Skip to main content
SpringerLink
Log in

A systematic review of robotic surgery curricula using a contemporary educational framework

  • Published:
Surgical Endoscopy Aims and scope Submit manuscript

Abstract

Background

There has been a rising trend in robotic surgery. Thus, there is demand for a robotic surgery curriculum (RSC) for training surgical trainees and practicing surgeons. There are limited data available about current curricular designs and the extent to which they have incorporated educational frameworks. Our aim was to study the existing robotic surgery curricula using Kern’s 6-step approach in curriculum development.

Methods

A systematic review was conducted using PubMed, PubMed Central, Cochrane, Embase, and Scopus (we searched studies from 2001 to 2021). PRISMA Guidelines was used to guide the search. Curriculum designed for general surgery and its subspecialties were included. Urology and gynecology were excluded. The articles were reviewed by five reviewers.

Results

Our review yielded 71 articles, including 39 curricula at 9 different settings. Using Kern’s framework, we demonstrated that the majority of robotic surgery curricula contained all the elements of Kern’s curricular design. However, there were significant deficiencies in important aspects of these curricula i.e., implementation, the quality of assessment tools for measurement of performance and evaluation of the educational value of these interventions. Most institutions used commercial virtual reality simulators (VRS) as the main component of their RSC and 23% of curricula only used VRS.

Conclusions

Although majority of these studies contained all the elements of Kern’s framework, there are critical deficiencies in the components of existing curricula. Future curricula should be designed using established educational frameworks to improve the quality of robotic surgery training.

This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.

Access this article

Log in via an institution

Price excludes VAT (USA)
Tax calculation will be finalised during checkout.

Instant access to the full article PDF.

Institutional subscriptions

Fig. 1

Similar content being viewed by others

References

  1. Sheetz KH, Claflin J, Dimick JB (2020) Trends in the adoption of robotic surgery for common surgical procedures. JAMA Netw Open 3:e1918911–e1918911

    Article  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  2. Schreuder H, Verheijen R (2009) Robotic surgery. BJOG 116:198–213

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  3. Aydin A, Shafi AM, Khan MS, Dasgupta P, Ahmed K (2016) Current status of simulation and training models in urological surgery: a systematic review. J Urol 196:312–320

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  4. Scarritt T, Hsu C-H, Maegawa FB, Ayala AE, Mobily M, Ghaderi I (2021) Trends in utilization and perioperative outcomes in robotic-assisted bariatric surgery using the MBSAQIP database: a 4-year analysis. Obes Surg 31:854–861

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  5. Chen R, Rodrigues Armijo P, Krause C, Siu K-C, Oleynikov D (2020) A comprehensive review of robotic surgery curriculum and training for residents, fellows, and postgraduate surgical education. Surg Endosc 34:361–367

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  6. Bordage G (2009) Conceptual frameworks to illuminate and magnify. Med Educ 43:312–319

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  7. Kern DE, Thomas PA, Bass EB, Howard DM (1998) Curriculum development for medical education: a six step approach. JHU Press, Baltimore

    Book  Google Scholar 

  8. Moher D, Liberati A, Tetzlaff J, Altman DG, Group* P (2009) Preferred reporting items for systematic reviews and meta-analyses: the PRISMA statement. Ann Intern Med 151:264–269

    Article  Google Scholar 

  9. Mills JT, Hougen HY, Bitner D, Krupski TL, Schenkman NS (2017) Does robotic surgical simulator performance correlate with surgical skill? J Surg Educ 74:1052–1056

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  10. Newcomb LK, Bradley MS, Truong T, Tang M, Comstock B, Li Y-J, Visco AG, Siddiqui NY (2018) Correlation of virtual reality simulation and dry lab robotic technical skills. J Minim Invasive Gynecol 25:689–696

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  11. Mehta A, Patel S, Robison W, Senkowski T, Allen J, Shaw E, Senkowski C (2018) Can teenage novel users perform as well as General Surgery residents upon initial exposure to a robotic surgical system simulator? J Robot Surg 12:165–171

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  12. Alzahrani T, Haddad R, Alkhayal A, Delisle J, Drudi L, Gotlieb W, Fraser S, Bergman S, Bladou F, Andonian S (2013) Validation of the da Vinci Surgical Skill Simulator across three surgical disciplines: a pilot study. Can Urol Assoc J 7:E520

    Article  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  13. Connolly M, Seligman J, Kastenmeier A, Goldblatt M, Gould JC (2014) Validation of a virtual reality-based robotic surgical skills curriculum. Surg Endosc 28:1691–1694

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  14. Finnerty BM, Afaneh C, Aronova A, Fahey TJ, Zarnegar R (2016) General surgery training and robotics: are residents improving their skills? Surg Endosc 30:567–573

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  15. Gomez PP, Willis RE, Van Sickle KR (2015) Development of a virtual reality robotic surgical curriculum using the da Vinci Si surgical system. Surg Endosc 29:2171–2179

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  16. Gurung P, Campbell T, Wang B, Joseph JV, Ghazi AE (2020) Accelerated Skills Acquisition Protocol (ASAP) in optimizing robotic surgical simulation training: a prospective randomized study. World J Urol 38:1623–1630

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  17. Hung AJ, Zehnder P, Patil MB, Cai J, Ng CK, Aron M, Gill IS, Desai MM (2011) Face, content and construct validity of a novel robotic surgery simulator. J Urol 186:1019–1025

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  18. Kelly DC, Margules AC, Kundavaram CR, Narins H, Gomella LG, Trabulsi EJ, Lallas CD (2012) Face, content, and construct validation of the da Vinci Skills Simulator. Urology 79:1068–1072

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  19. Lee GI, Lee MR (2018) Can a virtual reality surgical simulation training provide a self-driven and mentor-free skills learning? Investigation of the practical influence of the performance metrics from the virtual reality robotic surgery simulator on the skill learning and associated cognitive workloads. Surg Endosc 32:62–72

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  20. Tillou X, Collon S, Martin-Francois S, Doerfler A (2016) Robotic surgery simulator: elements to build a training program. J Surg Educ 73:870–878

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  21. Ahmad SB, Rice M, Chang C, Hamad A, Kingham TP, He J, Pimiento JM, Zureikat AH, Zeh HJ, Hogg ME (2021) Will it play in Peoria? A pilot study of a robotic skills curriculum for surgical oncology fellows. Ann Surg Oncol 28:6273–6282

    Article  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  22. Tam V, Zenati M, Novak S, Chen Y, Zureikat AH, Zeh HJ III, Hogg ME (2017) Robotic pancreatoduodenectomy biotissue curriculum has validity and improves technical performance for surgical oncology fellows. J Surg Educ 74:1057–1065

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  23. Al Abbas A, Hogg M (2018) Robotic biotissue curriculum for teaching the robotic pancreatoduodenectomy. Ann Pancreat Cancer 1:9

    Article  Google Scholar 

  24. Al Abbas AI, Wang C, Hamad AB, Knab LM, Rice MK, Moser AJ, Zeh HJ III, Zureikat AH, Hogg ME (2021) Mentorship and formal robotic proficiency skills curriculum improve subsequent generations’ learning curve for the robotic distal pancreatectomy. HPB 23:1849–1855

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  25. Knab LM, Zureikat AH, Zeh HJ, Hogg ME (2017) Towards standardized robotic surgery in gastrointestinal oncology. Langenbecks Arch Surg 402:1003–1014

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  26. Rice MK, Hodges JC, Bellon J, Borrebach J, Al Abbas AI, Hamad A, Knab LM, Moser AJ, Zureikat AH, Zeh HJ (2020) Association of mentorship and a formal robotic proficiency skills curriculum with subsequent generations’ learning curve and safety for robotic pancreaticoduodenectomy. JAMA Surg 155:607–615

    Article  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  27. Hogg ME, Tam V, Zenati M, Novak S, Miller J, Zureikat AH, Zeh HJ III (2017) Mastery-based virtual reality robotic simulation curriculum: the first step toward operative robotic proficiency. J Surg Educ 74:477–485

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  28. Mark Knab L, Zenati MS, Khodakov A, Rice M, Al-Abbas A, Bartlett DL, Zureikat AH, Zeh HJ, Hogg ME (2018) Evolution of a novel robotic training curriculum in a complex general surgical oncology fellowship. Ann Surg Oncol 25:3445–3452

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  29. Clarke NS, Price J, Boyd T, Salizzoni S, Zehr KJ, Nieponice A, Bajona P (2018) Robotic-assisted microvascular surgery: skill acquisition in a rat model. J Robot Surg 12:331–336

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  30. Martin JR, Stefanidis D, Dorin RP, Goh AC, Satava RM, Levy JS (2021) Demonstrating the effectiveness of the fundamentals of robotic surgery (FRS) curriculum on the RobotiX Mentor Virtual Reality Simulation Platform. J Robot Surg 15:187–193

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  31. Satava RM, Stefanidis D, Levy JS, Smith R, Martin JR, Monfared S, Timsina LR, Darzi AW, Moglia A, Brand TC (2020) Proving the effectiveness of the fundamentals of robotic surgery (FRS) skills curriculum: a single-blinded, multispecialty, multi-institutional randomized control trial. Ann Surg 272:384–392

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  32. Smith R, Patel V, Satava R (2014) Fundamentals of robotic surgery: a course of basic robotic surgery skills based upon a 14-society consensus template of outcomes measures and curriculum development. Int J Med Robot Comput Assist Surg 10:379–384

    Article  Google Scholar 

  33. Vargas MV, Moawad G, Denny K, Happ L, Misa NY, Margulies S, Opoku-Anane J, Abi Khalil E, Marfori C (2017) Transferability of virtual reality, simulation-based, robotic suturing skills to a live porcine model in novice surgeons: a single-blind randomized controlled trial. J Minim Invasive Gynecol 24:420–425

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  34. Chitwood WR Jr, Nifong LW, Chapman WH, Felger JE, Bailey BM, Ballint T, Mendleson KG, Kim VB, Young JA, Albrecht RA (2001) Robotic surgical training in an academic institution. Ann Surg 234:475

    Article  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  35. Aradaib M, Neary P, Hafeez A, Kalbassi R, Parvaiz A, O’Riordain D (2019) Safe adoption of robotic colorectal surgery using structured training: early Irish experience. J Robot Surg 13:657–662

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  36. Buchs NC, Pugin F, Volonté F, Hagen ME, Morel P (2013) Impact of robotic general surgery course on participants’ surgical practice. Surg Endosc 27:1968–1972

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  37. Fleming CA, Westby D, Ullah MF, Mohan HM, Sehgal R, Bolger JC, O’Leary DP, McNamara E, Korpanty G, El Bassiouni M (2020) A review of clinical and oncological outcomes following the introduction of the first robotic colorectal surgery programme to a university teaching hospital in Ireland using a dual console training platform. J Robot Surg 14:889–896

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  38. Dulan G, Rege RV, Hogg DC, Gilberg-Fisher KM, Arain NA, Tesfay ST, Scott DJ (2012) Developing a comprehensive, proficiency-based training program for robotic surgery. Surgery 152:477–488

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  39. Dulan G, Rege RV, Hogg DC, Gilberg-Fisher KM, Arain NA, Tesfay ST, Scott DJ (2012) Proficiency-based training for robotic surgery: construct validity, workload, and expert levels for nine inanimate exercises. Surg Endosc 26:1516–1521

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  40. Nacul MP, Melani AGF, Zilberstein B, Benevenuto DS, Cavazzola LT, Araujo RL, Sallum RAA, Aguiar-Jr S, Tomasich F (2020) Educational note: teaching and training in robotic surgery. An opinion of the Minimally Invasive and Robotic Surgery Committee of the Brazilian College of Surgeons. Revista do Colégio Brasileiro de Cirurgiões 47

  41. Raimondi P, Marchegiani F, Cieri M, Cichella A, Cotellese R, Innocenti P (2018) Is right colectomy a complete learning procedure for a robotic surgical program? J Robot Surg 12:147–155

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  42. Ramos P, Montez J, Tripp A, Ng CK, Gill IS, Hung AJ (2014) Face, content, construct and concurrent validity of dry laboratory exercises for robotic training using a global assessment tool. BJU Int 113:836–842

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  43. Suh I, Mukherjee M, Oleynikov D, Siu KC (2011) Training program for fundamental surgical skill in robotic laparoscopic surgery. Int J Med Robot Comput Assist Surg 7:327–333

    Google Scholar 

  44. Summers S, Anderson J, Petzel A, Tarr M, Kenton K (2015) Development and testing of a robotic surgical training curriculum for novice surgeons. J Robot Surg 9:27–35

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  45. Winder JS, Juza RM, Sasaki J, Rogers AM, Pauli EM, Haluck RS, Estes SJ, Lyn-Sue JR (2016) Implementing a robotics curriculum at an academic general surgery training program: our initial experience. J Robot Surg 10:209–213

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  46. Estes SJ, Goldenberg D, Winder JS, Juza RM, Lyn-Sue JR (2017) Best practices for robotic surgery programs. JSLS 21

  47. Raad WN, Ayub A, Huang C-Y, Guntman L, Rehmani SS, Bhora FY (2018) Robotic thoracic surgery training for residency programs: a position paper for an educational curriculum. Innovations 13:417–422

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  48. Guseila LM, Saranathan A, Jenison EL, Gil KM, Elias JJ (2014) Training to maintain surgical skills during periods of robotic surgery inactivity. Int J Med Robot Comput Assist Surg 10:237–243

    Article  Google Scholar 

  49. Bell S, Carne P, Chin M, Farmer C (2015) Establishing a robotic colorectal surgery programme. ANZ J Surg 85:214–216

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  50. Beulens A, Hashish Y, Brinkman W, Umari P, Puliatti S, Koldewijn E, Hendrikx A, Van Basten J, Van Merrienboer J, Van der Poel H (2021) Training novice robot surgeons: proctoring provides same results as simulator-generated guidance. J Robot Surg 15:397–428

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  51. Bric J, Connolly M, Kastenmeier A, Goldblatt M, Gould JC (2014) Proficiency training on a virtual reality robotic surgical skills curriculum. Surg Endosc 28:3343–3348

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  52. Moit H, Dwyer A, De Sutter M, Heinzel S, Crawford D (2019) A standardized robotic training curriculum in a general surgery program. JSLS 23

  53. Ayloo S, Roh Y, Choudhury N (2014) Robotic cholecystectomy: training of residents in use of the robotic platform. Int J Med Robot Comput Assist Surg 10:88–92

    Article  Google Scholar 

  54. Ayabe RI, Parrish AB, Dauphine CE, Hari DM, Ozao-Choy JJ (2018) Single-site robotic cholecystectomy and robotics training: should we start in the junior years? J Surg Res 224:1–4

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  55. Gerull W, Zihni A, Awad M (2020) Operative performance outcomes of a simulator-based robotic surgical skills curriculum. Surg Endosc 34:4543–4548

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  56. Kelly JD, Kowalewski TM, Brand T, French A, Nash M, Meryman L, Heller N, Organ N, George E, Smith R (2021) Virtual reality warm-up before robot-assisted surgery: a randomized controlled trial. J Surg Res 264:107–116

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  57. Mustafa S, Handren E, Farmer D, Ontiveros E, Ogola GO, Leeds SG (2019) Robotic curriculum enhances minimally invasive general surgery residents’ education. J Surg Educ 76:548–553

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  58. Ali MR, Rasmussen J, BhaskerRao B (2007) Teaching robotic surgery: a stepwise approach. Surg Endosc 21:912–915

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  59. Schlottmann F, Long JM, Brown S, Patti MG (2019) Low confidence levels with the robotic platform among senior surgical residents: simulation training is needed. J Robot Surg 13:155–158

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  60. Panteleimonitis S, Popeskou S, Aradaib M, Harper M, Ahmed J, Ahmad M, Qureshi T, Figueiredo N, Parvaiz A (2018) Implementation of robotic rectal surgery training programme: importance of standardisation and structured training. Langenbecks Arch Surg 403:749–760

    Article  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  61. Eardley N, Matzel K, Gómez Ruiz M, Khan J, Riley S, Donnelly M, Tou S (2020) European Society of Coloproctology Colorectal Robotic Surgery Training for the Trainers Course–the first pilot experience. Colorectal Dis 22:1741–1748

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  62. Tou S, Gómez Ruiz M, Gallagher A, Matzel K, Collaborative EA, Amin S, Bianchi P, Crolla R, Croner R, Eardley N (2020) European expert consensus on a structured approach to training robotic-assisted low anterior resection using performance metrics. Colorectal Dis 22:2232–2242

    Article  CAS  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  63. Mullens CL, Van Horn AL, Marsh JW, Hogg ME, Thomay AA, Schmidt CR, Boone BA (2021) Development of a senior medical student robotic surgery training elective. J Med Educ Curric Dev 8:23821205211024070

    PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  64. Cho JS, Hahn KY, Kwak JM, Kim J, Baek SJ, Shin JW, Kim SH (2013) Virtual reality training improves da Vinci performance: a prospective trial. J Laparoendosc Adv Surg Tech 23:992–998

    Article  Google Scholar 

  65. Dubin AK, Smith R, Julian D, Tanaka A, Mattingly P (2017) A comparison of robotic simulation performance on basic virtual reality skills: simulator subjective versus objective assessment tools. J Minim Invasive Gynecol 24:1184–1189

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  66. Chowriappa AJ, Shi Y, Raza SJ, Ahmed K, Stegemann A, Wilding G, Kaouk J, Peabody JO, Menon M, Hassett JM (2013) Development and validation of a composite scoring system for robot-assisted surgical training—the Robotic Skills Assessment Score. J Surg Res 185:561–569

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  67. Raza SJ, Froghi S, Chowriappa A, Ahmed K, Field E, Stegemann AP, Rehman S, Sharif M, Shi Y, Wilding GE (2014) Construct validation of the key components of Fundamental Skills of Robotic Surgery (FSRS) curriculum—a multi-institution prospective study. J Surg Educ 71:316–324

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  68. Stegemann AP, Ahmed K, Syed JR, Rehman S, Ghani K, Autorino R, Sharif M, Rao A, Shi Y, Wilding GE (2013) Fundamental skills of robotic surgery: a multi-institutional randomized controlled trial for validation of a simulation-based curriculum. Urology 81:767–774

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  69. Ebeling PA, Beale KG, Van Sickle KR, Al-Fayyadh MJ, Willis RE, Marcano J, Erwin D, Kempenich JW (2020) Resident training experience with robotic assisted transabdominal preperitoneal inguinal hernia repair. Am J Surg 219:278–282

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  70. Goh AC, Aghazadeh MA, Mercado MA, Hung AJ, Pan MM, Desai MM, Gill IS, Dunkin BJ (2015) Multi-institutional validation of fundamental inanimate robotic skills tasks. J Urol 194:1751–2175

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  71. Grannan HR, Hetzel E, Goldblatt MI, Gould JC, Higgins RM (2021) Robotic general surgery resident training curriculum: a pilot experience. Surg Laparosc Endosc Percutan Tech 31:588–593

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  72. Krause W, Bird J (2019) Training robotic community surgeons: our experience implementing a robotics curriculum at a rural community general surgery training program. J Robot Surg 13:385–438

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  73. Leijte E, de Blaauw I, Rosman C, Botden SM (2020) Assessment of validity evidence for the RobotiX robot assisted surgery simulator on advanced suturing tasks. BMC Surg 20:1–11

    Article  Google Scholar 

  74. Scott SI, Dalsgaard T, Jepsen JV, von Buchwald C, Andersen SAW (2020) Design and validation of a cross-specialty simulation-based training course in basic robotic surgical skills. Int J Med Robot Comput Assist Surg 16:1–10

    Article  Google Scholar 

  75. Watkinson W, Raison N, Abe T, Harrison P, Khan S, Van der Poel H, Dasgupta P, Ahmed K (2018) Establishing objective benchmarks in robotic virtual reality simulation at the level of a competent surgeon using the RobotiX Mentor simulator. Postgrad Med J 94:270–277

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  76. Whittaker G, Aydin A, Raison N, Kum F, Challacombe B, Khan MS, Dasgupta P, Ahmed K (2016) Validation of the RobotiX mentor robotic surgery simulator. J Endourol 30:338–346

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  77. Mariani A, Pellegrini E, De Momi E (2020) Skill-oriented and performance-driven adaptive curricula for training in robot-assisted surgery using simulators: a feasibility study. IEEE Trans Biomed Eng 68:685–694

    Article  Google Scholar 

  78. Mariani A, Pellegrini E, Enayati N, Kazanzides P, Vidotto M, De Momi E (2018) Design and evaluation of a performance-based adaptive curriculum for robotic surgical training: a pilot study. In: 2018 40th annual international conference of the IEEE engineering in medicine and biology society (EMBC), IEEE, pp 2162–2165

  79. Petz W, Spinoglio G, Choi GS, Parvaiz A, Santiago C, Marecik S, Giulianotti PC, Bianchi PP (2016) Structured training and competence assessment in colorectal robotic surgery. Results of a consensus experts round table. Int J Med Robot Comput Assist Surg 12:634–641

    Article  Google Scholar 

  80. Chater SS (1975) A conceptual framework for curriculum development. Nurs Outlook 23:428–433

    CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

Download references

Funding

None.

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

  1. Section of Minimally Invasive and Robotic Surgery, Department of Surgery, University of Arizona College of Medicine, 1501N. Campbell Avenue, P.O. Box 245066, Tucson, AZ, 85724-5066, USA

    Ahmad Omid Rahimi, Katherine Ho, Michelle Chang, Dillon Gasper, Yazan Ashouri, Devi Dearmon-Moore & Iman Ghaderi

  2. Epidemiology and Biostatistics Department, University of Arizona College of Public Health, Tucson, AZ, USA

    Chiu-Hsieh Hsu

Authors
  1. Ahmad Omid Rahimi
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  2. Katherine Ho
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  3. Michelle Chang
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  4. Dillon Gasper
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  5. Yazan Ashouri
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  6. Devi Dearmon-Moore
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  7. Chiu-Hsieh Hsu
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  8. Iman Ghaderi
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Iman Ghaderi.

Ethics declarations

Disclosures

Drs. Ahmad Omid Rahimi, Katherine Ho, Michelle Chang, Dillon Gasper, Yazan Ashouri, Devi Dearmon-Moore, Chiu-Hsieh Hsu, Iman Ghaderi have no conflicts of interest or financial ties to disclose.

Additional information

Publisher's Note

Springer Nature remains neutral with regard to jurisdictional claims in published maps and institutional affiliations.

Rights and permissions

Springer Nature or its licensor (e.g. a society or other partner) holds exclusive rights to this article under a publishing agreement with the author(s) or other rightsholder(s); author self-archiving of the accepted manuscript version of this article is solely governed by the terms of such publishing agreement and applicable law.

Reprints and permissions

About this article

Check for updates. Verify currency and authenticity via CrossMark

Cite this article

Rahimi, A.O., Ho, K., Chang, M. et al. A systematic review of robotic surgery curricula using a contemporary educational framework. Surg Endosc 37, 2833–2841 (2023). https://doi.org/10.1007/s00464-022-09788-5

Download citation

  • Received:

  • Accepted:

  • Published:

  • Issue Date:

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s00464-022-09788-5

Keywords

Search

Navigation