Literature DB >> 22771155

Survey of robotic surgery credentialing requirements for physicians completing OB/GYN residency.

Britt K Erickson1, Jonathan L Gleason, Warner K Huh, Holly E Richter.   

Abstract

STUDY
OBJECTIVE: To describe credentialing requirements for newly graduated resident physicians for robotic-assisted gynecologic surgery in Alabama.
DESIGN: Cross-sectional study (Canadian Task Force classification III).
SETTING: Hospitals in the state of Alabama in the United States. PARTICIPANTS: Credentialing authorities at hospitals in Alabama that currently use robotic surgery in the field of gynecology.
INTERVENTIONS: Participants completed an online questionnaire about credentialing policies.
MEASUREMENTS AND MAIN RESULTS: Fifteen of 16 hospitals (94%) in Alabama that use robotic technology for gynecologic surgery participated in this survey. All hospitals had a credentialing policy for robotic surgery; however, only 9 of the 15 hospitals (60%) had a separate pathway for physicians with recent residency training. This pathway consisted of an attestation letter from a residency program director in all of the 9 hospitals, a robotic case list in 3 (33%), and proctored cases after residency in 2 (22%). Five hospitals (55%) required a certain number of hysterectomy procedures (median, 5; range, 2-10).
CONCLUSION: Robotic surgery credentialing requirements in Alabama vary. Validation of requirements in best practices for robotic surgery by graduating resident physicians is needed.
Copyright © 2012 AAGL. Published by Elsevier Inc. All rights reserved.

Entities:  

Mesh:

Year:  2012        PMID: 22771155      PMCID: PMC3660088          DOI: 10.1016/j.jmig.2012.05.003

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  J Minim Invasive Gynecol        ISSN: 1553-4650            Impact factor:   4.137


  9 in total

1.  Survey of robotic surgery training in obstetrics and gynecology residency.

Authors:  Joseph M Gobern; Christopher M Novak; Ernest G Lockrow
Journal:  J Minim Invasive Gynecol       Date:  2011 Nov-Dec       Impact factor: 4.137

2.  New technology and health care costs--the case of robot-assisted surgery.

Authors:  Gabriel I Barbash; Sherry A Glied
Journal:  N Engl J Med       Date:  2010-08-19       Impact factor: 91.245

3.  ACOG Technology Assessment in Obstetrics and Gynecology No. 6: Robot-assisted surgery.

Authors: 
Journal:  Obstet Gynecol       Date:  2009-11       Impact factor: 7.661

4.  Robotic-assisted gynaecological surgery-establishing training criteria; minimizing operative time and blood loss.

Authors:  Michael C Pitter; Patrick Anderson; Amelia Blissett; Nicola Pemberton
Journal:  Int J Med Robot       Date:  2008-06       Impact factor: 2.547

5.  Navigating credentialing, privileging, and learning curves in robotics with an evidence and experienced-based approach.

Authors:  John P Lenihan
Journal:  Clin Obstet Gynecol       Date:  2011-09       Impact factor: 2.190

6.  Medicolegal review of liability risks for gynecologists stemming from lack of training in robot-assisted surgery.

Authors:  Yu L Lee; Gokhan S Kilic; John Y Phelps
Journal:  J Minim Invasive Gynecol       Date:  2011 Jul-Aug       Impact factor: 4.137

Review 7.  Best practices for robotic surgery training and credentialing.

Authors:  Jason Y Lee; Phillip Mucksavage; Chandru P Sundaram; Elspeth M McDougall
Journal:  J Urol       Date:  2011-02-22       Impact factor: 7.450

8.  A comparison of total laparoscopic hysterectomy to robotically assisted hysterectomy: surgical outcomes in a community practice.

Authors:  Thomas N Payne; Francis R Dauterive
Journal:  J Minim Invasive Gynecol       Date:  2008-03-06       Impact factor: 4.137

9.  What is the learning curve for robotic assisted gynecologic surgery?

Authors:  John P Lenihan; Carol Kovanda; Usha Seshadri-Kreaden
Journal:  J Minim Invasive Gynecol       Date:  2008 Sep-Oct       Impact factor: 4.137

  9 in total
  5 in total

1.  Robotic surgery basic skills training: Evaluation of a pilot multidisciplinary simulation-based curriculum.

Authors:  Kirsten Foell; Antonio Finelli; Kazuhiro Yasufuku; Marcus Q Bernardini; Thomas K Waddell; Kenneth T Pace; R John D 'a Honey; Jason Y Lee
Journal:  Can Urol Assoc J       Date:  2013 Nov-Dec       Impact factor: 1.862

2.  National Trends and Perioperative Outcomes of Robotic-assisted Hepatectomy in the USA: A Propensity-score Matched Analysis from the National Cancer Database.

Authors:  Mohamed K Kamel; Faiz Tuma; Charles A Keane; John Blebea
Journal:  World J Surg       Date:  2021-09-15       Impact factor: 3.352

Review 3.  A review of robotic surgical training: establishing a curriculum and credentialing process in ophthalmology.

Authors:  Bonnie He; Marc D de Smet; Mohit Sodhi; Mahyar Etminan; David Maberley
Journal:  Eye (Lond)       Date:  2021-06-11       Impact factor: 4.456

4.  Recommendations for a standardised educational program in robot assisted gynaecological surgery: Consensus from the Society of European Robotic Gynaecological Surgery (SERGS).

Authors:  P Rusch; T Ind; R Kimmig; A Maggioni; J Ponce; V Zanagnolo; P J Coronado; J Verguts; E Lambaudie; H Falconer; J W Collins; Rhm Verheijen
Journal:  Facts Views Vis Obgyn       Date:  2019-03

5.  The impact of training residents on the outcome of robotic-assisted sacrocolpopexy.

Authors:  Mohamed A Bedaiwy; Mohamed Abdelrahman; Stephanie Deter; Tarek Farghaly; Mahmoud M Shalaby; Heidi Frasure; Sangeeta Mahajan
Journal:  Minim Invasive Surg       Date:  2012-11-01
  5 in total

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.