Status of robotic-assisted surgery among Canadian urology residents

Authors

  • Michael Robinson Department of Urologic Sciences, Faculty of Medicine, University of British Columbia, Vancouver, BC
  • Andrew MacNeily Department of Urologic Sciences, Faculty of Medicine, University of British Columbia, Vancouver, BC
  • Larry Goldenberg Department of Urologic Sciences, Faculty of Medicine, University of British Columbia, Vancouver, BC
  • Peter Black Department of Urologic Sciences, Faculty of Medicine, University of British Columbia, Vancouver, BC

DOI:

https://doi.org/10.5489/cuaj.342

Abstract

Background: Robotic-assisted surgery (RAS) has been rapidly
adopted in urology, especially in the United States. Although less
prevalent in Canada, RAS is a growing and controversial field that has implications for resident training. We report on the status and perception of RAS among Canadian urology residents.

Methods: All Canadian urology residents from anglophone programs were contacted by email and asked to participate in an
online survey. Current resident exposure to, and perception of,
RAS was assessed.

Results: Of the residents contacted (n = 128), 50 (39%) completed the survey. Of the respondents, 52% have been involved in RAS. Those who have not been involved in RAS express lower interest and lesser knowledge of RAS. Ninety-two percent of respondents feel the use of RAS will increase, although only 29% feel this is feasible in Canada. Just 24% and 36% feel RAS to be superior to open and laparoscopic techniques, respectively. Sixty-eight percent of residents in programs with a robot viewed it as detrimental to training, whereas 81% of residents in programs without one viewed
its absence to either have no impact, or even be beneficial. Both
groups expressed a desire for more experience with RAS.

Conclusion: The resident experience with respect to RAS is mixed. Overall, residents view RAS as an expanding field with potentially negative impacts on their present training, although they appear to desire the acquisition of more experience in RAS. We plan to monitor the evolution of these perceptions over next four years.

Downloads

Download data is not yet available.

Author Biographies

Michael Robinson, Department of Urologic Sciences, Faculty of Medicine, University of British Columbia, Vancouver, BC

Andrew MacNeily, Department of Urologic Sciences, Faculty of Medicine, University of British Columbia, Vancouver, BC

Larry Goldenberg, Department of Urologic Sciences, Faculty of Medicine, University of British Columbia, Vancouver, BC

Peter Black, Department of Urologic Sciences, Faculty of Medicine, University of British Columbia, Vancouver, BC

Downloads

Published

2013-02-25

How to Cite

Robinson, M., MacNeily, A., Goldenberg, L., & Black, P. (2013). Status of robotic-assisted surgery among Canadian urology residents. Canadian Urological Association Journal, 6(3), 160–7. https://doi.org/10.5489/cuaj.342

Issue

Vol. 6 No. 3 (2012): CUAJ June

Section

Original Research

License

You, the Author(s), assign your copyright in and to the Article to the Canadian Urological Association. This means that you may not, without the prior written permission of the CUA:

  • Post the Article on any Web site
  • Translate or authorize a translation of the Article
  • Copy or otherwise reproduce the Article, in any format, beyond what is permitted under Canadian copyright law, or authorize others to do so
  • Copy or otherwise reproduce portions of the Article, including tables and figures, beyond what is permitted under Canadian copyright law, or authorize others to do so.

The CUA encourages use for non-commercial educational purposes and will not unreasonably deny any such permission request.

You retain your moral rights in and to the Article. This means that the CUA may not assert its copyright in such a way that would negatively reflect on your reputation or your right to be associated with the Article.

The CUA also requires you to warrant the following:

  • That you are the Author(s) and sole owner(s), that the Article is original and unpublished and that you have not previously assigned copyright or granted a licence to any other third party;
  • That all individuals who have made a substantive contribution to the article are acknowledged;
  • That the Article does not infringe any proprietary right of any third party and that you have received the permissions necessary to include the work of others in the Article; and
  • That the Article does not libel or violate the privacy rights of any third party.