SynthesisBMC medical education2025
A systematic review of robotic colorectal surgery programs worldwide and a comprehensive description of local robotic training programme.
Synthesis in BMC medical education, 2025. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 4 papers.
What it found
Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.
The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.
The trial behind it
Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.
Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.
Who cites it
4 citing papers in PubMed.
- Structured robotic colorectal training in a non-tertiary NHS hospital: a 502-case consecutive cohort implementation study.Journal of robotic surgery · 2026Article
- Surgeons' practices and preferences for performing right hemicolectomy for colorectal cancer: results from the SuPrHem survey.Updates in surgery · 2026Article
- Risk-adjusted learning curve for robotic colorectal surgery in an educational setting: a single-center consecutive series.Journal of robotic surgery · 2026Article
- Learning curves and outcomes of robotic colorectal surgery: A single-surgeon experience within a structured dual-console training program.Journal of robotic surgery · 2026Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
8 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
backgroundRobotic-assisted colorectal surgery (RACS) is gaining widespread adoption, with a growing number of procedures performed globally. These have been performed mostly by consultants, many of whom have gained sufficient proficiency to begin to educate their trainees. RACS offers a range of benefits to the surgeon and patient, yet safe and effective utilisation hinges on well-structured training programs for colorectal trainees within their general surgery residency. This systematic review aimed to evaluate the structure currently employed worldwide in RACS training programs for colorectal surgery trainees. In addition it delineates the conceptualization and implementation of a locally developed RACS program tailored to senior colorectal trainees and fellows at our Trust.
methodsA comprehensive search of Ovid Medline and Embase databases (January 2010- March 2024) following PRISMA guidelines identified six studies reporting on RACS training curricula. Critical analysis of programme structure and curricula tools utilised was performed. Articles involving training of consultants were excluded. The quality and bias score of each study were assessed using the Newcastle Ottawa Score for observational studies.
resultsSix out of 77 studies were selected as suitable for analysis describing RACS training using Da Vinci platform. All apart from one programme described a phased or parallel robotic curriculum with four studies incorporating theoretical knowledge and laboratory or cadaveric training. Six programmes incorporated simulation, bedside assisting and console training. The use of validated objective or subjective metrics at each phase varied. Formal feedback is provided in only two of the programmes. Reflecting on above results we present our Trust training program which run over the last two years. Our program ensures clear learning goals for trainees and trainers, maintains patient safety, and is easily replicated across other UK RACS units.
conclusionThe establishment of a standardised curriculum for colorectal surgery training worldwide, including in the UK, is vital. Currently, there is a scarcity of validated, objective assessment methods, which must be adequately standardised to create consistent progression criteria and competency-based metrics. Standardising these methods will enable reliable and robust assessment of trainee progression and competence to create a generation of robotically competent colorectal surgeons within their standard training program timeframe. PROSPERO DATABASE REGISTRATION: No.-CRD42024530340.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What OpenQuestion holds
Registered trials
Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.