Skip to main page content
U.S. flag

An official website of the United States government

Dot gov

The .gov means it’s official.
Federal government websites often end in .gov or .mil. Before sharing sensitive information, make sure you’re on a federal government site.

Https

The site is secure.
The https:// ensures that you are connecting to the official website and that any information you provide is encrypted and transmitted securely.

Access keys NCBI Homepage MyNCBI Homepage Main Content Main Navigation
. 2025 Apr 1;111(4):2791-2809.
doi: 10.1097/JS9.0000000000002284.

Essential components and validation of multi-specialty robotic surgical training curricula: a systematic review

Affiliations

Essential components and validation of multi-specialty robotic surgical training curricula: a systematic review

Josephine Walshaw et al. Int J Surg. .

Abstract

Introduction: The rapid adoption of robotic surgical systems has overtook the development of standardized training and competency assessment for surgeons, resulting in an unmet educational need in this field. This systematic review aims to identify the essential components and evaluate the validity of current robotic training curricula across all surgical specialties.

Methods: A systematic search of MEDLINE, EMBASE, Emcare, and CINAHL databases was conducted to identify the studies reporting on multi-specialty or specialty-specific surgical robotic training curricula, between January 2000 and January 2024. We extracted the data according to Kirkpatrick's curriculum evaluation model and Messick's concept of validity. The quality of studies was assessed using the Medical Education Research Study Quality Instrument (MERSQI).

Results: From the 3687 studies retrieved, 66 articles were included. The majority of studies were single-center ( n = 52, 78.8%) and observational ( n = 58, 87.9%) in nature. The most commonly reported curriculum components include didactic teaching ( n = 48, 72.7%), dry laboratory skills ( n = 46, 69.7%), and virtual reality (VR) simulation ( n = 44, 66.7%). Curriculum assessment methods varied, including direct observation ( n = 44, 66.7%), video assessment ( n = 26, 39.4%), and self-assessment (6.1%). Objective outcome measures were used in 44 studies (66.7%). None of the studies were fully evaluated according to Kirkpatrick's model, and five studies (7.6%) were fully evaluated according to Messick's framework. The studies were generally found to have moderate methodological quality with a median MERSQI of 11.

Conclusions: Essential components in robotic training curricula identified were didactic teaching, dry laboratory skills, and VR simulation. However, variability in assessment methods used and notable gaps in curricula validation remain evident. This highlights the need for standardized evidence-based development, evaluation, and reporting of robotic curricula to ensure the effective and safe adoption of robotic surgical systems.

Keywords: robotic curriculum; robotic training; surgical curriculum; surgical training.

PubMed Disclaimer

Conflict of interest statement

H.F.F. is a Member of the Advisory Board of Medtronic, Stryker Corporation and Distalmotion, and holds an educational grant (ESOMAP trial) and teaching courses through EAES with Intuitive Surgical. All other authors have no conflicts of interest to disclose.

Figures

Figure 1.
Figure 1.
The flowchart shows the literature search and study selection process according to PRISMA guidelines.
Figure 2.
Figure 2.
Components of robotic surgical training curricula reported in studies included in this systematic review.
Figure 3.
Figure 3.
Curricula validation; (A) percentage of studies meeting the components for Kirkpatrick’s model of curriculum evaluation, (B) percentage of studies meeting the components for Messick’s concept of validity, and (C) percentage of studies having no, partial, or full validation.

References

    1. Sheetz KH, Claflin J, Dimick JB. Trends in the adoption of robotic surgery for common surgical procedures. JAMA Network Open 2020;3:e1918911. - PMC - PubMed
    1. Walshaw J, Huo B, McClean A, et al. Innovation in gastrointestinal surgery: the evolution of minimally invasive surgery-a narrative review. Front Surg 2023;10:1193486. - PMC - PubMed
    1. Yiasemidou M, Tomlinson J, Chetter I, Biyani CS. Impact of the SARS-CoV-2 (COVID-19) crisis on surgical training: global survey and a proposed framework for recovery. BJS Open 2021;5:zraa051. - PMC - PubMed
    1. Das B, Ledesma F, Naik R, et al. Development and validation of a virtual teaching method for minimally invasive surgery skills: a prospective cohort study. Int J Surg 2024;110:7414–20. - PMC - PubMed
    1. Sridhar AN, Briggs TP, Kelly JD, Nathan S. Training in robotic surgery-an overview. Curr Urol Rep 2017;18:58. - PMC - PubMed

Publication types

LinkOut - more resources