Key result
Structured robotic-assisted surgery curricula are needed to overcome training barriers in plastic surgery.
Why the study?
Plastic surgery has been slow to incorporate robotic-assisted surgery due to lack of adequate training, creating a need for a structured RAS curriculum for trainees.
This article outlines the essential components of a plastic surgery-specific robotic-assisted surgery curriculum and current training models.
Training barriers may limit robotic integration in plastic surgery; leaves open optimal curriculum design and validation in prospective studies.
Over the past two decades, the surgical community has increasingly embraced robotic-assisted surgery (RAS) due to its potential to enhance accuracy and decrease surgical morbidity. Plastic surgery as a field has been historically slow to incorporate RAS, with lack of adequate training posing as one of the most commonly cited barriers. To date, robot technology has been utilized for various reconstructive procedures including flap elevation and inset, pedicle dissection, and microvascular anastomosis. As RAS continues to integrate within plastic surgery procedures, the need for a structured RAS curriculum designed for plastic surgery trainees is rising. This article delineates the essential components of a plastic surgery-specific RAS curriculum and outlines current training models and assessment tools utilized across surgical subspecialties to date.
No takes yet. Share an insight, caveat, or question.
Yim et al. (2023) conducted a review in Robotic-assisted surgery training in plastic surgery. Robotic-assisted surgery (RAS) curriculum was evaluated. A structured robotic-assisted surgery curriculum specific to plastic surgery trainees is needed to overcome training barriers and integrate robotic technology into reconstructive procedures.
Synapse has enriched 5 closely related papers on similar clinical questions. Consider them for comparative context: