Scholarlink

Introduction <p>While robotic surgical training is crucial for preparing skilled surgeons, the landscape of available training programs is not well-defined. Many institutions offer structured curricula, yet transparency about training modalities, caseloads, and eligibility criteria for novice surgeons is limited. To address this gap, a structured survey was designed to assess robotic education offerings globally.</p> Patients and methods <p>A web-based survey was distributed to different robotic societies, institutions and dedicated robotic surgery experts, based on the Junior European Association of Urology Robotic Section (J-ERUS) network and the Young Academic Urologists (YAU) Robotic Section between February and September 2024. Furthermore, a peer-esteem snowballing approach allowed the survey to expand its reach through expert referrals. The survey captured information on training modalities, infrastructure, caseload, and case mix. Respondents were required to provide contact details for further follow-up, while their identities and institutions remained confidential.</p> Results <p>The survey achieved a 16.5% response rate, with 80 respondents from 49 institutions confirming robotic training opportunities. Training platforms included Da Vinci multi-port systems (71%), HUGO-RAS (15%), and Versius (8%). Training methods featured simulators (89%), dual-console training (65%), dry-labs (39%), and wet-labs (16%). Variability in training structures was observed, with 32% of institutions offering dedicated fellowships and 68% combining training with clinical duties. Institutions varied in case volumes (100–500 cases per year), and 41% indicated performing over 500 robotic procedures annually. Respondents predominantly answered that robotic surgery novices may access about 20% of these cases.</p> Conclusion <p>This study highlights the heterogeneity of robotic surgical education and the need for standardized, globally accessible training frameworks. Establishing an international consortium to map training programs and content could enhance transparency and support novice surgeons in selecting institutions that align with their career goals. It is critical to integrate emerging robotic platforms and evolving methodologies into curricula to ensure comprehensive and effective training.</p>

错误：搜索内容不能为空，请输入英文关键词
错误：关键词超出字数限制，请精简
高级检索

Current training landscape for novice robotic surgeons: an international investigative survey by the Junior-ERUS/Young academic urologists (YAU) robotics in urology working group

  • 期刊论文

  • 出版模式：

    开放获取

  • 发表日期：

    2025年8月1日

查看全文
  • Christoph Würnschimmel,
  • Mike Wenzel,
  • Marcio Covas Moschovas,
  • Paolo Dell’Oglio,
  • Marco Paciotti,
  • Carlo Andrea Bravi,
  • Ruben De Groote,
  • Fabrizio Di Maida,
  • Federico Piramide,
  • Filippo Turri,
  • Iulia Andras,
  • Gabriele Sorce,
  • Nikolaos Liakos,
  • Alberto Breda,
  • Alessandro Larcher

摘要

Introduction

While robotic surgical training is crucial for preparing skilled surgeons, the landscape of available training programs is not well-defined. Many institutions offer structured curricula, yet transparency about training modalities, caseloads, and eligibility criteria for novice surgeons is limited. To address this gap, a structured survey was designed to assess robotic education offerings globally.

Patients and methods

A web-based survey was distributed to different robotic societies, institutions and dedicated robotic surgery experts, based on the Junior European Association of Urology Robotic Section (J-ERUS) network and the Young Academic Urologists (YAU) Robotic Section between February and September 2024. Furthermore, a peer-esteem snowballing approach allowed the survey to expand its reach through expert referrals. The survey captured information on training modalities, infrastructure, caseload, and case mix. Respondents were required to provide contact details for further follow-up, while their identities and institutions remained confidential.

Results

The survey achieved a 16.5% response rate, with 80 respondents from 49 institutions confirming robotic training opportunities. Training platforms included Da Vinci multi-port systems (71%), HUGO-RAS (15%), and Versius (8%). Training methods featured simulators (89%), dual-console training (65%), dry-labs (39%), and wet-labs (16%). Variability in training structures was observed, with 32% of institutions offering dedicated fellowships and 68% combining training with clinical duties. Institutions varied in case volumes (100–500 cases per year), and 41% indicated performing over 500 robotic procedures annually. Respondents predominantly answered that robotic surgery novices may access about 20% of these cases.

Conclusion

This study highlights the heterogeneity of robotic surgical education and the need for standardized, globally accessible training frameworks. Establishing an international consortium to map training programs and content could enhance transparency and support novice surgeons in selecting institutions that align with their career goals. It is critical to integrate emerging robotic platforms and evolving methodologies into curricula to ensure comprehensive and effective training.