TY - JOUR
TI - European Association of Urology Section of Urolithiasis (EULIS)
Consensus Statement on Simulation, Training, and Assessment in
Urolithiasis
AU - Ahmed, Kamran
AU - Patel, Sachin
AU - Aydin, Abdullatif
AU - Veneziano,
AU - Domenico
AU - van Cleynenbreugel, Ben
AU - Goezen, Ali Serdar and
AU - Skolarikos, Andreas
AU - Sietz, Christian
AU - Lahme, Sven
AU - Knoll,
AU - Thomas
AU - Palou Redorta, Juan
AU - Somani, Bhaskar Kumar and
AU - Sanguedolce, Francesco
AU - Liatsikos, Evangelos
AU - Rassweiler, Jens and
AU - Khan, Muhammad Shamim
AU - Dasgupta, Prokar
AU - Sarica, Kemal
JO - European Urology Focus
PY - 2018
VL - 4
TODO - 4
SP - 614-620
PB - Elsevier
SN - 2405-4569
TODO - 10.1016/j.euf.2017.03.006
TODO - Urolithiasis; Training; Simulation; Curriculum
TODO - Background: Simulation-based training offers an acceptable adjunct to
the traditional mentor-apprentice model in helping trainees to traverse
the early stages of the learning curve for ureteroscopy and percutaneous
renal surgery. In addition, nontechnical skills are increasingly
important in preventing adverse events in the operating room, and
simulation-based training can be used for training in such skills.
Incorporation of simulation into formalised, standardised, and validated
curricula offers an applicable method for training residents.
Objective: To develop a curriculum for urolithiasis procedures
incorporating technical and nontechnical skills training for
implementation across Europe.
Design, setting, and participants: An international panel of experts
from EULIS, EUREP, ESU and ESUT was consulted in five stages. The study
incorporated a mix of qualitative and quantitative data for collection
and analysis. Responses were drawn out in (1) an opinion survey and (2)
a curriculum development survey, which were discussed in (3) a focus
group meeting. Group responses from this meeting were analysed for
themes, which were discussed at (4) a focus group meeting, where
consensus was reached among the group. Data analysis and integration at
this stage were used to draft the curriculum.
Results and limitations: All group meetings were transcribed from the
focus group discussion. Eight themes were generated, into which all data
were categorised. These were: need for a training curriculum; curriculum
objectives; curriculum structure; curriculum content; teaching platforms
and tools; assessment and certification; validation and implementation;
and global integration of the curriculum. A curriculum, including
recommended simulators for use, was subsequently proposed.
Conclusions: We propose a comprehensive curriculum for training in
urolithiasis. Additional planning is required for full validation and
implementation before it can be used to train residents.
Patient summary: Stone disease accounts for a major proportion of
surgical interventions worldwide. We describe a consensus guideline for
effective training of stone surgeons. (c) 2017 European Association of
Urology. Published by Elsevier B.V. All rights reserved.
ER -