Search

Background: Urology has been at the forefront of adopting laparoscopic and robot-assisted techniques to improve patient outcomes. This systematic review aimed to examine the literature relating to the learning curves of major urological robotic and laparoscopic procedures., Methods: In accordance with PRISMA (Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses) guidelines, a systematic literature search strategy was employed across PubMed, EMBASE, and the Cochrane Library from inception to December 2021, alongside a search of the grey literature. Two independent reviewers completed the article screening and data extraction stages using the Newcastle-Ottawa Scale as a quality assessment tool. The review was reported in accordance with AMSTAR (A MeaSurement Tool to Assess systematic Reviews) guidelines., Results: Of 3702 records identified, 97 eligible studies were included for narrative synthesis. Learning curves are mapped using an array of measurements including operative time (OT), estimated blood loss, complication rates as well as procedure-specific outcomes, with OT being the most commonly used metric by eligible studies. The learning curve for OT was identified as 10-250 cases for robot-assisted laparoscopic prostatectomy and 40-250 for laparoscopic radical prostatectomy. The robot-assisted partial nephrectomy learning curve for warm ischaemia time is 4-150 cases. No high-quality studies evaluating the learning curve for laparoscopic radical cystectomy and for robotic and laparoscopic retroperitoneal lymph node dissection were identified., Conclusion: There was considerable variation in the definitions of outcome measures and performance thresholds, with poor reporting of potential confounders. Future studies should use multiple surgeons and large sample sizes of cases to identify the currently undefined learning curves for robotic and laparoscopic urological procedures., (Copyright © 2023 The Author(s). Published by Wolters Kluwer Health, Inc.)

Objectives: To develop a wet laboratory training model for learning core laparoscopic surgical skills and evaluating learners' competency level outside the operating room., Methods: Participants completed three tasks (task 1: tissue dissection around the aorta; task 2: tissue dissection and division of the renal artery; task 3: renal parenchymal closure). Each performance was video recorded and subsequently evaluated by two experts, according to the Global Operative Assessment of Laparoscopic Skills and task-specific metrics that we developed (Assessment Sheet of Laparoscopic Skills in Wet Lab score). Mean scores were used for analyses. The subjective mental workload was also assessed (NASA Task Load Index)., Results: The 54 participants included 32 urologists, eight young trainees and 14 medical students. A total of 13 participants were categorized as experts (≥50 laparoscopic surgeries), eight as intermediates (10-49) and 33 as novices (0-9). There were significant differences in the Global Operative Assessment of Laparoscopic Skills and Assessment Sheet of Laparoscopic Skills in Wet Lab scores among the three groups in all three tasks. Higher NASA Task Load Index scores were observed in novices, and there were significant differences in tasks 1 (Kruskal-Wallis test, P = 0.0004) and 2 (P = 0.0002), and marginal differences in task 3 (P = 0.0745) among the three groups., Conclusions: Our training model has good construct validity, and differences in the NASA Task Load Index score reflect previous laparoscopic surgical experiences. Our findings show the ability to assess both laparoscopic surgical skills and mental workloads, which could help educators comprehend trainees' level outside the operating room. Given the decreasing opportunity to carry out pure laparoscopic surgeries because of the dissemination of robotic surgery, especially in urology, our model can offer practical training opportunities., (© 2020 The Authors. International Journal of Urology published by John Wiley & Sons Australia, Ltd on behalf of the Japanese Urological Association.)

Objectives: To report the study protocol for the first international multicentre randomized controlled trial investigating the effectiveness of simulation-based surgical training and the development process for an evidence-based training curriculum, to be delivered as an educational intervention., Participants and Methods: This prospective, international, multicentre randomized controlled clinical and educational trial will recruit urology surgical trainees who must not have performed ≥10 of the selected index procedure, ureterorenoscopy (URS). Participants will be randomized to simulation-based training (SBT) or non-simulation-based training (NSBT), the latter of which is the current sole standard of training globally. The primary outcome is the number of procedures required to achieve proficiency, where proficiency is defined as achieving a learning curve plateau of 28 or more on an Objective Structured Assessment of Technical Skills (OSATS) assessment scale, for three consecutive operations, without any complications. All participants will be followed up either until they complete 25 procedures or for 18 months. Development of the URS SBT curriculum took place through a two-round Delphi process., Results: A total of 47 respondents, consisting of trainees (n = 24) with URS experience and urolithiasis specialists (n = 23), participated in round 1 of the Delphi process. Specialists (n = 10) finalized the content of the curriculum in round 2. The developed interventional curriculum consists of initial theoretic knowledge through didactic lectures followed by select tasks and cases on the URO-Mentor (Simbionix, Lod, Israel) VR Simulator, Uro-Scopic Trainer (Limbs & Things, Bristol, UK) and Scope Trainer (Mediskills, Manchester, UK) models for both semi-rigid and flexible URS. Respondents also selected relevant non-technical skills scenarios and cadaveric simulation tasks as additional components, with delivery subject to local availability., Conclusions: SIMULATE is the first multicentre trial investigating the effect and transferability of supplementary SBT on operating performance and patient outcomes. An evidence-based training curriculum is presented, developed with expert and trainee input. Participants will be followed and the primary outcome, number of procedures required to proficiency, will be reported alongside key clinical secondary outcomes, (ISCRTN 12260261)., (© 2020 The Authors BJU International published by John Wiley & Sons Ltd on behalf of BJU International.)

Background: Simulation-based training offers an acceptable adjunct to the traditional mentor-apprentice model in helping trainees to traverse the early stages of the learning curve for ureteroscopy and percutaneous renal surgery. In addition, nontechnical skills are increasingly important in preventing adverse events in the operating room, and simulation-based training can be used for training in such skills. Incorporation of simulation into formalised, standardised, and validated curricula offers an applicable method for training residents., Objective: To develop a curriculum for urolithiasis procedures incorporating technical and nontechnical skills training for implementation across Europe., Design, Setting, and Participants: An international panel of experts from EULIS, EUREP, ESU and ESUT was consulted in five stages. The study incorporated a mix of qualitative and quantitative data for collection and analysis. Responses were drawn out in (1) an opinion survey and (2) a curriculum development survey, which were discussed in (3) a focus group meeting. Group responses from this meeting were analysed for themes, which were discussed at (4) a focus group meeting, where consensus was reached among the group. Data analysis and integration at this stage were used to draft the curriculum., Results and Limitations: All group meetings were transcribed from the focus group discussion. Eight themes were generated, into which all data were categorised. These were: need for a training curriculum; curriculum objectives; curriculum structure; curriculum content; teaching platforms and tools; assessment and certification; validation and implementation; and global integration of the curriculum. A curriculum, including recommended simulators for use, was subsequently proposed., Conclusions: We propose a comprehensive curriculum for training in urolithiasis. Additional planning is required for full validation and implementation before it can be used to train residents., Patient Summary: Stone disease accounts for a major proportion of surgical interventions worldwide. We describe a consensus guideline for effective training of stone surgeons., (Copyright © 2017 European Association of Urology. Published by Elsevier B.V. All rights reserved.)

Surgeons training in the twenty-first century are subject to a myriad of pressures, as has always been the case within surgical training. These include reduced hours available for training and increased threat of litigation against their operating practice. The Halstedian approach of "see one, do one, teach one" has been replaced within surgical training and simulation has become established to enable urology trainees to develop technical and non-technical skills away from the operating room. With the primary focus as patient safety and increasing operating skill, "simulation training" encompasses several modalities. These include wet-lab cadaveric and animal models, dry lab, high fidelity, low-fidelity and virtual reality (VR). These can be used to practice generic surgical skills, such as laparoscopic suturing or knot tying on a robotic console. Beyond this there is potential for simulation training courses and full-immersion simulation to address non-technical skills and team aspects within the operating room. To incorporate simulators into training, models must be carefully designed and evaluated according to certain considerations, ensuring that they address parameters such as face, content and construct validity. This review aimed to provide an overview of simulation platforms available within endourology, considering ureterorenoscopy and percutaneous nephrolithotomy and the status of their validation.

Simulation has become widely accepted as a supplementary method of training. Within urology, the greatest number of procedure-specific models and subsequent validation studies have been carried out in the field of endourology. Many generic-skills simulators have been created for laparoscopic and robot-assisted surgery, but only a limited number of procedure-specific models are available. By contrast, open urological simulation has only seen a handful of validated models. Of the available modalities, virtual reality (VR) simulators are most commonly used for endourology and robotic surgery training, the former also employing many high-fidelity bench models. Smaller dry-lab and ex vivo animal models have been used for laparoscopic and robotic training, whereas live animals and human cadavers are widely used for full procedural training. Newer concepts such as augmented-reality (AR) models and patient-specific simulators have also been introduced. Several curricula, including one recommended within, have been produced, incorporating various different training modalities and nontechnical skills training techniques. Such curricula and validated models should be used in a structured fashion to supplement operating room training.

Purpose: Increased awareness of patient safety, advances in surgical technology and reduced working times have led to the adoption of simulation enhanced training. However, the simulators available need to be scientifically evaluated before integration into curricula. We identify the currently available training models for urological surgery, their status of validation and the evidence behind each model., Materials and Methods: MEDLINE®, Embase® and the Cochrane Library databases were searched for English language articles published between 1990 and 2015 describing urological simulators and/or validation studies of these models. All studies were assessed for level of evidence, and each model was subsequently awarded a level of recommendation using a modified Oxford Centre for Evidence-Based Medicine classification, adapted for education by the European Association of Endoscopic Surgeons., Results: A total of 91 validation studies were identified pertaining to training models in endourology (63), laparoscopic surgery (17), robot-assisted surgery (8) and open urological surgery (6), with a total of 55 models. Of the included studies 6 were classified Level 1b, 9 Level 2a, 39 Level 2b and 19 Level 2c. Of all the training models the URO Mentor™ was the only one to receive a level of recommendation of 1., Conclusions: UroSimulation is a growing field and increasing numbers of models are being produced. However, there are still too few validation studies with a high level of evidence demonstrating the transferability of skills. Nevertheless, efforts should be made to use the currently available models in curriculum based training programs., (Copyright © 2016 American Urological Association Education and Research, Inc. Published by Elsevier Inc. All rights reserved.)

Objectives: To assess face, content, and construct validity of the RobotiX Mentor virtual reality simulator, to assess its acceptability as a robotic surgery training tool and feasibility of its use, and to develop a supplementary training curriculum., Subjects and Methods: This prospective, observational, and comparative study recruited novice (n = 20), intermediate (n = 15), and expert (n = 11) robotic surgeons as participants from institutions across the United Kingdom and at the 30th European Association of Urology Annual Meeting. Each participant completed nine surgical tasks across two modules on the simulator, followed by a questionnaire to evaluate subjective realism (face validity), task importance (content validity), feasibility, and acceptability. Outcome measures of novice, intermediate, and expert groups were compared using Mann-Whitney U-tests to assess construct validity., Results: Construct validity was demonstrated in a total of 17/25 performance evaluation metrics (p < 0.001). Experts performed better than intermediates with regard to time taken to complete the first (p = 0.002) and second (p = 0.043) module, number of instrument collisions (p = 0.040), path length (p =  .049), number of cuts >2 mm deep (p = 0.033), average distance from suture target (p = 0.015), and number of suture breakages (p = 0.038). Participants determined both the simulator console and psychomotor tasks as highly realistic (mean: 3.7/5) and important for surgical training (4.5/5), with system pedals (4.2/5) and knot tying task (4.6/5) scoring highest, respectively. The simulator was also rated as an acceptable (4.3/5) tool for training and its use highly feasible (4.3/5)., Conclusion: Construct, face, and content validity was established for the RobotiX Mentor, and feasibility and acceptability of incorporation into surgical training were ascertained. The RobotiX Mentor shows potential as a valuable tool for training and assessment of trainees in robotic skills. Investigation of concurrent and predictive validity is necessary to complete validation, and evaluation of learning curves would provide insight into its value for training.

Objective: To evaluate the urology human cadaver training program developed by the British Association of Urological Surgeons., Design: This prospective, observational comparative study recruited urology residents, with different levels of experience, in 2 sessions of a 3-day modular cadaveric operative urology training. Participants performed various procedures on fresh-frozen cadaveric specimens, as per module, supervised by certified urological surgeons. At the conclusion of each module, all residents and faculty were invited to complete an evaluation survey., Setting: The training days were hosted by the British Association of Urological Surgeons at the University of Manchester Surgical Skills and Simulation Centre., Participants: A total of 81 urology residents were recruited, with a maximum of 14 participants attending each module, over 2 sessions. We allocated 2 participants to each cadaver with access to all necessary equipment and guidance., Results: A total of 102 evaluation surveys were received from the trainees and faculty; a response rate of 94%. All procedures scored a mean of 3 on 5 for face validity, which is higher than the acceptability range. Regarding content validity, participants and faculty rated all aspects ≥3 on 5. Respondents held a positive view of the cadaver sessions and believed them to be useful for learning anatomy and steps of an operation (mean = 4.54) and as a confidence booster for performing a procedure (mean = 4.33). Furthermore, it was thought that the training program significantly improved skills (mean = 4.11), gave transferrable skills for the operating room (mean = 4.21), and was feasible to be incorporated into training programs (mean = 4.29). Human cadaveric simulation was rated as the best mode of simulation-based training for all the procedures in the curriculum., Conclusions: This study on cadaveric simulation training demonstrated face and content validities. It also showed feasibility, acceptability, a high value for educational influence and cost-effectiveness for cadaveric simulation. A simulation-based training pathway has been proposed for effective procedural training in urology., (Copyright © 2015 Association of Program Directors in Surgery. Published by Elsevier Inc. All rights reserved.)

Objective: Simulation is a common adjunct to operative training and various modalities exist for ureteroscopy. This systematic review aims the following: (1) to identify available ureteroscopy simulators, (2) to explore evidence for their effectiveness using characteristic criterion, and (3) to provide recommendations for simulation-based ureteroscopy training., Design: The preferred reporting items for systematic reviews and meta-analysis statement guidelines were used. A literature search was performed using the PubMed, EMBASE, and Cochrane Library databases., Results: In total, 20 articles concerning ureteroscopy simulators were included. Overall, 3 high-fidelity bench models are available. The Uro-Scopic Trainer has demonstrated face, construct, and concurrent validity, whereas the Scope Trainer has undergone content, construct, and predictive validation. The adult ureteroscopy trainer has demonstrated face, content, and construct validity. The URO Mentor is the only available ureteroscopy virtual-reality system; 10 studies were identified demonstrating its face, content, construct, concurrent, and predictive validity. The Uro-Scopic Trainer, the Scope Trainer, and the URO Mentor have demonstrated high educational impact. A noncommercially available, low-fidelity model has demonstrated effectiveness comparable to its high-fidelity counterpart at 185 times lesser than the price of the Uro-Scopic Trainer. The use of porcine models has also been described in 3 studies but require further study., Conclusions: Valid models are available for simulation-based ureteroscopy training. However, there is a lack of many high-level studies conducted, and further investigation is required in this area. Furthermore, current research focuses on the technical skills acquisition with little research conducted on nontechnical skills acquisition within ureteroscopy. The next step for ureteroscopy training is a formalized and validated curriculum, incorporating simulation, training models, development of nontechnical skills, and real-life practice., (Copyright © 2014 Association of Program Directors in Surgery. Published by Elsevier Inc. All rights reserved.)

Aims : This review aims to provide an update on the role of augmented reality (AR) in surgical training and investigate whether the use of AR improves performance measures compared to traditional approaches in surgical trainees. Methods : PUBMED, EMBASE, Google Scholar, Cochrane Library, British Library and Science Direct were searched following PRIMSA guidelines. All English language original studies pertaining to AR in surgical training were eligible for inclusion. Qualitative analysis was performed and results were categorised according to simulator models, subsequently being evaluated using Messick's framework for validity and McGaghie's translational outcomes for simulation-based learning. Results : Of the 1132 results retrieved, 45 were included in the study. 29 platforms were identified, with the highest 'level of effectiveness' recorded as 3. In terms of validity parameters, 10 AR models received a strong 'content validity' score of 2.15 models had a 'response processes' score ≥ 1. 'Internal structure' and 'consequences' were largely not discussed. 'Relations to other variables' was the best assessed criterion, with 9 platforms achieving a high score of 2. Overall, the Microsoft HoloLens received the highest level of recommendation for both validity and level of effectiveness. Conclusions : Augmented reality in surgical education is feasible and effective as an adjunct to traditional training. The Microsoft HoloLens has shown the most promising results across all parameters and produced improved performance measures in surgical trainees. In terms of the other simulator models, further research is required with stronger study designs, in order to validate the use of AR in surgical training. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Introduction: Over the past few decades, simulation-based training has rapidly been adopted by many centres for effective technical and non-technical skills training, as a supplementary method to traditional operating room experience. The aim of this study is to assess the current practice in training and seek opinion regarding the future role of simulation in urological training.Methods: A cross sectional survey was designed and distributed amongst expert and trainee urological surgeons. The survey consisted of twenty-two questions that were split into three sections; Introduction (6), Technical Skills training in urology (10) and Non-technical skills training in urology (6).Results: A total of 91 residents and 172 specialists completed the survey. In both groups, there was an agreed consensus that laparoscopic training and exposure was insufficient as only 21% of trainees and 23% of specialists believed that they had sufficient training in this area. Furthermore, both groups lacked simulation-based training in common urological procedures including nephrectomy (62%), cystoscopy (69-74%), ureteroscopy (47-59%), transurethral resection of the prostate (56-65%) and percutaneous renal surgery (76-73%). 90% of trainees and 70% of specialists believed (agreed and strongly agreed) that there is a role for non-technical skills simulation in urological training.Conclusions: Simulation training has been under-used thus far and trainees face an uphill challenge to enhance their skills and technical abilities in the operating room. Simulation is recommended by both trainees and specialists and may represent one of the solutions to the challenges of safe and effective urology procedural training. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]