Evaluation of Laparoscopic Curricula in American Urology Residency Training: A 5-Year Update

Medical simulation offers the advantage of improving resident skill and comfort without impacting patient care. Five years ago, we identified trends in the use of robotic and laparoscopic simulation in 2008 and 2009 at American urology residency training programs. We seek to identify the changes in the use of simulators and the presence of formal curricula in the wake of technological advances and changes in graduate medical education.

Attendees of the American Urological Association (AUA) Basic Sciences Course, mostly in their second or third year of residency, were surveyed on the availability and use of laparoscopic/robotic simulators at their program, the presence of a formal curriculum, and a Likert scale questionnaire regarding face and content validity.

Over a 5-year period, the availability of virtual reality robotic simulators substantially increased from 14% to nearly 60% availability in 2013. Despite this increase, the frequency of simulator use remained unchanged (p = 0.40) and the reported presence of formal curricula decreased from 41% to 34.8%. There was no significant difference in simulator use between residents in programs with or without laparoscopic/robotic curricula (p = 0.95). There was also a decrease in the percentage of residents who felt official laparoscopic curricula (93%-81%) and simulators (82%-74%) should be involved in resident education.

In the past 5 years, despite evidence supporting benefits from simulator use and increasing availability, self-reported resident use has remained unchanged and the reporting of presence of laparoscopic/robotic curricula has decreased. With more dedicated investment in formal curricula, residency training programs may receive greater returns on their simulator investments, improve resident skills and comfort, and ultimately improve the quality of patient care.