Top

World Journal of Urology

Published in:

Open Access 01-10-2018 | Original Article

Surgical teaching in urology: patient safety and educational value of ‘LIVE’ and ‘SEMI-LIVE’ surgical demonstrations

Authors: Jaap D. Legemate, Stefano P. Zanetti, Jan Erik Freund, Joyce Baard, Jean J. M. C. H. de la Rosette

Published in: World Journal of Urology | Issue 10/2018

Abstract

Purpose

To evaluate the opinion of urologists and their audience regarding patient safety and educational value of live surgical demonstrations (LSD) and semi-live surgical demonstrations (semi-LSD).

Methods

Following the ‘2017 Challenges in Endourology’ meeting, a survey addressing patient safety and the educational value of LSD and semi-LSD was disseminated online to all participants. Survey outcomes of LSD and semi-LSD were compared.

Results

All 279 respondents attended both LSD and semi-LSD. Overall, 53% of said respondents stated that patient safety was always the highest priority for LSD, while 74% noted the same for semi-LSD. The complication risk in LSD was perceived equal by 57% of the respondents when compared to cases of similar difficulty in routine practice, while 38% perceived it as a greater risk. For semi-LSD, the complication risk was perceived equal by 84%, while 5% perceived it to be a greater risk in comparison to general practice. On a scale from 0 (no value) to 10 (highly valuable), the average educational value of LSD and semi-LSD was rated 8.4 and 8.3, respectively. A substantial percentage of the surgeons who perform LSD express concerns that live surgery is not the optimal setting to ensure patient safety.

Conclusions

LSD remains a popular tool for surgical education among urologists and their audience. However, patient safety remains a concern and is perceived less of a concern for semi-LSD. The educational value of LSD and semi-LSD was scored equally high. Therefore, we should consider to advocate the use of semi-LSD more often.

Available only for authorised users

Artibani W, Ficarra V, Challacombe BJ et al (2014) EAU policy on live surgery events. Eur Urol 66(1):87–97. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.eururo.2014.01.028 CrossRefPubMed

Kallmes DF, Cloft HJ, Molyneux A, Burger I, Brinjikji W, Murphy KP (2011) Live case demonstrations: patient safety, ethics, consent, and conflicts. Lancet 377(9776):1539–1541. https://doi.org/10.1016/S0140-6736(11)60357-7 CrossRefPubMed

Challacombe B, Weston R, Coughlin G, Murphy D, Dasgupta P (2010) Live surgical demonstrations in urology: valuable educational tool or putting patients at risk? BJU Int 106(11):1571–1574. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1464-410X.2010.09860.x CrossRefPubMed

Smith A (2012) Urological live surgery—An anathema. BJU Int 110(3):299–300. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1464-410X.2012.11314.x CrossRef

Philip-Watson J, Khan SAA, Hadjipavlou M, Rane A, Knoll T (2014) Live surgery at conferences—Clinical benefits and ethical dilemmas. Arab J Urol 12(3):183–186. https://doi.org/10.1016/i.aiu.2014.04.002 CrossRefPubMedPubMedCentral

Legemate JD, Zanetti SP, Baard J et al (2017) Outcome from 5-year live surgical demonstrations in urinary stone treatment: are outcomes compromised? World J Urol 35(11):1745–1756. https://doi.org/10.1007/s00345-017-2050-4 CrossRefPubMedPubMedCentral

Finch W, Masood J, Buchholz N, Turney BW, Smith D, Wiseman O (2015) Would you want to be the patient? “Live surgical broadcast” or “as-live unedited surgical broadcast”. J Endourol 29(7):821–829. https://doi.org/10.1089/end.2014.0580 CrossRefPubMed

Phan YC, Segaran S, Wiseman O et al (2016) Which is better? “Live” surgical broadcasts vs “as-live” surgical broadcasts. J Endourol 30(9):1022–1028. https://doi.org/10.1089/end.2016.0165 CrossRefPubMed

Elsamra SE, Fakhoury M, Motato H et al (2014) The surgical spectacle: a survey of urologists viewing live case demonstrations. BJU Int 113(4):674–678. https://doi.org/10.1111/bju.12453 CrossRefPubMed

10.

Duty B, Okhunov Z, Friedlander J, Okeke Z, Smith A (2012) Live surgical demonstrations: an old, but increasingly controversial practice. Urology 79(5):1185.e7–1185.e11. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.urology.2011.12.037 CrossRef

11.

Khan SAA, Chang RTM, Ahmed K et al (2014) Live surgical education: a perspective from the surgeons who perform it. BJU Int 114(1):151–158. https://doi.org/10.1111/bju.12283 CrossRefPubMed

12.

Salami SS, Elsamra SE, Motato H et al (2014) Performing in the surgical amphitheater of today: perception of urologists conducting live case demonstrations. J Endourol 28(9):1121–1126. https://doi.org/10.1089/end.2014.0094 CrossRefPubMed

13.

Brunckhorst O, Challacombe B, Abboudi H, Khan MS, Dasgupta P, Ahmed K (2014) Systematic review of live surgical demonstrations and their effectiveness on training. Br J Surg 101(13):1637–1643. https://doi.org/10.1002/bjs.9635 CrossRefPubMed

14.

Ogaya-Pinies G, Abdul-Muhsin H, Palayapalayam-Ganapathi H, Bonet X, Rogers T, Rocco B, Coelho R, Hernandez-Cardona E, Jenson C, Patel V (2017) Safety of live robotic surgery: results from a single institution. Eur Urol Focus. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.euf.2017.08.004 CrossRefPubMed

15.

Misraï V, Guillot-Tantay C, Pasquié M et al (2018) Comparison of Outcomes Obtained After Regular Surgery Versus Live Operative Surgical Cases: single-centre Experience with Green Laser Enucleation of the Prostate. Eur Urol Focus. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.euf.2018.01.001 CrossRefPubMed

Title: Surgical teaching in urology: patient safety and educational value of ‘LIVE’ and ‘SEMI-LIVE’ surgical demonstrations
Authors: Jaap D. Legemate
Stefano P. Zanetti
Jan Erik Freund
Joyce Baard
Jean J. M. C. H. de la Rosette
Publication date: 01-10-2018
Publisher: Springer Berlin Heidelberg
Published in: World Journal of Urology / Issue 10/2018
Print ISSN: 0724-4983
Electronic ISSN: 1433-8726
DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s00345-018-2291-x

At a glance: The ONWARDS insulin icodec trials

Springer Medicine

Surgical teaching in urology: patient safety and educational value of ‘LIVE’ and ‘SEMI-LIVE’ surgical demonstrations

Abstract

Purpose

Methods

Results

Conclusions

At a glance: The ONWARDS insulin icodec trials

Springer Medicine

Abstract

Purpose

Methods

Results

Conclusions

Please log in to get access to this content

Other articles of this Issue 10/2018

Role of quantitative computed tomography texture analysis in the prediction of adherent perinephric fat

Urologic Management of the Spinal Cord Injured Patient

Epidemiology and pathophysiology of neurogenic bladder after spinal cord injury

Surveillance and management of urologic complications after spinal cord injury

Non-surgical urologic management of neurogenic bladder after spinal cord injury

Current and future international patterns of care of neurogenic bladder after spinal cord injury