Development of a standardised training curriculum for robotic surgery: a consensus statement from an international multidisciplinary group of experts
(2015) In BJU International 116(1). p.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... (More)
- 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 kappa 0.89) and they included: need for a training curriculum (inter-rater agreement kappa 0.85); identification of learning needs (kappa 0.83); development of the curriculum contents (kappa 0.81); an overview of available curricula (kappa 0.79); settings for robotic surgery training ((kappa 0.89); assessment and training of trainers (kappa 0.92); requirements for certification and patient safety (kappa 0.83); and need for a universally standardised curriculum (kappa 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. (Less)
Please use this url to cite or link to this publication:
https://lup.lub.lu.se/record/7584844
- author
- organization
- publishing date
- 2015
- type
- Contribution to journal
- publication status
- published
- subject
- keywords
- learning-needs, validation, education, curriculum, training, robotics
- in
- BJU International
- volume
- 116
- issue
- 1
- pages
- 93 - 101
- publisher
- Wiley-Blackwell
- external identifiers
-
- wos:000357048700017
- scopus:84933672012
- pmid:25359658
- ISSN
- 1464-4096
- DOI
- 10.1111/bju.12974
- language
- English
- LU publication?
- yes
- id
- 31732a9d-6a83-45d8-98eb-626b4328596c (old id 7584844)
- date added to LUP
- 2016-04-01 11:01:32
- date last changed
- 2022-05-18 07:50:15
@article{31732a9d-6a83-45d8-98eb-626b4328596c,
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 kappa 0.89) and they included: need for a training curriculum (inter-rater agreement kappa 0.85); identification of learning needs (kappa 0.83); development of the curriculum contents (kappa 0.81); an overview of available curricula (kappa 0.79); settings for robotic surgery training ((kappa 0.89); assessment and training of trainers (kappa 0.92); requirements for certification and patient safety (kappa 0.83); and need for a universally standardised curriculum (kappa 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.}},
author = {{Ahmed, Kamran and Khan, Reenam and Mottrie, Alexandre and Lovegrove, Catherine and Abaza, Ronny and Ahlawat, Rajesh and Ahlering, Thomas and Ahlgren, Göran and Artibani, Walter and Barret, Eric and Cathelineau, Xavier and Challacombe, Ben and Coloby, Patrick and Khan, Muhammad S. and Hubert, Jacques and Michel, Maurice Stephan and Montorsi, Francesco and Murphy, Declan and Palou, Joan and Patel, Vipul and Piechaud, Pierre-Thierry and Van Poppel, Hendrik and Rischmann, Pascal and Sanchez-Salas, Rafael and Siemer, Stefan and Stoeckle, Michael and Stolzenburg, Jens-Uwe and Terrier, Jean-Etienne and Thueroff, Joachim W. and Vaessen, Christophe and Van der Poel, Henk G. and Van Cleynenbreugel, Ben and Volpe, Alessandro and Wagner, Christian and Wiklund, Peter and Wilson, Timothy and Wirth, Manfred and Witt, Joern and Dasgupta, Prokar}},
issn = {{1464-4096}},
keywords = {{learning-needs; validation; education; curriculum; training; robotics}},
language = {{eng}},
number = {{1}},
pages = {{93--101}},
publisher = {{Wiley-Blackwell}},
series = {{BJU International}},
title = {{Development of a standardised training curriculum for robotic surgery: a consensus statement from an international multidisciplinary group of experts}},
url = {{http://dx.doi.org/10.1111/bju.12974}},
doi = {{10.1111/bju.12974}},
volume = {{116}},
year = {{2015}},
}