Literature DB >> 24993171

The Business Engineering Surgical Technologies (BEST) teaching method: incubating talents for surgical innovation.

V de Ruijter1, P Halvax, B Dallemagne, L Swanström, J Marescaux, S Perretta.   

Abstract

INTRODUCTION: Technological innovation in surgical science and healthcare is vital and calls for close collaboration between engineering and surgery. To meet this objective, BEST was designed as a free sustainable innovative teaching method for young professionals, combining surgery, engineering, and business in a multidisciplinary, high-quality, low-cost, and learning-by-doing philosophy. AIMS: This paper reviews the initial outcomes of the program and discusses lessons learned and future directions of this innovative educational method.
METHODS: BEST educational method is delivered in two parts: the first component consisting of live streaming or pre-recorded online lectures, with an interdisciplinary profile focused on surgery, engineering, and business. The second component is an annual 5-day on-site course, organized at IRCAD-IHU, France. The program includes workshops in engineering, entrepreneurship team projects, and in-depth hands-on experience in laparoscopy, robotic surgery, interventional radiology, and flexible endoscopy with special emphasis on the interdisciplinary aspect of the training. A panel of surgeons, engineers, well-established entrepreneurs, and scientists assessed the team projects for potential patent application.
RESULTS: From November 2011 till September 2013, 803 individual and institutional users from 79 different countries attended the online course. In total, 134 young professionals from 32 different countries applied to the onsite course. Sixty participants were selected each year for the onsite course. In addition, five participants were selected for a web-based team. Thirteen provisional patents were filed for the most promising projects.
CONCLUSION: BEST proved to be a global talent incubator connecting students to high-quality education despite institutional and economical boundaries. Viable and innovative ideas arose from this revolutionary approach which is likely to spin-off significant technology transfer and lead the way for future interdisciplinary hybrid surgical education programs and career paths.

Entities:  

Mesh:

Year:  2014        PMID: 24993171     DOI: 10.1007/s00464-014-3652-1

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  Surg Endosc        ISSN: 0930-2794            Impact factor:   4.584


  16 in total

1.  Medical innovation and institutional interdependence: rethinking university-industry connections.

Authors:  Annetine C Gelijns; Samuel O Thier
Journal:  JAMA       Date:  2002-01-02       Impact factor: 56.272

2.  The discipline of innovation.

Authors:  P F Drucker
Journal:  Harv Bus Rev       Date:  1998 Nov-Dec

3.  The role of surgeons in identifying emerging technologies for health technology assessment.

Authors:  Tania Stafinski; Leigh-Ann Topfer; Ken Zakariasen; Devidas Menon
Journal:  Can J Surg       Date:  2010-04       Impact factor: 2.089

4.  Evaluation and stages of surgical innovations.

Authors:  Jeffrey S Barkun; Jeffrey K Aronson; Liane S Feldman; Guy J Maddern; Steven M Strasberg; Douglas G Altman; Jeffrey S Barkun; Jane M Blazeby; Isabell C Boutron; W Bruce Campbell; Pierre-Alain Clavien; Jonathan A Cook; Patrick L Ergina; David R Flum; Paul Glasziou; John C Marshall; Peter McCulloch; Jon Nicholl; Bournaby C Reeves; Christoph M Seiler; Jonathan L Meakins; Deborah Ashby; Nick Black; John Bunker; Martin Burton; Marion Campbell; Kalipso Chalkidou; Iain Chalmers; Marc de Leval; Jon Deeks; Adrian Grant; Muir Gray; Roger Greenhalgh; Milos Jenicek; Sean Kehoe; Richard Lilford; Peter Littlejohns; Yoon Loke; Rajan Madhock; Kim McPherson; Peter Rothwell; Bill Summerskill; David Taggart; Parris Tekkis; Matthew Thompson; Tom Treasure; Ulrich Trohler; Jan Vandenbroucke
Journal:  Lancet       Date:  2009-09-26       Impact factor: 79.321

Review 5.  Technical skill set training in natural orifice transluminal endoscopic surgery: how should we approach it?

Authors:  Emmeline Nugent; Oscar Traynor; Paul Neary
Journal:  J Laparoendosc Adv Surg Tech A       Date:  2011-02-02       Impact factor: 1.878

6.  Grand challenges in interfacing engineering with life sciences and medicine.

Authors:  Bin He; Richard Baird; Robert Butera; Aniruddha Datta; Steven George; Bruce Hecht; Alfred Hero; Gianluca Lazzi; Raphael C Lee; Jie Liang; Michael Neuman; Grace C Y Peng; Eric J Perreault; Melur Ramasubramanian; May D Wang; John Wikswo; Guang-Zhong Yang; Yuan-Ting Zhang
Journal:  IEEE Trans Biomed Eng       Date:  2013-02-01       Impact factor: 4.538

7.  Health services innovation: the time is now.

Authors:  Barry Zuckerman; Peter A Margolis; Kedar S Mate
Journal:  JAMA       Date:  2013-03-20       Impact factor: 56.272

8.  Are MOOCs the future of medical education?

Authors:  Ben Harder
Journal:  BMJ       Date:  2013-04-26

9.  The society for gastrointestinal intervention. Are we, as an organization of disparate disciplines, cooperative or competitive?

Authors:  Richard A Kozarek
Journal:  Gut Liver       Date:  2010-09-10       Impact factor: 4.519

10.  Outcomes from a postgraduate biomedical technology innovation training program: the first 12 years of Stanford Biodesign.

Authors:  Todd J Brinton; Christine Q Kurihara; David B Camarillo; Jan B Pietzsch; Julian Gorodsky; Stefanos A Zenios; Rajiv Doshi; Christopher Shen; Uday N Kumar; Anurag Mairal; Jay Watkins; Richard L Popp; Paul J Wang; Josh Makower; Thomas M Krummel; Paul G Yock
Journal:  Ann Biomed Eng       Date:  2013-02-13       Impact factor: 3.934

View more
  5 in total

Review 1.  Application of robotics in gastrointestinal endoscopy: A review.

Authors:  Baldwin Po Man Yeung; Philip Wai Yan Chiu
Journal:  World J Gastroenterol       Date:  2016-02-07       Impact factor: 5.742

2.  LapTrain: multi-modality training curriculum for laparoscopic cholecystectomy-results of a randomized controlled trial.

Authors:  K F Kowalewski; C R Garrow; T Proctor; A A Preukschas; M Friedrich; P C Müller; H G Kenngott; L Fischer; B P Müller-Stich; F Nickel
Journal:  Surg Endosc       Date:  2018-02-12       Impact factor: 4.584

3.  Exploring the Cost of eLearning in Health Professions Education: Scoping Review.

Authors:  Edward Meinert; Jessie Eerens; Christina Banks; Stephen Maloney; George Rivers; Dragan Ilic; Kieran Walsh; Azeem Majeed; Josip Car
Journal:  JMIR Med Educ       Date:  2021-03-11

4.  Pushing the Needle of Entrepreneurship and Innovation: Where Do Plastic and Reconstructive Surgeons Stand?

Authors:  Sumun Khetpal; Alvaro Reátegui; Joseph Lopez; Justin M Sacks; Adnan Prsic
Journal:  Plast Reconstr Surg Glob Open       Date:  2021-04-28

5.  The Baetylus Theorem-the central disconnect driving consumer behavior and investment returns in Wearable Technologies.

Authors:  James A Levine
Journal:  Technol Invest       Date:  2016-07-28
  5 in total

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.