Nader Francis1,2, Airazat M Kazaryan3,4, Andrea Pietrabissa5, David Goitein6,7, Eugenia Yiannakopoulou8, Ferdinando Agresta9, Igor Khatkov10, Svend Schulze11, Tan Arulampalam12, Victor Tomulescu13, Young-Woo Kim14, Eduardo Mª Targarona15, Giovanni Zaninotto16. 1. Department of General Surgery, Yeovil District Hospital, Higher Kingston, Yeovil, BA21 4AT, UK. nader.francis@ydh.nhs.uk. 2. Faculty of Science, University of Bath, Wessex House 3.22, Bath, BA2 7AY, UK. nader.francis@ydh.nhs.uk. 3. Department of Gastrointestinal Surgery, Akershus University Hospital, Lørenskog, Norway. 4. Interventional Centre, Oslo University Hospital, Rikshospitalet, Oslo, Norway. 5. Fondazione IRCCS Policlinico San Matteo, Università di Pavia, Pavia, Italy. 6. Department of Surgery C, Chaim Sheba Medical Center, Tel Hashomer, Israel. 7. Sackler School of Medicine, Tel Aviv University, Tel Aviv, Israel. 8. Department of Medical Laboratories, Faculty of Health and Caring Professions, Highest Technological Educational Institute of Athens, Athens, Greece. 9. Department of General Surgery, ULSS19 del Veneto, Adria, RO, Italy. 10. Moscow Clinical Scientific Center, Enthuziastov shosse 86, Moscow, Russia. 11. Gastrounit, Surgical Division, Hvidovre University Hospital, Copenhagen, Denmark. 12. ICENI Centre for Surgical Training, Research and Education, Turner Road, Colchester, Essex, CO4 5JL, UK. 13. "Dan Setlacec" Department of General Surgery and Liver Transplant, Fundeni Clinical Institute, "Carol Davila" University of Medicine and Pharmacy, Fundeni Street 258, Bucharest, Romania. 14. Department of Cancer Control and Policy, Graduate School of Cancer Science and Policy, National Cancer Center, Goyang, Korea. 15. Unit of Gastrointestinal and Hematological Surgery, Department of Surgery, Hospital Sant Pau, Autonomous University of Barcelona, Barcelona, Spain. 16. Department of Academic Surgery, St Mary's Hospital, Imperial College, London, UK.
Abstract
INTRODUCTION: The European Association of Endoscopic Surgeons (EAES) conducted this study aiming to identify the top research questions which are relevant to surgeons in Minimal Access Surgery (MAS). This is in order to promote and link research questions to the current clinical practice in MAS in Europe. METHODS: Using a systematic methodology, (modified Delphi), the EAES members and leadership teams were surveyed to obtain consensus on the top research priorities in MAS. The responses were categorized and redistributed to the membership to rate the level of importance of each research question. The data were reported as the weighted average score with a scale from 1 (lowest agreement) to 5 (highest agreement). RESULTS: In total, 324 of 2580 (12.5%) of the EAES members and the leaders responded to the survey and contributed to the final consensus. The ranked responses over the 80th percentile identified 39 research priorities with rating ranged from 4.22 to 3.67. The top five highest ranking research priorities in the EAES were centered on improving training in MAS, laparoscopic surgery for benign upper gastrointestinal conditions, integration of novel technology in OR, translational and basic science research in bariatric surgery and investigating the role of MAS in rectal cancer. CONCLUSION: An EAES research agenda was developed using a systematic methodology and can be used to focus MAS research. This study was commissioned by the European Association for Endoscopic Surgery (EAES).
INTRODUCTION: The European Association of Endoscopic Surgeons (EAES) conducted this study aiming to identify the top research questions which are relevant to surgeons in Minimal Access Surgery (MAS). This is in order to promote and link research questions to the current clinical practice in MAS in Europe. METHODS: Using a systematic methodology, (modified Delphi), the EAES members and leadership teams were surveyed to obtain consensus on the top research priorities in MAS. The responses were categorized and redistributed to the membership to rate the level of importance of each research question. The data were reported as the weighted average score with a scale from 1 (lowest agreement) to 5 (highest agreement). RESULTS: In total, 324 of 2580 (12.5%) of the EAES members and the leaders responded to the survey and contributed to the final consensus. The ranked responses over the 80th percentile identified 39 research priorities with rating ranged from 4.22 to 3.67. The top five highest ranking research priorities in the EAES were centered on improving training in MAS, laparoscopic surgery for benign upper gastrointestinal conditions, integration of novel technology in OR, translational and basic science research in bariatric surgery and investigating the role of MAS in rectal cancer. CONCLUSION: An EAES research agenda was developed using a systematic methodology and can be used to focus MAS research. This study was commissioned by the European Association for Endoscopic Surgery (EAES).
Entities:
Keywords:
Agenda; Consensus; EAES; Laparoscopy; Research
Authors: D R Urbach; K D Horvath; N N Baxter; B A Jobe; A K Madan; A D Pryor; L Khaitan; A Torquati; S T Brower; T L Trus; S Schwaitzberg Journal: Surg Endosc Date: 2007-02-08 Impact factor: 4.584
Authors: Dimitrios Stefanidis; Paul Montero; David R Urbach; Alia Qureshi; Kyle Perry; Sharon L Bachman; Atul Madan; Rebecca Petersen; Aurora D Pryor Journal: Surg Endosc Date: 2014-05-02 Impact factor: 4.584
Authors: Matt Dunstan; Ralph Smith; Katie Schwab; Andrea Scala; Piers Gatenby; Martin Whyte; Tim Rockall; Iain Jourdan Journal: Surg Endosc Date: 2019-07-18 Impact factor: 4.584
Authors: Omer F Ahmad; Yuichi Mori; Masashi Misawa; Shin-Ei Kudo; John T Anderson; Jorge Bernal; Tyler M Berzin; Raf Bisschops; Michael F Byrne; Peng-Jen Chen; James E East; Tom Eelbode; Daniel S Elson; Suryakanth R Gurudu; Aymeric Histace; William E Karnes; Alessandro Repici; Rajvinder Singh; Pietro Valdastri; Michael B Wallace; Pu Wang; Danail Stoyanov; Laurence B Lovat Journal: Endoscopy Date: 2021-01-13 Impact factor: 9.776