Overview and perspectives about the robotic surgical certification process in Brazil: the new statement and a national web-survey

• Autor(a) principal: ARAUJO,RAPHAEL L. C.
• Data de Publicação: 2020
• Outros Autores: BENEVENUTO,DYEGO SÁ, ZILBERSTEIN,BRUNO, SALLUM,RUBENS A., AGUIAR-JR,SAMUEL, CAVAZZOLA,LEANDRO TOTTI, NACUL,MIGUEL, MELANI,ARMANDO G. F., TOMASICH,FLÁVIO D. S.
• Tipo de documento: Artigo
• Idioma: eng
• Título da fonte: Revista do Colégio Brasileiro de Cirurgiões
• Texto Completo: http://old.scielo.br/scielo.php?script=sci_arttext&pid=S0100-69912020000100197
• topic: Robotics; Certification; Minimally Invasive Surgical Procedures; Training Support

ABSTRACT Objective: to appraise the general profile of the Brazilian robotic surgeon and the acknowledgment of the new certification process for robotic surgery upon the Associação Médica Brasileira (AMB - Brazilian Medical Association) statement. According to the AMB statement, medical societies and proctors have to achieve leading roles in training and certification of surgeons, acting in partnership with industry. Methods: a national web-based survey was promoted by the Colégio Brasileiro de Cirurgiões (CBC - Brazilian College of Surgeons) among their members. Results: the 294 answers were split into two groups: 133 (45.3%) who had robotic console certification, and 161 (54.8%) who did not have it. The overall median age was 46, but the non-robotic group presented more surgeons with at least 30 years of experience than to the robotic group (32.3% versus 23.3%, p=0.033). Surgeons with robotic certification more frequently work in a city with at least one million inhabitants than surgeons who were not certified (85.7 versus 63.4%, p<0.001). The majority of surgeons in both groups have similar positioning for all main points of the statement. However, the agreement proportions for the preceptors responsibility during the procedures were higher among non-robotic surgeons that expected the preceptor to assume co-responsibility for the procedure (85% versus 60.9%, p<0.001), and intervene during the procedure as much as necessary (97.5% versus 91.7%, p=0.033). Conclusion: the overall agreement of the answers to the AMB statement seems to be a promising pathway to increase the participation of the medical entities into the robotic certification in Brazil.