Dataset Information

The development of a robotic gynaecological surgery training curriculum and results of a delphi study.

ABSTRACT: BACKGROUND:Technology for minimal access surgery is rapidly progressing in all surgical specialities including Gynaecology. As robotic surgery becomes established in increasing numbers of hospitals, there is no set curriculum for training in robotic gynaecological surgery or the assistant role in use in the UK. The purpose of this study was to determine a list of competencies that could be used as the basis of a core robotic gynaecological surgery curriculum, to explore its acceptability and the level of interest in undertaking training in robotics among obstetrics & gynaecology (O&G) trainees. METHODS:A four-round Delphi study was conducted using members and associates of British & Irish Association of Robotic Gynaecological Surgeons (BIARGS). In Round 1 respondents were asked to propose standards that could be used in the curriculum. In the following three rounds, the respondents were asked to score each of the standards according to their opinion as to the importance of the standard. Items that scored a mean of 80% or above were included in the final proposed curriculum. Following this, a national survey was conducted to explore the interest among O&G trainees in undertaking a formal robotic training for the first assistant and console surgeon roles. RESULTS:The items proposed were divided into three separate sections: competencies for a medical first assistant; competencies for a console surgeon; continued professional development for trained console surgeons. From the national survey; 109 responses were received of which 60% were interested in undertaking a formal training for the first assistant role, and 68% are expressing interest in training for the console surgeon role. CONCLUSION:Undertaking a Delphi exercise to determine a core gynaecological robotic training curriculum has enabled consensus to be achieved from the opinions of BIARGS members/associates. There is interest among O&G trainees at all levels of training to gain experience and develop their skills in robotic surgery by undertaking a formal training in robotic surgery at both the first assistant and console surgeon level.

SUBMITTER: Ismail A

PROVIDER: S-EPMC7057472 | biostudies-literature | 2020 Mar

REPOSITORIES: biostudies-literature

ACCESS DATA

Publications

The development of a robotic gynaecological surgery training curriculum and results of a delphi study.

Ismail Aemn A Wood Matthew M Ind Thomas T Gul Nahid N Moss Esther E

BMC medical education 20200304 1

<h4>Background</h4>Technology for minimal access surgery is rapidly progressing in all surgical specialities including Gynaecology. As robotic surgery becomes established in increasing numbers of hospitals, there is no set curriculum for training in robotic gynaecological surgery or the assistant role in use in the UK. The purpose of this study was to determine a list of competencies that could be used as the basis of a core robotic gynaecological surgery curriculum, to explore its acceptability ...[more]

PMID: 32131812

Similar Datasets

Project description:ObjectiveTo compare the health-related quality of life and cost-effectiveness of robot-assisted laparoscopic surgery (RALS) versus conventional 'straight stick' laparoscopic surgery (CLS) in women undergoing hysterectomy as part of their treatment for either suspected or proven gynaecological malignancy.DesignMulticentre prospective observational cohort study.SettingPatients aged 16+ undergoing hysterectomy as part of their treatment for gynaecological malignancy at 12 National Health Service (NHS) cancer units and centres in England between August 2017 and February 2020.Participants275 patients recruited with 159 RALS, 73 CLS eligible for analysis.Outcome measuresPrimary outcome was the European Organisation for Research and Treatment of Cancer Quality of Life measure (EORTC). Secondary outcomes included EuroQol-5 Dimension (EQ-5D-5L) utility, 6-minute walk test (6MWT), NHS costs using pounds sterling (£) 2018-2019 prices and cost-effectiveness. The cost-effectiveness evaluation compared EQ-5D-5L quality adjusted life years and costs between RALS and CLS.ResultsNo difference identified between RALS and CLS for EORTC, EQ-5D-5L utility and 6MWT. RALS had unadjusted mean cost difference of £556 (95% CI -£314 to £1315) versus CLS and mean quality adjusted life year (QALY) difference of 0.0024 (95% CI -0.00051 to 0.0057), non-parametric incremental cost-effectiveness ratio of £231 667per QALY. For the adjusted cost-effectiveness analysis, RALS dominated CLS with a mean cost difference of -£188 (95% CI -£1321 to £827) and QALY difference of 0.0024 (95% CI -0.0008 to 0.0057).ConclusionsFindings suggest that RALS versus CLS in women undergoing hysterectomy (after adjusting for differences in morbidity) is cost-effective with lower costs and QALYs. Results are highly sensitive to the usage of robotic hardware with higher usage increasing the probability of cost-effectiveness. Non-inferiority randomised controlled trial would be of benefit to decision-makers to provide further evidence on the cost-effectiveness of RALS versus CLS but may not be practical due to surgical preferences of surgeons and the extensive roll out of RALS.

Project description:ContextThe role of robot-assisted surgery continues to expand at a time when trainers and proctors have travel restrictions during the coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) pandemic.ObjectiveTo provide guidance on setting up and running an optimised telementoring service that can be integrated into current validated curricula. We define a standardised approach to training candidates in skill acquisition via telepresence technologies. We aim to describe an approach based on the current evidence and available technologies, and define the key elements within optimised telepresence services, by seeking consensus from an expert committee comprising key opinion leaders in training.Evidence acquisitionThis project was carried out in phases: a systematic review of the current literature, a teleconference meeting, and then an initial survey were conducted based on the current evidence and expert opinion, and sent to the committee. Twenty-four experts in training, including clinicians, academics, and industry, contributed to the Delphi process. An accelerated Delphi process underwent three rounds and was completed within 72 h. Additions to the second- and third-round surveys were formulated based on the answers and comments from the previous rounds. Consensus opinion was defined as ≥80% agreement.Evidence synthesisThere was 100% consensus regarding an urgent need for international agreement on guidance for optimised telepresence. Consensus was reached in multiple areas, including (1) infrastructure and functionality; (2) definitions and terminology; (3) protocols for training, communication, and safety issues; and (4) accountability including ethical and legal issues. The resulting formulated guidance showed good internal consistency among experts, with a Cronbach alpha of 0.90.ConclusionsUsing the Delphi methodology, we achieved international consensus among experts for development and content validation of optimised telepresence services for robotic surgery training. This guidance lays the foundation for launching telepresence services in robotic surgery. This guidance will require further validation.Patient summaryOwing to travel restrictions during the coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) pandemic, development of remote training and support via telemedicine is becoming increasingly important. We report a key opinion leader consensus view on a standardised approach to telepresence.

Project description:ObjectivesEmergency medicine (EM) trainees are expected to learn to provide acute care for patients of all ages. The American Council for Graduate Medical Education provides some guidance on topics related to caring for pediatric patients; however, education about pediatric topics varies across residency programs. The goal of this project was to develop a consensus curriculum for teaching pediatric emergency care.MethodsWe recruited 13 physicians from six academic health centers to participate in a three-round electronic modified Delphi project. Participants were selected on the basis of expertise with both EM resident education and pediatric emergency care. The first modified Delphi survey asked participants to generate the core knowledge, skills, and experiences needed to prepare EM residents to effectively treat children in an acute care setting. The qualitative data from the first round was reformulated into a second-round questionnaire. During the second round, participants used rating scales to prioritize the curriculum content proposed during the first round. In round 3, participants were asked to make a determination about each curriculum topic using a three-point scale labeled required, optional, or not needed.ResultsThe first modified Delphi round yielded 400 knowledge topics, 206 clinical skills, and 44 specific types of experience residents need to prepare for acute pediatric patient care. These were narrowed to 153 topics, 84 skills, and 28 experiences through elimination of redundancy and two rounds of prioritization. The final lists contain topics classified by highly recommended, partially recommended, and not recommended. The partially recommended category is intended to help programs tailor their curriculum to the unique needs of their learners as well as account for variability between 3- and 4-year programs and the amount of time programs allocate to pediatric education.ConclusionThe modified Delphi process yielded the broad outline of a consensus core pediatric emergency care curriculum.

Project description:Emerging evidence indicates that proximity to unconventional oil and gas development (UOGD) is associated with health outcomes. There is intense debate about "How close is too close?" for maintaining public health and safety. The goal of this Delphi study was to elicit expert consensus on appropriate setback distances for UOGD from human activity. Three rounds were used to identify and seek consensus on recommended setback distances. The 18 panelists were health care providers, public health practitioners, environmental advocates, and researchers/scientists. Consensus was defined as agreement of ?70% of panelists. Content analysis of responses to Round 1 questions revealed four categories: recommend setback distances; do not recommend setback distances; recommend additional setback distances for vulnerable populations; do not recommend additional setback distances for vulnerable populations. In Round 2, panelists indicated their level of agreement with the statements in each category using a five-point Likert scale. Based on emerging consensus, statements within each category were collapsed into seven statements for Round 3: recommend set back distances of <¼ mile; ¼-½ mile; 1-1 ¼ mile; and ? 2 mile; not feasible to recommend setback distances; recommend additional setbacks for vulnerable groups; not feasible to recommend additional setbacks for vulnerable groups. The panel reached consensus that setbacks of < ¼ mile should not be recommended and additional setbacks for vulnerable populations should be recommended. The panel did not reach consensus on recommendations for setbacks between ¼ and 2 miles. The results suggest that if setbacks are used the distances should be greater than ¼ of a mile from human activity, and that additional setbacks should be used for settings where vulnerable groups are found, including schools, daycare centers, and hospitals. The lack of consensus on setback distances between 1/4 and 2 miles reflects the limited health and exposure studies and need to better define exposures and track health.

Dataset Information

The development of a robotic gynaecological surgery training curriculum and results of a delphi study.

Publications

The development of a robotic gynaecological surgery training curriculum and results of a delphi study.

Similar Datasets

OmicsDI is part of the ELIXIR infrastructure

Tweets