Standards in surgical training in advanced pelvic malignancy across Europe and beyond - A Snapshot analysis

Brandl, A; Lundon, D; Lorenzon, L; Schrage, Y; Caballero, C; Holmberg, CJ; Santrac, N; Vasileva-Slaveva, M; Montagna, G; Sgarbura, O; Sayyed, R; Ben-Yaacov, A; Herrera Kok, JH; Suppan, I; Mohan, H; Kovacs, T; D&#39;Ugo, D; Sandrucci, S; Ceelen, W; EYSAC Research Academy

Author(s): Brandl, A; Lundon, D; Lorenzon, L; Schrage, Y; Caballero, C; Holmberg, CJ; Santrac, N; Vasileva-Slaveva, M; Montagna, G; Sgarbura, O; Sayyed, R; Ben-Yaacov, A; Herrera Kok, JH; Suppan, I; Mohan, H; Kovacs, T; D'Ugo, D; Sandrucci, S; Ceelen, W; EYSAC Research Academy;
Details: Publication Year 2022-11,Volume 48,Issue #11,Page 2338-2345
Journal Title: European Journal of Surgical Oncology
Publication Type: Research article
Abstract: INTRODUCTION: Multimodal treatment of patients with advanced pelvic malignancies (APM) is challenging and surgical expertise is usually concentrated in highly specialised centres. Given significant regional variation in APM surgery, surgical training represents a cornerstone in standardising and future-proofing of this complex therapy. The aim of this study was to describe the availability and current satisfaction levels with surgical training for APM. MATERIAL AND METHODS: An online questionnaire was developed and distributed through the Redcap(c) platform with 32 questions addressing participant and institution demographics, and training in APM surgeries. The survey was electronically disseminated in 2021 to surgical networks across Europe including all specialities treating APM via the European Society of Surgical Oncology (ESSO). All statistical analysis were performed using R. RESULTS: The survey received 280 responses from surgeons across 49 countries, representing general surgery (36%), surgical oncology (30%), gynaeoncology (15%), colorectal surgery (14%) and urology (5%). Fifty-three percent of participants report performing >25 APM procedures/year. Respondents were departmental chiefs (12%), consultants (34%), specialist surgeons (40%) and fellows (15%). 34% were happy/very happy with their training with 70% satisfaction about their exposure to surgical procedures. Respondents reported a lack of standardised training (72%), monitoring tools (41%) and mentorship (56%). 57% rated attended courses as useful for training, while 80% rated visiting expert centres as useful. CONCLUSION: This study has identified a learning need for improved structured training in APM, with low current satisfaction levels with exposure to APM training. Organisations such as ESSO provide an important platform for visiting expert centres, courses, and structured training.
Keywords: Humans; *Pelvic Neoplasms/surgery; Europe; *Urology/education; *Surgical Oncology/education; *Surgeons; Surveys and Questionnaires; Online survey; Pelvic malignancy; Standardised training; Surgical training
Department(s): Surgical Oncology
PubMed ID: 35090797
Publisher's Version: https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ejso.2022.01.002
Terms of Use/Rights Notice: Refer to copyright notice on published article.

Creation Date: 2024-10-11 04:24:39

Last Modified: 2024-10-11 04:26:13