S. Khan, S. Raza, K. Ahmed, R. Din, A. Stegemann, M. Bienko, A. Chowriappa, T. Kesavadas, M. Bhandari, K. Guru
Guy’s and St Thomas’ NHS Foundation Trust, Roswell Park Cancer Institute, Guy’s Hospital, Roswell Park Cance
Introduction & Objectives
Robot assisted surgery has been incorporated into the surgical armamentarium and generated interest among practicing non-robotic surgeons (NRS). We evaluated whether our Robot-assisted Surgical Training (RAST) Program would enable NRS to incorporate this new skill into their clinical expertise. This study aims to establish educational impact and acceptability of the curriculum.
Materials & Methods
A formal RAST Program was established at Roswell Park Cancer Institute in 2007. From July 2010 to October 2012, 43 non-robotic surgeons (US: , International: ) participated in the RAST program. The 5-day to 3-week program include a Fundamental of Robotic Surgery (FSRS) curriculum, Bedside Hands on trouble shooting training, case observation, Hands On Surgical Training (HoST) procedure module; da-Vinci Robotic Surgical hands on Experience and finally an animal laboratory. As part of our training & credentialing quality assurance program, pre and post program follow-up questionnaires evaluating the quality and feedback for improvement routinely used as a measure at regular intervals were evaluated. This survey aims to evaluate impact of the educational intervention at a delayed interval when participants were back to their practice as independently performing surgeons.
Results
43 non-robotic surgeons participated in our RAST program over 27 months. The response rate to the questionnaires was 85 %. The average follow-up period since completion of program was 6 months (2-19). Only 13% surgeons had performed any robot-assisted surgery before completion of the program. Two participants had performed other training program for robot-assisted surgery before embarking on our program. 81%, 7%, 66% participants felt FSRS curriculum, bedside trouble shooting and animal laboratory were beneficial in getting acquainted with basic principles of robot-assisted surgery respectively. 61% participants were performing robot-assisted surgery in three surgical specialties (urology, gynecology and gastrointestinal surgery). Robot-assisted radical prostatectomy and gastrointestinal surgeries were the two commonest performed procedures performed after completion respectively. 12 surgeons had performed the procedures independently; meanwhile 8 performed them under supervision of another surgeon. 61 % non-robotic surgeons performed robot-assisted surgery at an average of 5 weeks (1-24) after completion of RAST program. 2% conversion rate to open surgery was reported due to difficult bladder neck and post transurethral resection of prostate in robot-assisted radical prostatectomy and one patient with a large gynecologic tumor.
Conclusions
A dedicated surgical training program focused on learning key steps of robot-assisted surgery enabled most participants to successfully incorporate and maintain their robot-assisted surgical skills in clinical practice. A program if its kind certainly has educational impact and is acceptable to the participants.
Session: Poster Presentation
Program Number: ETP019
« Return to SAGES 2013 abstract archive
