Department of Urology, Fundació Puigvert, Barcelona, Spain; Department of Urology, IRCCS San Raffaele Hospital, Milan, Italy.
Department of Urology, Fundació Puigvert, Barcelona, Spain; Department of Surgery, Autonomous University of Barcelona, Bellaterra, Spain.
Eur Urol. 2024 Aug;86(2):130-145. doi: 10.1016/j.eururo.2024.04.008. Epub 2024 Apr 21.
Different training programs have been developed to improve trainee outcomes in urology. However, evidence on the optimal training methodology is sparse. Our aim was to provide a comprehensive description of the training programs available for urological robotic surgery and endourology, assess their validity, and highlight the fundamental elements of future training pathways.
We systematically reviewed the literature using PubMed/Medline, Embase, and Web of Science databases. The validity of each training model was assessed. The methodological quality of studies on metrics and curricula was graded using the MERSQI scale. The level of evidence (LoE) and level of recommendation for surgical curricula were awarded using the educational Oxford Centre for Evidence-Based Medicine classification.
A total of 75 studies were identified. Many simulators have been developed to aid trainees in mastering skills required for both robotic and endourology procedures, but only four demonstrated predictive validity. For assessment of trainee proficiency, we identified 18 in robotics training and six in endourology training; however, the majority are Likert-type scales. Although proficiency-based progression (PBP) curricula demonstrated superior outcomes to traditional training in preclinical settings, only four of six (67%) in robotics and three of nine (33%) in endourology are PBP-based. Among these, the Fundamentals of Robotic Surgery and the SIMULATE curricula have the highest LoE (level 1b). The lack of a quantitative synthesis is the main limitation of our study.
Training curricula that integrate simulators and PBP methodology have been introduced to standardize trainee outcomes in robotics and endourology. However, evidence regarding their educational impact remains restricted to preclinical studies. Efforts should be made to expand these training programs to different surgical procedures and assess their clinical impact.
不同的培训计划已经被开发出来以改善泌尿科医生的培训效果。然而,关于最佳培训方法的证据仍然很少。我们的目的是提供泌尿科机器人手术和内镜泌尿外科培训计划的全面描述,评估它们的有效性,并强调未来培训途径的基本要素。
我们使用 PubMed/Medline、Embase 和 Web of Science 数据库系统地审查了文献。评估了每个培训模式的有效性。使用 MERSQI 量表评估研究在指标和课程方面的方法学质量。使用牛津循证医学中心的教育分类法对手术课程的证据水平(LoE)和推荐级别进行评定。
共确定了 75 项研究。已经开发了许多模拟器来帮助学员掌握机器人和内镜泌尿外科手术所需的技能,但只有 4 个模拟器具有预测性有效性。对于学员熟练程度的评估,我们在机器人培训中发现了 18 个,在内镜泌尿外科培训中发现了 6 个;然而,大多数都是李克特量表。尽管基于熟练程度的进展(PBP)课程在临床前环境中表现出优于传统培训的效果,但在机器人培训中,只有 4 个(67%)是基于 PBP 的,在内镜泌尿外科培训中,只有 3 个(33%)是基于 PBP 的。其中,机器人手术的基础和 SIMULATE 课程具有最高的 LoE(1b 级)。本研究的主要局限性是缺乏定量综合。
已经引入了整合模拟器和 PBP 方法的培训课程,以标准化机器人和内镜泌尿外科培训中的学员结果。然而,关于其教育影响的证据仍然仅限于临床前研究。应该努力将这些培训计划扩展到不同的手术程序,并评估其临床影响。