BACKGROUND/AIMS: Laparoscopy is a widespread surgical approach for many urological conditions. Achieving prof-ciency in laparoscopic surgery requires considerable effort due to the steep learning curve. Several residency programs include standardized laparoscopic training periods in their curricula. Our aim was to systematically analyze the evidence on the current status of training in laparoscopy in different residency programs in urology. METHODS: We performed a systematic review of PubMed/Medline and the Cochrane library, in February 2018, according to the Preferred Reporting Items for the Systematic Review and Meta-Analyses Statement. Identified reports were reviewed according to the previously defined inclusion criteria. Eight publications, comprising a total of 985 urology residents, were selected for inclusion in this analysis. RESULTS: There was a wide variation between training programs in terms of exposure to laparoscopy. Most residents considered that training in lap-aroscopy was inadequate during residency and had a low degree of confidence in independently performing laparo-scopic procedures by the end of the residency. Only North American residents reported high degrees of confidence in the possibility of performing laparoscopic procedures in the uture, whereas the remaining residents, namely from European countries, reported considerably lower degrees of confidence. CONCLUSION: There were considerable differences between national urology residency programs in terms of exposure to laparoscopy. Most residents would prefer higher exposure to laparoscopy throughout their residencies.
BACKGROUND/AIMS: Laparoscopy is a widespread surgical approach for many urological conditions. Achieving prof-ciency in laparoscopic surgery requires considerable effort due to the steep learning curve. Several residency programs include standardized laparoscopic training periods in their curricula. Our aim was to systematically analyze the evidence on the current status of training in laparoscopy in different residency programs in urology. METHODS: We performed a systematic review of PubMed/Medline and the Cochrane library, in February 2018, according to the Preferred Reporting Items for the Systematic Review and Meta-Analyses Statement. Identified reports were reviewed according to the previously defined inclusion criteria. Eight publications, comprising a total of 985 urology residents, were selected for inclusion in this analysis. RESULTS: There was a wide variation between training programs in terms of exposure to laparoscopy. Most residents considered that training in lap-aroscopy was inadequate during residency and had a low degree of confidence in independently performing laparo-scopic procedures by the end of the residency. Only North American residents reported high degrees of confidence in the possibility of performing laparoscopic procedures in the uture, whereas the remaining residents, namely from European countries, reported considerably lower degrees of confidence. CONCLUSION: There were considerable differences between national urology residency programs in terms of exposure to laparoscopy. Most residents would prefer higher exposure to laparoscopy throughout their residencies.
Authors: Mark A Preston; Brian D M Blew; Rodney H Breau; Darren Beiko; Stuart J Oake; J D Watterson Journal: Can Urol Assoc J Date: 2010-02 Impact factor: 1.862
Authors: David A Duchene; Felipe Rosso; Ralph Clayman; Elspeth M McDougall; Howard N Winfield Journal: J Endourol Date: 2011-08-30 Impact factor: 2.942
Authors: Florian Imkamp; Thomas R W Herrmann; Jens U Stolzenburg; Jens Rassweiler; Tullio Sulser; Uwe Zimmermann; Sebastian Dziuba; Markus A Kuczyk; Martin Burchardt Journal: World J Urol Date: 2014-02-04 Impact factor: 4.226
Authors: Willem M Brinkman; Irene M Tjiam; Barbara M A Schout; Arno M M Muijtjens; Ben Van Cleynenbreugel; Evert L Koldewijn; J Alfred Witjes Journal: Eur Urol Date: 2013-11-06 Impact factor: 20.096