox Hill Hospital, 186 E. 76th Street, 1st Floor, New York, NY, 10021, USA.
| | - Poppy Addison
- Intraoperative Performance Analytics Laboratory (IPAL), Department of General Surgery, Northwell Health, Lenox Hill Hospital, 186 E. 76th Street, 1st Floor, New York, NY, 10021, USA
| | - Paul J Chung
- Intraoperative Performance Analytics Laboratory (IPAL), Department of General Surgery, Northwell Health, Lenox Hill Hospital, 186 E. 76th Street, 1st Floor, New York, NY, 10021, USA.,Donald and Barbara Zucker School of Medicine at Hofstra/Northwell, Hempstead, NY, USA
| | - Mark A Talamini
- Donald and Barbara Zucker School of Medicine at Hofstra/Northwell, Hempstead, NY, USA
| | - Filippo Filicori
- Intraoperative Performance Analytics Laboratory (IPAL), Department of General Surgery, Northwell Health, Lenox Hill Hospital, 186 E. 76th Street, 1st Floor, New York, NY, 10021, USA.,Donald and Barbara Zucker School of Medicine at Hofstra/Northwell, Hempstead, NY, USA
| |
Collapse
|
8
|
O’Connell LV, Hayes C, Ismail M, O’Riordain D, Hafeez A. Attitudes and access of Irish general surgery trainees to robotic surgical training. Surg Open Sci 2022; 9:24-27. [PMID: 35541566 PMCID: PMC9079091 DOI: 10.1016/j.sopen.2022.03.010] [Citation(s) in RCA: 0] [Impact Index Per Article: 0] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Track Full Text] [Download PDF] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 12/15/2021] [Revised: 03/07/2022] [Accepted: 03/24/2022] [Indexed: 12/02/2022] Open
Abstract
Background Although the use of robotic-assisted surgery is now mainstream for procedures such as robotic prostatectomy and hysterectomy, its role in general surgery is less well established. Access to training in robotics for general surgery trainees in the Republic of Ireland is variable. Further, there are no data on specific attitudes of Irish trainees toward the role of robotics. We aimed to establish attitudes of Irish general surgery trainees toward the perceived utility of robotic surgery as well as access and satisfaction with training. Methods A survey was disseminated to trainees in the Republic of Ireland enrolled in a General Surgery training scheme via email and social media. Data collected included stage of training, intended subspecialty, interest in developing robotic skills, previous exposure to robotic surgery, satisfaction with current access to robotic training, and opinion on formally incorporating training in robotics into the general surgery curriculum. Results The response rate was 53.8%. Of these, 83% reported interest in training in robotics and 66% anticipated using the technology regularly in consultant practice. Previous exposure to robotic-assisted surgery was significantly predictive of interest in developing the skillset (P = .014). More than 71% of trainees reported that they were not satisfied with access to robotic training. Of those satisfied with access, 40% felt there was a role for incorporating robotic training into the curriculum compared to 68% of those dissatisfied. Conclusion Irish general surgery trainees perceive robotic-assisted surgery to be highly relevant to their future practice. There is an unmet need to provide additional training in the skillset. Irish general surgery trainees perceive robotic surgery (RS) to be highly relevant to their future practice. Access to training in RS is limited, and the majority of trainees desire more access to RS training. Most trainees feel that there is a role for incorporating RS training into the curriculum.
Collapse
|
9
|
Lokuhetty N, Mohan HM, Kong JC, Heriot AG, Warrier SK. Lateral pelvic sidewall dissection in rectal cancer: case selection and training to optimize outcomes. Br J Surg 2022; 109:306-307. [DOI: 10.1093/bjs/znab446] [Citation(s) in RCA: 0] [Impact Index Per Article: 0] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 07/15/2021] [Revised: 09/20/2021] [Accepted: 12/05/2021] [Indexed: 11/14/2022]
Affiliation(s)
- Naradha Lokuhetty
- Division of Cancer Surgery, Peter MacCallum Cancer Centre, Melbourne, Victoria 3000, Australia
- Department of General Surgery, The Alfred Hospital, Melbourne, Victoria 3004, Australia
| | - Helen M. Mohan
- Division of Cancer Surgery, Peter MacCallum Cancer Centre, Melbourne, Victoria 3000, Australia
| | - Joseph C. Kong
- Division of Cancer Surgery, Peter MacCallum Cancer Centre, Melbourne, Victoria 3000, Australia
- Department of General Surgery, The Alfred Hospital, Melbourne, Victoria 3004, Australia
- Department of Surgery, University of Melbourne, Melbourne, Victoria 3010, Australia
| | - Alexander G. Heriot
- Division of Cancer Surgery, Peter MacCallum Cancer Centre, Melbourne, Victoria 3000, Australia
- Department of Surgery, University of Melbourne, Melbourne, Victoria 3010, Australia
- Department of General Surgery, Epworth Healthcare, Melbourne, Victoria 3121, Australia
| | - Satish K. Warrier
- Division of Cancer Surgery, Peter MacCallum Cancer Centre, Melbourne, Victoria 3000, Australia
- Department of General Surgery, The Alfred Hospital, Melbourne, Victoria 3004, Australia
- Department of Surgery, University of Melbourne, Melbourne, Victoria 3010, Australia
- Department of General Surgery, Epworth Healthcare, Melbourne, Victoria 3121, Australia
| |
Collapse
|