How to develop a simulation programme in urology

Authors


Kamran Ahmed, Research Registrar, Department of Urology, Guy's Hospital, MRC Centre for Transplantation, King's College London, King's Health Partners, St Thomas Street, London SE1 9RT, UK. e-mail: k.ahmed@imperial.ac.uk

Abstract

What's known on the subject? and What does the study add?

Inanimate trainers and simulators have been shown to facilitate the skill acquisition of urologists. However, there are significant challenges to integrating standalone simulation programmes into mainstream urology curricula.

This study provides a framework to overcome these challenges and discusses the advantages of centralised urology simulation centres and their potential to serve as key adjuncts in the certification and validation process of urologists.

Fixed performance-based outcomes of inanimate trainers and simulators have been praised as useful adjuncts in urology for reducing the learning curve associated with the acquisition of new technical and non-technical skills without compromising patient safety. Simulators are becoming an integral part of the urology training curriculum and their effectiveness is totally dependent on the structure of the programme implemented. The present paper discusses the fundamental concepts of centralized urology centres and their potential to serve as key adjuncts in the certification and validation process of urologists. In summary, proficiency-based curricula with well structured endpoints and objective tools for validating proficiency are critical in developing a simulation programme in urology. We concludes that more educational research into the outcomes of integrated urology curricula followed by trainee/trainer opinion surveys will help address some of these criteria.

Ancillary