The Impact of Single-Port Robotic Surgery: A Survey among Urology Residents and Fellows in the United States
Recommended Citation
Bologna E, Licari LC, Badani KK, Razdan S, Psutka SP, Ditonno F, Ramos-Carpinteyro R, Soputro NA, Jackson JC, Nelson R, Rais-Bahrami S, White WM, Djaladat H, Pierorazio PM, Eun DD, Kutikov A, Margulis V, Kovac E, Kim IY, Anele UA, Mehrazin R, Ben-David R, Viers BR, Su LM, Rogers CG, Abdollah F, Ghazi A, Cherullo EE, Vourganti S, Coogan CL, Raman JD, Sundaram CP, Stifelman M, Link RE, Kaouk J, Crivellaro S, and Autorino R. The impact of single-port robotic surgery: a survey among urology residents and fellows in the United States. J Robot Surg 2024; 18(1):369.
Document Type
Article
Publication Date
10-14-2024
Publication Title
J Robot Surg
Abstract
Our aim was to investigate the perception and future expectations of Single-Port (SP) surgery among urology trainees in the United States. A 34-item online survey was distributed to urological residency and fellowship programs across the US, covering demographic profiles, SP training opportunities, perceived educational impact, and future perspectives. Descriptive analysis and multivariable linear regression were used to assess predictors of SP adoption. 201 surveys were completed (28.6% completion rate). Among institutions with an SP platform, about 50% have used it regularly for over 2 years, though often in less than 50% of procedures. While robotic simulators are commonly available, only 17% offer both multi-port and SP simulators, and structured pre-clinical SP training is limited. Approximately 30% of respondents expressed concerns over limited hands-on experience and a steeper learning curve with SP. Around 40% felt that their robotic surgery exposure was negatively impacted by SP's introduction. SP surgery's benefits are seen mostly in the immediate post-operative period and a significant number of respondents foresee a major role for SP in urology. However, proficiency in SP surgery is not seen as crucial for career advancement or job opportunities. Academic job aspirations, SP platform availability, and SP surgery workload are predictors of future SP implementation. Trainees increasingly recognize the clinical benefits of SP procedures but express concerns about the potential negative impact on hands-on experience. Training programs should more systematically integrate SP technology into curricula. There is a correlation between training in high-volume SP centers and future SP adoption.
Medical Subject Headings
Robotic Surgical Procedures; Internship and Residency; United States; Humans; Surveys and Questionnaires; Urology; Fellowships and Scholarships; Urologic Surgical Procedures; Male; Female; Clinical Competence
PubMed ID
39402405
Volume
18
Issue
1
First Page
369
Last Page
369
