title: Current training on the basics of robotic surgery in the Netherlands: Time for a multidisciplinary approach?
abstract: The following research questions were answered: (1) What are the training pathways followed by the current robot professionals? (2) Are there any differences between the surgical specialties in robot training and robot use? (3) What is their opinion about multidisciplinary basic skills training?
  
  
  
  An online questionnaire was sent to 91 robot professionals in The Netherlands. The questionnaire contained 21 multiple-choice questions focusing on demographics, received robot training, and their opinion on basic skills training in robotic surgery.
  
  
  
  The response rate was 62 % (n = 56): 13 general surgeons, 16 gynecologists, and 27 urologists. The urologists performed significantly more robotic procedures than surgeons and gynecologists. The kind of training of all professionals varied from a training program by Intuitive Surgical, master-apprenticeship with or without duo console, fellowship, and self-designed training programs. The training did neither differ significantly among the different specialties nor the year of starting robotic surgery. Majority of respondents favor an obliged training program including an examination for the basics of robot skills training.
  
  
  
  Training of the current robot professionals is mostly dependent on local circumstances and the manufacturer of the robot system. Training is independent of the year of start with robotic surgery and speciality. To guarantee the quality of future training of residents and fellows in robot-assisted surgery, clear training goals should be formulated and implemented. Since this study shows that current training of different specialities does not differ, training in robotic surgery could be started by a multidisciplinary basic skills training and assessment.
authors.affiliation: Department of Urology, Erasmus MC, Rotterdam, The Netherlands. wmbrinkman@gmail.com.
authors.forename: Willem
authors.initials: W
authors.lastname: Brinkman
authors.affiliation: Department of Urology, Erasmus MC, Rotterdam, The Netherlands.
authors.forename: Isabel
authors.initials: I
authors.lastname: de Angst
authors.affiliation: UMC Utrecht Cancer Center, Department of Gynaecologic Oncology, University Medical Centre Utrecht, Utrecht, The Netherlands.
authors.forename: Henk
authors.initials: H
authors.lastname: Schreuder
authors.affiliation: Department of Urology, Alrijne Hospital, Leiden, The Netherlands.
authors.forename: Barbara
authors.initials: B
authors.lastname: Schout
authors.affiliation: Department of Surgery, Meander Medical Centre, Amersfoort, The Netherlands.
authors.forename: Werner
authors.initials: W
authors.lastname: Draaisma
authors.affiliation: The Netherlands Institute of Health Services Research (NIVEL), Utrecht, The Netherlands.
authors.forename: Lisanne
authors.initials: L
authors.lastname: Verweij
authors.affiliation: Department of Urology, Catharina Hospital, Eindhoven, The Netherlands.
authors.forename: Ad
authors.initials: A
authors.lastname: Hendrikx
authors.affiliation: Department of Urology, Netherlands Cancer Institute, Amsterdam, The Netherlands.
authors.forename: Henk
authors.initials: H
authors.lastname: van der Poel
mesh_terms: D000328:Adult; D002983:Clinical Competence; D005260:Female; D006801:Humans; D010535:Laparoscopy / Q000193:education; D008297:Male; D008875:Middle Aged; D009426:Netherlands; D065287:Robotic Surgical Procedures / Q000193:education*; D013043:Specialties, Surgical; D011795:Surveys and Questionnaires
keywords: Gynecology; Robot; Simulation; Surgery; Training; Urology