Journal of Robotic Surgery

, Volume 4, Issue 1, pp 23–27 | Cite as

Survey of obstetrics and gynecology residents’ training and opinions on robotic surgery

  • Aimee L. Smith
  • Karen M. Schneider
  • Pamela D. Berens
Original Article

Abstract

To investigate obstetrics and gynecology residents’ access to training in robotics and their opinions of its utility and future in gynecologic surgery a 31-item questionnaire was developed and distributed to Ob/Gyn residents in the United States via email. Results were tabulated via SurveyMonkey.com©. A total of 470 residents representative of all ACOG districts and PGY levels responded. A total of 72% of residents reported ≥3 staff surgeons performing robotic gynecologic surgery at their institution and 70% had participated in robotic surgery in the past 12 months. Robotic hysterectomy (81%) and oncologic surgery (76%) were the most frequently performed procedures. A total of 79% believe their institution should provide formal training in robotics, but only 38% report access to it. A total of 23% have operated at the surgeon console, and 44% plan to incorporate robotic surgery into their practice after completing residency. A total of 3.6% feel equipped to perform robotic surgery without additional training. A total of 63% believe robotic surgery in gynecology will continue to increase in popularity. Exposure to gynecologic robotic procedures during residency is increasing. Although residents believe robotics has a place in gynecology, many feel formalized training has not been successfully implemented into their residency. Development of a structured program for training residents in robotics merits further investigation.

Keywords

Da Vinci® Gynecology Laparoscopy Resident training Robotics 

Notes

Conflict of interest

None.

References

  1. 1.
    Wu JM, Wechter ME, Geller EJ, Nguyen TV, Visco AG (2007) Hysterectomy rates in the United States, 2003. Obstet Gynecol 110:1091–1095PubMedGoogle Scholar
  2. 2.
    Wexner SD, Bergamaschi R, Lacy A et al (2009) The current status of robotic pelvic surgery: results of a multinational interdisciplinary consensus conference. Surg Endosc 23:438–443CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  3. 3.
    Visco AG, Advincula AP (2008) Robotic gynecologic surgery. Obstet Gynecol 112(6):1369–1382PubMedGoogle Scholar
  4. 4.
    Garry R, Fountain J, Brown J et al (2004) EVALUATE hysterectomy trial: a multicenter randomized trial comparing abdominal, vaginal and laparoscopic methods of hysterectomy. Health Technol Assess 8:1–154PubMedGoogle Scholar
  5. 5.
    Magrina JF (2007) Robotic surgery in gynecology. Eur J Gynaecol Oncol 28(2):77–82PubMedGoogle Scholar
  6. 6.
    Payne TN, Dauterive FR (2008) A comparison of total laparoscopic hysterectomy to robotically assisted hysterectomy: surgical outcomes in a community practice. J Minim Invasive Gynecol 15(3):286–291CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  7. 7.
    Duchene DA, Moinzadeh A, Gill IS, Clayman RV, Winfield HN (2006) Survey of residency training in laparoscopic and robotic surgery. J Urol 176:2158–2167CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  8. 8.
    Donias HW, Karamanoukian RL, Glick PL, Bergsland J, Karamanoukian HL (2002) Survey of resident training in robotic surgery. Am Surg 68:177–181PubMedGoogle Scholar
  9. 9.
    Patel YR, Donias HW, Boyd DW et al (2003) Are you ready to become a robo-surgeon? Am Surg 69:599–603PubMedGoogle Scholar
  10. 10.
    Chitwood WR, Wiley N, Chapman WH et al (2001) Robotic surgical training in an academic institution. Ann Surg 234:475–486CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  11. 11.
    Rashid HH, Leung YY, Rashid MJ et al (2006) Robotic surgical education: a systematic approach to training urology residents to perform robotic-assisted laparoscopic radical prostatectomy. Urology 68(1):75–79CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  12. 12.
    Judkins TN, Oleynikov D, Stergiou N (2009) Objective evaluation of expert and novice performance during robotic surgical training tasks. Surg Endosc 23:590–597CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  13. 13.
    Pulliman SJ, Berkowitz LR (2009) Smaller pieces of the hysterectomy pie: current challenges in resident surgical education. Obstet Gynecol 113:395–398Google Scholar
  14. 14.
    Shay BF, Thomas R, Monga M (2002) Urology practice patterns after residency training in laparoscopy. J Endourol 16:251CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer-Verlag London Ltd 2010

Authors and Affiliations

  • Aimee L. Smith
    • 1
    • 2
  • Karen M. Schneider
    • 1
  • Pamela D. Berens
    • 1
  1. 1.Department of Obstetrics Gynecology, and Reproductive SciencesUniversity of Texas Medical School at HoustonHoustonUSA
  2. 2.Cleveland Clinic FloridaWestonUSA

Personalised recommendations