Ruling the robot: a phase-based analysis of resident autonomy across core robotic general surgery procedures.

IF 3.3 2区 医学 Q2 SURGERY
Arjun N Patel, Georgia Lydon, Thomas Allen, Stephen Fann, Bruce Crookes, Mary K Bryant, William P Lancaster, Rana Pullatt, Heather L Evans, Douglas J Cassidy
{"title":"Ruling the robot: a phase-based analysis of resident autonomy across core robotic general surgery procedures.","authors":"Arjun N Patel, Georgia Lydon, Thomas Allen, Stephen Fann, Bruce Crookes, Mary K Bryant, William P Lancaster, Rana Pullatt, Heather L Evans, Douglas J Cassidy","doi":"10.1007/s00464-026-13439-4","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><strong>Background: </strong>Robotic surgery has become foundational in general surgery training, yet limited data exist on resident participation in core robotic procedures. This study assessed resident involvement in robotic cholecystectomies and inguinal hernia repairs (IHR) across operative phases and postgraduate year to characterize how participation evolves throughout training.</p><p><strong>Methods: </strong>A retrospective review of robotic cholecystectomies and unilateral IHR performed over a single academic year at one tertiary academic institution was conducted using My Intuitive App case logs. Cholecystectomies were divided into three phases (dissection, clipping, removal) and IHR into two phases (dissection, reconstruction). Resident participation was quantified for each phase and the overall case. Differences by postgraduate year were assessed using one-way ANOVA, junior (PGY2/3) versus senior (PGY4/5) comparisons using two-sample t-tests, and inter-phase participation using repeated measures ANOVA.</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>151 robotic cholecystectomies and 101 robotic unilateral IHR performed by seven surgeons met inclusion criteria. Resident participation in cholecystectomy measured 50.7% (dissection), 90.5% (clipping), 89.4% (removal), and 72.1% (overall) compared to attending surgeons. For IHR, participation measured 44.8% (dissection), 72.5% (reconstruction), and 57.4% (overall). Across postgraduate years, significant differences in participation were identified in the cholecystectomy dissection (p < 0.001), clipping (p = 0.001), and overall case (p < 0.001), but not the removal phase (p = 0.077). For IHR, significant differences were identified across all phases (p < 0.001). Senior residents participated significantly more than junior residents across all phases for both procedures. In both case types, resident participation in the dissection phase significantly lagged behind all other phases regardless of postgraduate year.</p><p><strong>Conclusion: </strong>Resident participation in robotic cholecystectomy and IHR varies significantly by operative phase and training level. Dissection consistently represents the phase of lowest resident involvement, while senior residents demonstrate greater autonomy across all phases. These findings underscore the importance of phase-level operative data in understanding resident progression and informing competency-based surgical training.</p>","PeriodicalId":22174,"journal":{"name":"Surgical Endoscopy And Other Interventional Techniques","volume":" ","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":3.3000,"publicationDate":"2026-10-05","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Surgical Endoscopy And Other Interventional Techniques","FirstCategoryId":"3","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1007/s00464-026-13439-4","RegionNum":2,"RegionCategory":"医学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q2","JCRName":"SURGERY","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

Background: Robotic surgery has become foundational in general surgery training, yet limited data exist on resident participation in core robotic procedures. This study assessed resident involvement in robotic cholecystectomies and inguinal hernia repairs (IHR) across operative phases and postgraduate year to characterize how participation evolves throughout training.

Methods: A retrospective review of robotic cholecystectomies and unilateral IHR performed over a single academic year at one tertiary academic institution was conducted using My Intuitive App case logs. Cholecystectomies were divided into three phases (dissection, clipping, removal) and IHR into two phases (dissection, reconstruction). Resident participation was quantified for each phase and the overall case. Differences by postgraduate year were assessed using one-way ANOVA, junior (PGY2/3) versus senior (PGY4/5) comparisons using two-sample t-tests, and inter-phase participation using repeated measures ANOVA.

Results: 151 robotic cholecystectomies and 101 robotic unilateral IHR performed by seven surgeons met inclusion criteria. Resident participation in cholecystectomy measured 50.7% (dissection), 90.5% (clipping), 89.4% (removal), and 72.1% (overall) compared to attending surgeons. For IHR, participation measured 44.8% (dissection), 72.5% (reconstruction), and 57.4% (overall). Across postgraduate years, significant differences in participation were identified in the cholecystectomy dissection (p < 0.001), clipping (p = 0.001), and overall case (p < 0.001), but not the removal phase (p = 0.077). For IHR, significant differences were identified across all phases (p < 0.001). Senior residents participated significantly more than junior residents across all phases for both procedures. In both case types, resident participation in the dissection phase significantly lagged behind all other phases regardless of postgraduate year.

Conclusion: Resident participation in robotic cholecystectomy and IHR varies significantly by operative phase and training level. Dissection consistently represents the phase of lowest resident involvement, while senior residents demonstrate greater autonomy across all phases. These findings underscore the importance of phase-level operative data in understanding resident progression and informing competency-based surgical training.

统治机器人:核心机器人普外科手术过程中居民自主性的阶段分析。
背景:机器人手术已成为普外科培训的基础,但关于住院医生参与核心机器人手术的数据有限。本研究评估了住院医师在手术阶段和研究生阶段对机器人胆囊切除术和腹股沟疝修补术(IHR)的参与情况,以描述参与情况在整个培训过程中的演变。方法:使用My Intuitive App案例日志对一所高等教育机构在一学年内进行的机器人胆囊切除术和单侧IHR进行回顾性回顾。胆囊切除术分为三个阶段(剥离、夹持、切除),IHR分为两个阶段(剥离、重建)。对每个阶段和整个病例的居民参与情况进行量化。采用单因素方差分析评估研究生年级的差异,采用双样本t检验评估低年级(PGY2/3)与高年级(PGY4/5)的比较,采用重复测量方差分析评估阶段间参与。结果:7位外科医生进行的151例机器人胆囊切除术和101例机器人单侧IHR手术符合纳入标准。与主治外科医生相比,住院医生参与胆囊切除术的比例分别为50.7%(剥离)、90.5%(夹持)、89.4%(切除)和72.1%(总体)。对于国际卫生条例,参与者分别为44.8%(解剖)、72.5%(重建)和57.4%(总体)。在研究生期间,参与胆囊切除术解剖的人数存在显著差异(p结论:住院医师参与机器人胆囊切除术和IHR的人数因手术阶段和培训水平而有显著差异。解剖一直是住院医生参与最少的阶段,而老年住院医生在所有阶段都表现出更大的自主权。这些发现强调了阶段级手术数据在了解住院患者进展和告知基于能力的外科培训中的重要性。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 求助全文
来源期刊
CiteScore
6.10
自引率
12.90%
发文量
890
审稿时长
6 months
期刊介绍: Uniquely positioned at the interface between various medical and surgical disciplines, Surgical Endoscopy serves as a focal point for the international surgical community to exchange information on practice, theory, and research. Topics covered in the journal include: -Surgical aspects of: Interventional endoscopy, Ultrasound, Other techniques in the fields of gastroenterology, obstetrics, gynecology, and urology, -Gastroenterologic surgery -Thoracic surgery -Traumatic surgery -Orthopedic surgery -Pediatric surgery
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
确定
请完成安全验证×
copy
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
右上角分享
点击右上角分享
0
联系我们:info@booksci.cn Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。 Copyright © 2023 布克学术 All rights reserved.
京ICP备2023020795号-1
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:604180095
Book学术官方微信
小红书