Skip to main content
Top
Published in: Journal of Robotic Surgery 3/2018

01-09-2018 | Original Article

Time to consider integration of a formal robotic-assisted surgical training program into obstetrics/gynecology residency curricula

Authors: Monica Hagan Vetter, Marilly Palettas, Erinn Hade, Jeffrey Fowler, Ritu Salani

Published in: Journal of Robotic Surgery | Issue 3/2018

Login to get access

Abstract

The objectives of the study were to describe robotic-assisted surgery training programs currently being used by ACGME-accredited obstetrics and gynecology (OB/Gyn) residency programs and to explore residents’ attitudes towards their robotic surgery training curricula to evaluate resident desire for robotics training. We conducted a cross-sectional study of OB/Gyn residents for the 2015–2016 academic year. Participants completed a 31-item online questionnaire regarding their robotic-assisted surgical training and associated perspectives. Analyses of these data were primarily descriptive. In total, 98.9% of included respondents (N = 177) reported availability of a surgical robot at their training institution, and 35.0% of participants reported not having any structured robotics training program at their institution. The most commonly used training modalities included online modules (62.2%), dual-assist console (55.1%) and virtual reality simulation (50.3%). The most commonly reported barriers to completing a robots training were a lack of personal time (56.2%) and availability of the virtual reality simulator or access to the robotic equipment (29.2%). OB/Gyn residents desire robotics training and are exposed to a wide variety of training modalities. The ACGME should consider recommending the incorporation of a standardized formal robotics training program as part of the OB/Gyn residency curriculum.
Literature
2.
go back to reference Robotic Surgery in Gynecology (2015) ACOG committee opinion no. 628. American College of Obstetricians and Gynecologists. Obstet Gynecol 125(3):760–7CrossRef Robotic Surgery in Gynecology (2015) ACOG committee opinion no. 628. American College of Obstetricians and Gynecologists. Obstet Gynecol 125(3):760–7CrossRef
3.
go back to reference Schreuder HWR, Wolswijk R, Zweemer RP et al (2012) Training and learning robotic surgery, time for a more structured approach: a systematic review. BJOG 119:137–149CrossRefPubMed Schreuder HWR, Wolswijk R, Zweemer RP et al (2012) Training and learning robotic surgery, time for a more structured approach: a systematic review. BJOG 119:137–149CrossRefPubMed
4.
go back to reference Gobern JM, Novak CM, Lockrow EG (2011) Survey of robotic surgery training in obstetrics and gynecology residency. JMIG 18:755–760 Gobern JM, Novak CM, Lockrow EG (2011) Survey of robotic surgery training in obstetrics and gynecology residency. JMIG 18:755–760
5.
go back to reference Smith AL, Schneider KM, Berens PD (2010) Survey of obstetrics and gynecology residents training and opinions on robotic surgery. J Robot Surg 4:23CrossRefPubMed Smith AL, Schneider KM, Berens PD (2010) Survey of obstetrics and gynecology residents training and opinions on robotic surgery. J Robot Surg 4:23CrossRefPubMed
6.
go back to reference Vetter MH, Green I, Martino M, Fowler J, Salani R (2015) Incorporating resident/fellow training into a robotic surgery program. J Surg Oncol 112(7):684–689CrossRefPubMed Vetter MH, Green I, Martino M, Fowler J, Salani R (2015) Incorporating resident/fellow training into a robotic surgery program. J Surg Oncol 112(7):684–689CrossRefPubMed
7.
go back to reference Patel YR, Donias HW, Boyd DW, Pandea RU, Amodeo JL, Karamanoukian RL, D’Ancona G, Karamanoukain HL (2003) Are you ready to become a robo-surgeon? Am Surg 69:599–603PubMed Patel YR, Donias HW, Boyd DW, Pandea RU, Amodeo JL, Karamanoukian RL, D’Ancona G, Karamanoukain HL (2003) Are you ready to become a robo-surgeon? Am Surg 69:599–603PubMed
8.
go back to reference Thiel DD, Patel VR, Larson T, Lannen A, Leveillee RJ (2013) Assessment of robotic simulation by trainees in residency programs of the Southeastern Section of the American Urologic Association. J Surg Educ 70(5):571–577CrossRefPubMed Thiel DD, Patel VR, Larson T, Lannen A, Leveillee RJ (2013) Assessment of robotic simulation by trainees in residency programs of the Southeastern Section of the American Urologic Association. J Surg Educ 70(5):571–577CrossRefPubMed
9.
go back to reference Vogell A, Gujral H, Wright KN, Wright VW, Ruthazer R (2015) Impact of a robotic simulation program on resident surgical performance. AJOG 213:874–875CrossRef Vogell A, Gujral H, Wright KN, Wright VW, Ruthazer R (2015) Impact of a robotic simulation program on resident surgical performance. AJOG 213:874–875CrossRef
10.
go back to reference Sheth SS, Fader AN, Tergas AI, Kushnir CL, Green IC (2014) Virtual reality robotic surgical simulation: an analysis of gynecology trainees. J Surg Educ 71:125–132CrossRefPubMed Sheth SS, Fader AN, Tergas AI, Kushnir CL, Green IC (2014) Virtual reality robotic surgical simulation: an analysis of gynecology trainees. J Surg Educ 71:125–132CrossRefPubMed
11.
go back to reference Crusco S, Jackson T, Advincula A (2014) Comparing the da Vinci si single console and dual console in teaching novice surgeon suturing techniques. JSLS 18(e2014):00218 Crusco S, Jackson T, Advincula A (2014) Comparing the da Vinci si single console and dual console in teaching novice surgeon suturing techniques. JSLS 18(e2014):00218
12.
go back to reference Liang MI, McCann GA, Rath KS, Backes FJ, Cansino C, Salani R (2014) Training the next generation of robotic surgeons using guided mentorship: a randomized controlled trial. JMIG 21(6):1075–1079 Liang MI, McCann GA, Rath KS, Backes FJ, Cansino C, Salani R (2014) Training the next generation of robotic surgeons using guided mentorship: a randomized controlled trial. JMIG 21(6):1075–1079
13.
go back to reference Fernandes E, Elli E, Guilianotti P (2014) The role of the dual console in robotic surgical training. Surg 155(1):1–4CrossRef Fernandes E, Elli E, Guilianotti P (2014) The role of the dual console in robotic surgical training. Surg 155(1):1–4CrossRef
14.
go back to reference Farviar BS, Flannagan M, Leitman IM (2015) General surgery residents’ perception of robot-assisted procedures during surgical training. J Surg Educ 72:235–242CrossRef Farviar BS, Flannagan M, Leitman IM (2015) General surgery residents’ perception of robot-assisted procedures during surgical training. J Surg Educ 72:235–242CrossRef
15.
go back to reference Arain NA, Dulan G, Hogg DC, Rege RV, Powers CE, Tesfay ST, Hynan LS, Scott DJ (2012) Comprehensive proficiency-based inanimate training for robotic surgery: reliability, feasibility and educational benefit. Surg Endosc 26(10):2740–2745CrossRefPubMed Arain NA, Dulan G, Hogg DC, Rege RV, Powers CE, Tesfay ST, Hynan LS, Scott DJ (2012) Comprehensive proficiency-based inanimate training for robotic surgery: reliability, feasibility and educational benefit. Surg Endosc 26(10):2740–2745CrossRefPubMed
16.
go back to reference Winder JS, Juza RM, Saski J, Rogers AM, Pauli EM, Haluck RS, Estes SJ, Lyn-Sue JR (2016) Implementing a robotics curriculum at an academic general surgery training program: our initial experience. J Robot Surg 10(3):209–213CrossRefPubMed Winder JS, Juza RM, Saski J, Rogers AM, Pauli EM, Haluck RS, Estes SJ, Lyn-Sue JR (2016) Implementing a robotics curriculum at an academic general surgery training program: our initial experience. J Robot Surg 10(3):209–213CrossRefPubMed
Metadata
Title
Time to consider integration of a formal robotic-assisted surgical training program into obstetrics/gynecology residency curricula
Authors
Monica Hagan Vetter
Marilly Palettas
Erinn Hade
Jeffrey Fowler
Ritu Salani
Publication date
01-09-2018
Publisher
Springer London
Published in
Journal of Robotic Surgery / Issue 3/2018
Print ISSN: 1863-2483
Electronic ISSN: 1863-2491
DOI
https://doi.org/10.1007/s11701-017-0775-0

Other articles of this Issue 3/2018

Journal of Robotic Surgery 3/2018 Go to the issue