Utilising the Delphi Process to Develop a Proficiency-based Progression Train-the-trainer Course for Robotic Surgery Training

As the role of robot-assisted surgery continues to expand, development of standardised and validated training programmes is becoming increasingly important. To provide guidance on an optimised “train-the-trainer” (TTT) structured educational programme for surgical trainers, in which delegates learn...

Full description

Saved in:
Bibliographic Details
Published inEuropean urology Vol. 75; no. 5; pp. 775 - 785
Main Authors Collins, Justin W., Levy, Jeffrey, Stefanidis, Dimitrios, Gallagher, Anthony, Coleman, Mark, Cecil, Tom, Ericsson, Anders, Mottrie, Alexandre, Wiklund, Peter, Ahmed, Kamran, Pratschke, Johann, Casali, Gianluca, Ghazi, Ahmed, Gomez, Marcos, Hung, Andrew, Arnold, Anne, Dunning, Joel, Martino, Martin, Vaz, Carlos, Friedman, Eric, Baste, Jean-Marc, Bergamaschi, Roberto, Feins, Richard, Earle, David, Pusic, Martin, Montgomery, Owen, Pugh, Carla, Satava, Richard M.
Format Journal Article
LanguageEnglish
Published Switzerland Elsevier B.V 01.05.2019
Subjects
Online AccessGet full text

Cover

Loading…
More Information
Summary:As the role of robot-assisted surgery continues to expand, development of standardised and validated training programmes is becoming increasingly important. To provide guidance on an optimised “train-the-trainer” (TTT) structured educational programme for surgical trainers, in which delegates learn a standardised approach to training candidates in skill acquisition. We aim to describe a TTT course for robotic surgery based on the current published literature and to define the key elements within a TTT course by seeking consensus from an expert committee formed of key opinion leaders in training. The project was carried out in phases: a systematic review of the current evidence was conducted, a face-to-face meeting was held in Philadelphia, and then an initial survey was created based on the current literature and expert opinion and sent to the committee. Thirty-two experts in training, including clinicians, academics, and industry, contributed to the Delphi process. The Delphi process underwent three rounds of survey in total. Additions to the second- and third-round surveys were formulated based on the answers and comments from the previous rounds. Consensus opinion was defined as ≥80% agreement. There was 100% consensus that there was a need for a standardized TTT course in robotic surgery. A consensus was reached in multiple areas, including the following: (1) definitions and terminologies, (2) qualifications to attend, (3) course objectives, (4) precourse considerations, (5) requirement of e-learning, (6) theory and course content, and (7) measurement of outcomes and performance level verification. The resulting formulated curriculum showed good internal consistency among experts, with a Cronbach alpha of 0.90. Using the Delphi methodology, we achieved an international consensus among experts to develop and reach content validation for a standardised TTT curriculum for robotic surgery training. This defined content lays the foundation for developing a proficiency-based progression model for trainers in robotic surgery. This TTT curriculum will require further validation. As the role of robot-assisted surgery continues to expand, development of standardised and validated training programmes is becoming increasingly important. There is currently a lack of high-level evidence on how best to train trainers in robot-assisted surgery. We report a consensus view on a standardised “train-the trainer” curriculum focused on robotic surgery. It was formulated by training experts from the USA and Europe, combining current evidence for training with experts’ knowledge of surgical training. There is currently a lack of high-level evidence on how best to train trainers in robot-assisted surgery. We report a Delphi process consensus view formulated by US and European training experts on a standardised “train-the trainer” curriculum for robotic surgery.
Bibliography:ObjectType-Article-2
SourceType-Scholarly Journals-1
ObjectType-Feature-3
content type line 23
ObjectType-Review-1
ISSN:0302-2838
1873-7560
1873-7560
DOI:10.1016/j.eururo.2018.12.044