Literature DB >> 31558428

Making the Jump: A Qualitative Analysis on the Transition From Bedside Assistant to Console Surgeon in Robotic Surgery Training.

Beiqun Zhao1, Hannah M Hollandsworth2, Arielle M Lee2, Jenny Lam2, Nicole E Lopez2, Benjamin Abbadessa2, Samuel Eisenstein2, Bard C Cosman3, Sonia L Ramamoorthy2, Lisa A Parry3.   

Abstract

OBJECTIVE: To determine barriers associated with the transition from bedside assistant to console surgeon for general surgery residents in the era of robotic surgery in general surgery training.
DESIGN: Qualitative thematic analysis using one-on-one interviews of general surgery residents and attendings conducted between June 2018 and February 2019.
SETTING: An urban, academic, multihospital general surgery residency program with a robust robotic surgery program. PARTICIPANTS: Convenient and purposeful sampling was performed to ensure a variety of resident graduate-years and attending subspecialties were represented. Sample size was determined by data saturation, which occurred after 20 resident and 7 attending interviews.
RESULTS: Residents identified the low volume of general surgery robotic cases, the infrequency of exposure to robotic surgery, and attending comfort with robotic surgery (and with teaching on the robot) as potential barriers in the transition from bedside assistant to console surgeon. Residents had to find a replacement bedside assistant in order to be the console surgeon, which was challenging. In addition, residents felt that the current culture surrounding robotic surgery is very hierarchal, limiting their exposure. Attendings' trust in the residents' console skills was a major determining factor in allowing residents on the console.
CONCLUSIONS: Most robotic surgery education curricula are sequential, requiring the resident to progress from bedside assistant to console surgeon. Unfortunately, there are many potential barriers for residents in the transition from bedside assistant to console surgeon. Some barriers apply to general surgery training overall, but are amplified in robotic surgery, while others are unique to robotic surgery education. Recognition of, and rectifying, these barriers may increase resident participation as the console surgeon.
Copyright © 2019 Association of Program Directors in Surgery. Published by Elsevier Inc. All rights reserved.

Entities:  

Keywords:  Interpersonal and Communication Skills; Medical Knowledge; Patient Care; bedside assistant; education; general surgery; qualitative analysis; residency; robotic surgery

Mesh:

Year:  2019        PMID: 31558428      PMCID: PMC7036000          DOI: 10.1016/j.jsurg.2019.09.015

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  J Surg Educ        ISSN: 1878-7452            Impact factor:   2.891


  34 in total

Review 1.  Robotic general surgery: current practice, evidence, and perspective.

Authors:  M Jung; P Morel; L Buehler; N C Buchs; M E Hagen
Journal:  Langenbecks Arch Surg       Date:  2015-02-18       Impact factor: 3.445

2.  Validation of a virtual reality-based robotic surgical skills curriculum.

Authors:  Michael Connolly; Johnathan Seligman; Andrew Kastenmeier; Matthew Goldblatt; Jon C Gould
Journal:  Surg Endosc       Date:  2014-01-01       Impact factor: 4.584

3.  Robotic-assisted versus laparoscopic unilateral inguinal hernia repair: a comprehensive cost analysis.

Authors:  Walaa F Abdelmoaty; Christy M Dunst; Chris Neighorn; Lee L Swanstrom; Chet W Hammill
Journal:  Surg Endosc       Date:  2018-12-07       Impact factor: 4.584

4.  Surgical training in robotic surgery: surgical experience of robotic-assisted transabdominal preperitoneal inguinal herniorrhaphy with and without resident participation.

Authors:  Jessica Gonzalez-Hernandez; Purvi Prajapati; Gerald Ogola; Ryan D Burkart; Lam D Le
Journal:  J Robot Surg       Date:  2018-01-06

Review 5.  Robotic cholecystectomy versus conventional laparoscopic cholecystectomy: A meta-analysis.

Authors:  Yeqian Huang; Terence C Chua; Guy J Maddern; Jaswinder S Samra
Journal:  Surgery       Date:  2016-12-20       Impact factor: 3.982

6.  The Construction of Surgical Trust: How Surgeons Judge Residents' Readiness for Operative Independence.

Authors:  Saad Y Salim; Marjan Govaerts; Jonathan White
Journal:  Ann Surg       Date:  2020-02       Impact factor: 12.969

7.  Developing a comprehensive, proficiency-based training program for robotic surgery.

Authors:  Genevieve Dulan; Robert V Rege; Deborah C Hogg; Kristine M Gilberg-Fisher; Nabeel A Arain; Seifu T Tesfay; Daniel J Scott
Journal:  Surgery       Date:  2012-09       Impact factor: 3.982

8.  Time to consider integration of a formal robotic-assisted surgical training program into obstetrics/gynecology residency curricula.

Authors:  Monica Hagan Vetter; Marilly Palettas; Erinn Hade; Jeffrey Fowler; Ritu Salani
Journal:  J Robot Surg       Date:  2017-12-28

9.  Intraoperative resident education for robotic laparoscopic gastric banding surgery: a pilot study on the safety of stepwise education.

Authors:  Daniel A Hashimoto; Ernest D Gomez; Enrico Danzer; Paula K Edelson; Jon B Morris; Noel N Williams; Kristoffel R Dumon
Journal:  J Am Coll Surg       Date:  2012-04-21       Impact factor: 6.113

10.  Incorporating a Detailed Case Log System to Standardize Robotic Colon and Rectal Surgery Resident Training and Performance Evaluation.

Authors:  Rachel Martin; June Hsu; Mark K Soliman; Amir L Bastawrous; Robert K Cleary
Journal:  J Surg Educ       Date:  2019-01-19       Impact factor: 2.891

View more
  2 in total

Review 1.  Robot-assisted groin hernia repair is primarily performed by specialized surgeons: a scoping review.

Authors:  Danni Lip Hansen; Anders Gram-Hanssen; Siv Fonnes; Jacob Rosenberg
Journal:  J Robot Surg       Date:  2022-07-05

2.  Teaching and learning robotic surgery at the dual console: a video-based qualitative analysis.

Authors:  Hélène Cristofari; Minoa Karin Jung; Nadja Niclauss; Christian Toso; Laure Kloetzer
Journal:  J Robot Surg       Date:  2021-03-16
  2 in total

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.