Abstract
In recent years, the emphasis of robotic training has moved outside of the operating room and into simulated environments. Three methods of robotic training have been utilized including inanimate, virtual reality, and animal models. Animal models provide the most high fidelity and complex training, but they are also expensive, may be inconsistent, and can require additional support such as veterinary staff and lab facilities. At present, no standardized or validated robotic training program exists and efficacy data on the various training methods is evolving. Animal model training appears to have utility in a comprehensive robotic training program with a defined role in higher-level procedure-based training.
This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.
Access this chapter
Tax calculation will be finalised at checkout
Purchases are for personal use only
References
Lepor H. Status of radical prostatectomy in 2009: is there medical evidence to justify the robotic approach? Rev Urol. 2009;11(2):61–70.
Intuitive Surgical. Investor relations. http://investor.intuitivesurgical.com/phoeniz.zhtml?c=122359&p=irol-irhome.
Duchene DA, Moinzadeh A, Gill IS, Clayman RV, Winfield HN. Survey of residency training in laparoscopic and robotic surgery. J Urol. 2006;176:158–66. discussion 2167.
Preston MA, Blew BD, Breau RH, Beiko D, Oake SJ, Watterson JD. Survey of senior resident training in urologic laparoscopy, robotics and endourology surgery in Canada. Can Urol Assoc J. 2010;4:42–6.
Scalese RJ, Obeso VT, Issenberg SB. Simulation technology for skills training and competency assessment in medical education. J Gen Intern Med. 2008;23(suppl. 1):46–9.
Scott DJ, Dunnington GL. The new ACS/APDS Skills Curriculum: moving the learning curve out of the operating room. J Gastrointest Surg. 2008;12:213–21.
Grillo HC. To impart this art: the development of graduate surgical education in the United States. Surgery. 1999;125(1):1–14.
Amodeo A, Linares Quevedo A, Joseph JV, Belgrano E, Patel HR. Robotic laparoscopic surgery: cost and training. Minerva Urol Nefrol. 2009;61(2):121–8. Review.
Birkmeyer JD. Surgical skill and complication rates after bariatric surgery. N Engl J Med. 2013;369(15):1434–42.
Samadi D, Levinson A, Hakimi A, Shabsigh R, Benson MC. From proficiency to expert, when does the learning curve for robotic-assisted prostatectomies plateau? The Columbia University experience. World J Urol. 2007;25(1):105–10.
Patel VR, Tully AS, Holmes R, Lindsay J. Robotic radical prostatectomy in the community setting—the learning curve and beyond: initial 200 cases. J Urol. 2005;174(1):269–72.
Ericsson KA. Deliberate practice and the acquisition and maintenance of expert performance in medicine and related domains. Acad Med. 2004;S70:81–3.
Moulton CA, Dubrowski A, Macrae H, Graham B, Grober E, Reznick R. Teaching surgical skills: what kind of practice makes perfect: A randomized, Controlled Trial. Ann Surg. 2006;244:400–9.
Cannon-Bowers JA, Bowers C, Procci K. Optimizing learning in surgical simulations: guidelines from the science of learning and human performance. Surg Clin North Am. 2010;90:583–603.
Lee JY, Mucksavage P, Sundaram CP, McDougall EM. Best practices for robotic surgery training and credentialing. J Urol. 2011;185:1191–7.
Fried GM. FLS assessment of competency using simulated laparoscopic tasks. J Gastrointest Surg. 2008;12(2):210–2.
Xeroulis G, Dubrowski A, Leslie K. Simulation in laparoscopic surgery: a concurrent validity study for FLS. Surg Endosc. 2009;23(1):161–5.
Sroka G, Feldman LS, Vassiliou MC, Kaneva PA, Fayez R, Fried GM. Fundamentals of laparoscopic surgery simulator training to proficiency improves laparoscopic performance in the operating room- a randomized controlled trial. Am J Surg. 2004;100(1):115–20.
Feldman LS, Sherman V, Fried GM. Using simulators to assess laparoscopic competence: ready for widespread use? Surgery. 2004;135(1):28–42.
Sweet RM, Hananel D, Lawrenz F. A unified approach to validation, reliability, and education study design for surgical technical skills training. Arch Surg. 2010;145(2):197–201.
Goh AC, Joseph R, O’Malley M, et al. Development and validation of inanimate tasks for robotic surgical skills assessment and training. J Urol. 2010;183:516.
Goh AC, Aghazadeh A, Mercado MA, Hung AJ, Pan MM, et al. Multi-institutional validation of fundamental inanimate robotic skills tasks. J Urol. 2015;194(6):1751–6.
Ramos P, Montez J, Tripp A, Ng CK, Gill IS, Hung AJ. Face, content construct and concurrent validity of dry laboratory exercises for robotic training using a global assessment tool. BJU Int. 2014;113:836–42.
Moglia A, Ferrari V, Morelli L, Ferrari M, Mosca F, Cuschieri A. A systematic review of virtual reality simulators for robot-assisted surgery. Sur Urol. 2016;69:1065–80.
Chowriappa A, Raza SJ, Fazili A, Field E, Malito C, Samarasekera D, et al. Augmented-reality-based skills training for robot-assisted urethrovesical anastomosis: a multi-institutional randomised controlled trial. BJU Int. 2015;115:336–45.
Hung AJ, Patil MB, Zehnder P, Cai J, Ng CK, Aron M, et al. Concurrent and predictive validation of a novel robotic surgery simulator: a prospective, randomized study. J Urol. 2012;187:630–7.
Whitehurst SV, Lockrow EG, Lendvay TS, Propst AM, Dunlow SG, Rosemeyer CJ, et al. Comparison of two simulation systems to support robotic-assisted surgical training: a pilot study (swine model). J Minim Invasive Gynecol. 2015;22:483–8.
Vaccaro CM, Crisp CC, Fellner AN, Jackson C, Kleeman SD, Pavelka J. Robotic virtual reality simulation plus standard robotic orientation versus standard robotic orientation alone: a randomized controlled trial. Female Pelvic Med Reconstr Surg. 2013;19:266–70.
Goh AC, Goldfarb DW, Sander J, Miles BJ, Dunkin BJ. Global evaluative assessment of robotic skills: validation of a clinical assessment tool to measure robotic surgical skills. J Urol. 2012;187:247.
Aghazadeh MA, Jayaratna IS, Hung AJ, Pan MM, Desai MM, Gill IS, Goh AC. External validation of global evaluation assessment of robotic skills (GEARS). Surg Endosc. 2015;29:3261–6.
Rehman S, Raza SJ, Stegemann AP, Zeeck K, Din R, Llewellyn A, et al. Simulation-based robot-assisted surgical training: a health economic evaluation. Int J Surg. 2013;11(9):841–6.
Perrenot C, Perez M, Tran N, Jehl JP, Felblinger J, Bresler L, et al. The virtual reality simulator dV-Trainer is a valid assessment tool for robotic surgery skills. Surg Endos. 2012;26:2587–93.
Dulan G, Rege RV, Hogg DC, Gilberg-Fisher KM, Arain NA, Tesfay ST, et al. Developing a comprehensive, proficiency-based training program for robotic surgery. Surgery. 2012;152(3):477–88.
Berry M, Hellstrom M, Gothlin J, Reznick R, Lonn L. Endovascular training with animals versus virtual reality systems: as economic analysis. J Vasc Interv Radiol. 2008;19:233–8.
A Frost and Sullivan report performed in conjunction with the American Hospital Association, Health Research and Educational Trust. Immersion Medical, Inc. Laparoscopy Accutouch System; 2004. Return on investment study for medical simulation training.
Hung AJ, Jayaratna IS, Teruya K, Desai MM, Gill IS, Goh AC. Comparative assessment of three standardized robotic surgery training methods. BJU Int. 2013;112:864.
Aghazadeh MA, Mercado MA, Pan MM, Miles BJ, Goh AC. Performance of robotic simulated skills tasks is positively associated with clinical robotic surgical performance. BJU Int. 2016;118(3):475–81.
Author information
Authors and Affiliations
Corresponding author
Editor information
Editors and Affiliations
Rights and permissions
Copyright information
© 2018 Springer International Publishing AG, part of Springer Nature
About this chapter
Cite this chapter
Craven, S., Goh, A.C. (2018). Animal Laboratory Training: Current Status and How Essential Is It?. In: Hemal, A., Menon, M. (eds) Robotics in Genitourinary Surgery. Springer, Cham. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-319-20645-5_13
Download citation
DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-319-20645-5_13
Published:
Publisher Name: Springer, Cham
Print ISBN: 978-3-319-20644-8
Online ISBN: 978-3-319-20645-5
eBook Packages: MedicineMedicine (R0)