Worldwide Survey on Interventional Pulmonology Training Programs

Interventional pulmonology (IP) has evolved into a distinct subspecialty driven by advanced technologies, yet the global educational infrastructure to support this growth remains undefined. The shift from traditional training models to competency-based medical education is advocated but inconsistently applied. This study aimed to comprehensively assess the current landscape of IP training, identifying geographic disparities in educational structure, resource availability, and certification requirements.

We conducted a prospective, international, cross-sectional survey in May 2025. A validated 25-item web-based questionnaire was distributed to interventional pulmonologists and thoracic endoscopists across 34 countries via major international respiratory societies and professional digital networks. The instrument evaluated four domains: demographics, institutional setting, local training architecture, and assessment methodologies. Data were analyzed using descriptive statistics to map global training availability and standardization.

Analysis of 102 valid responses revealed a profound global training deficit. Seventy percent of respondents reported that no structured IP training program exists in their country. In general pulmonary fellowships, 41% of respondents indicated their training offered no exposure to interventional techniques. Geographic disparities were significant; while 100% of North American respondents reported access to structured programs, respondents from Africa reported 0% availability. Furthermore, certification was not mandatory for operating in an IP unit in 70% of cases. Assessment methods lacked rigor, with 33.3% of general fellowships reporting no formal skills evaluation. Despite these gaps, 96% of respondents expressed agreement with the need for a standardized, global IP training curriculum.

A critical "training divide" exists in interventional pulmonology, characterized by a lack of structured programs, inconsistent assessment, and severe regional inequities. The current reliance on unregulated training models is insufficient for modern procedural complexity. There is a near-unanimous consensus among practitioners for the implementation of a unified, competency-based international curriculum to ensure patient safety and standard of care worldwide.