A census of robotic urological practice and training: a survey of the robotic section of the European Association of Urology.

Abstract

To determine the current state of robotic urological practice, to establish how robotic training has been delivered and to ascertain whether this training was felt to be adequate. A questionnaire was emailed to members of the European Association of Urology robotic urology section mailing list. Outcomes were subdivided into three groups: demographics, exposure and barriers to training, and delivery of training. A comparative analysis of trainees and independently practising robotic surgeons was performed. 239 surgeons completed the survey, of these 117 (48.9 %) were practising robotic surgeons with the remainder either trainees or surgeons who had had received training in robotic surgery. The majority of robotic surgeons performed robotic-assisted laparoscopic prostatectomy (90.6 %) and were undertaking >50 robotic cases per annum (55.6 %). Overall, only 66.3 % of respondents felt their robotic training needs had been met. Trainee satisfaction was significantly lower than that of independently practising surgeons (51.6 versus 71.6 %, p = 0.01). When a subgroup analysis of trainees was performed examining the relationship between regular simulator access and satisfaction, simulator access was a positive predictor of satisfaction, with 87.5 % of those with regular access versus 36.8 % of those without access being satisfied (p < 0.01). This study reveals that a significant number of urologists do not feel that their robotic training needs have been met. Increased access to simulation, as part of a structured curriculum, appears to improve satisfaction with training and, simultaneously, allows for a proportion of a surgeon's learning curve to be removed from the operating room.