Assessment and maintenance of competence in urology

Nature Reviews Urology

Volumn 7, Issue 7, 2010, Pages 403-413

  Ahmed, Kamran ^a   Jawad, Muhammed ^a   Dasgupta, Prokar ^b   Darzi, Ara ^a   Athanasiou, Thanos ^a   Khan, Mohammad Shamim ^b  

^a IMPERIAL COLLEGE LONDON   (United Kingdom)

^b KING'S COLLEGE LONDON   (United Kingdom)

Author keywords

[No Author keywords available]

Indexed keywords

CLINICAL COMPETENCE; MEDICAL EDUCATION; MEDICAL PRACTICE; MEDICAL SPECIALIST; MORBIDITY; MORTALITY; OUTCOME ASSESSMENT; PATIENT SAFETY; PRIORITY JOURNAL; PROFESSIONALISM; REVIEW;

CERTIFICATION; CLINICAL COMPETENCE; HUMANS; PHYSICIANS; UROLOGY;

EID: 77954535099     PISSN: 17594812     EISSN: 17594820     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1038/nrurol.2010.81     Document Type: Review

References (97)

1. Murray, A. Redesigning urological training and the consultant urologist. Ann. R. Coll. Surg. Engl. (Suppl.) 85, 314-317 (2003).
2. Risser, D. T. et al. The potential for improved teamwork to reduce medical errors in the emergency department: the MedTeams Research Consortium. Ann. Emerg. Med. 34, 373-383 (1999).
3. Reznick, R. K. & MacRae, H. Teaching surgical skills-changes in the wind. N. Engl. J. Med. 355, 2664-2669 (2006).
4. Kohn, L. T., Corrigan, J. M. & Donaldson, M. S. To Err is Human: Building a Safer Health System (Institute of Medicine, 1999).
5. The Bristol Royal Infirmary Inquiry. Learning from Bristol: the report of the public inquiry into children's heart surgery at the Bristol Royal Infirmary 1984-1995 [online], http:// www.bristol-inquiry.org.uk/ (2001).
6. American Board of Medical Specialties. ABMS Maintenance of Certification [online], http:// www.abms.org/Maintenance-of-Certification/ ABMS-MOC.aspx (2009).
7. CanMEDS. The CanMEDS 2005 Physician Competency Framework [online], http:// meds.queensu.ca/medicine/obgyn/pdf/ CanMEDS2005.booklet.pdf (2005).
8. Academy of Medical Royal Colleges. Revalidation [online], http://www.aomrc.org.uk/ introduction.html (2009).
9. Merkur, S., Mossialos, E., Long, M. & McKee, M. Physician revalidation in Europe. Clin. Med. 8, 371-376 (2008).
10. Epstein, R. M. & Hundert, E. M. Defining and assessing professional competence. JAMA 287, 226-235 (2002).
11. Prystowsky, J. B., Bordage, G. & Feinglass, J. M. Patient outcomes for segmental colon resection according to surgeon's training, certification and experience. Surgery 132, 663-670 (2002).
12. Kohatsu, N. D., Gould, D. & Ross, L. K. Characteristics associated with physician discipline: a case-control study. Arch. Intern. Med. 164, 653-658 (2004).
13. Royal Australasian College of Surgeons. Surgical Competence and Performance [online], http://www.surgeons.org/Content/ ContentFolders/Policies/ PUB-2008-Surgical- Competence-Performance-Guide.pdf (2008).
14. Ahmed, K., Ashrafian, H., Hanna, G. B., Darzi, A. & Athanasiou, T. Assessment of specialists in cardiovascular practice. Nat. Rev. Cardiol. 6, 659-667 (2009).
15. Stewart, M. A. Effective physician-patient communication and health outcomes: a review. CMAJ 152, 1423-1433 (1995).
16. Satava, R. M., Gallagher, A. G. & Pellegrini, C. A. Surgical competence and surgical proficiency: definitions, taxonomy, and metrics. J. Am. Coll. Surg. 196, 933-937 (2003).
17. GMC. Good Medical Practice [online], http:// www.gmc-uk.org/static/ documents/content/ GMC-GMP-0911.pdf (2009).
18. National Patient Safety Agency. Junior Doctor [online], http://www.nrls.npsa.nhs.uk/ resources/search-by-audience/junior-doctor/ (2010).
19. Haynes, A. B. et al. A surgical safety checklist to reduce morbidity and mortality in a global population. N. Engl. J. Med. 360, 491-499 (2009).
20. Makary, M. A. et al. Operating room teamwork among physicians and nurses: teamwork in the eye of the beholder. J. Am. Coll. Surg. 202, 746-752 (2006).
21. vincent, C., Moorthy, K., Sarker, S. K., Chang, A. & Darzi, A. W. Systems approaches to surgical quality and safety: from concept to measurement. Ann. Surg. 239, 475-482 (2004).
22. Joint Commission on Accreditation of Healthcare Organizations. Sentinel Event Statistics [online], http://www.jointcommission. org/SentinelEvents/ (2003).
23. Brewin, J. et al. Face, content and construct validation of the first virtual reality laparoscopic nephrectomy simulator. BJU Int. doi:10.1111/j.1464-410X.2009.09193.x.
24. Joyce, A. & Fawcett, D. Medical Revalidation. BAUS Strategy for Recertification [online], http://www.surg-online.net/index.php (2009).
25. Buyske, J. For the protection of the public and the good of the specialty: maintenance of certification. Arch. Surg. 144, 101-103 (2009).
26. Archer, J., Norcini, J., Southgate, L., Heard, S. & Davies, H. Mini-PAT (peer assessment tool): a valid component of a national assessment programme in the UK? Adv. Health Sci. Educ. Theory Pract. 13, 181-192 (2008).
27. Nomura, H. Developing the "why" facet of medical professionalism. Kaohsiung J. Med. Sci. 24, 31-34 (2008).
28. Simpson, M. et al. Doctor-patient communication: the Toronto consensus statement. BMJ 303, 1385-1387 (1991).
29. Nicholson, D. T., Chalk, C., Funnell, W. R. & Daniel, S. J. Can virtual reality improve anatomy education? A randomised controlled study of a computer-generated three-dimensional anatomical ear model. Med. Educ. 40, 1081-1087 (2006).
30. Undre, S., Healey, A. N., Darzi, A. & vincent, C. A. Observational assessment of surgical teamwork: a feasibility study. World J. Surg. 30, 1774-1783 (2006).
31. Thomas, E. J. et al. Teamwork and quality during neonatal care in the delivery room. J. Perinatol. 26, 163-169 (2006).
32. Miller, L. A. Patient safety and teamwork in perinatal care: resources for clinicians. J. Perinat. Neonatal Nurs. 19, 46-51 (2005).
33. Morey, J. C. et al. Error reduction and performance improvement in the emergency department through formal teamwork training: evaluation results of the MedTeams project. Health Serv. Res. 37, 1553-1581 (2002).
34. Sherwood, G., Thomas, E., Bennett, D. S. & Lewis, P. A teamwork model to promote patient safety in critical care. Crit. Care Nurs. Clin. North Am. 14, 333-340 (2002).
35. Undre, S., Sevdalis, N., Healey, A. N., Darzi, S. A. & vincent, C. A. Teamwork in the operating theater: cohesion or confusion? J. Eval. Clin. Pract. 12, 182-189 (2006).
36. Flin, R., Yule, S., McKenzie, L., Paterson- Brown, S. & Maran, N. Attitudes to teamwork and safety in the operating theatre. Surgeon 4, 145-151 (2006).
37. Flin, R., Fletcher, G., McGeorge, P., Sutherland, A. & Patey, R. Anaesthetists' attitudes to teamwork and safety. Anesthesia 58, 233-242 (2003).
38. Rao, A. R., Hudd, C., Laniado, M., Motiwala, H. & Karim, O. M. Left or right, get it right [abstract P132]. BJU Int. 95 (Suppl. 5), 96 (2005).
39. Coxon, J. P., Pattison, S. H., Parks, J. W., Stevenson, P. K. & Kirby, R. S. Reducing human error in urology: lessons from aviation. BJU Int. 91, 1-3 (2003).
40. Flin, R. et al. Teaching surgeons about nontechnical skills. Surgeon 5, 86-89 (2007).
41. Sevdalis, N. et al. Reliability of a revised NOTECHS scale for use in surgical teams. Am. J. Surg. 196, 184-190 (2008).
42. Powers, K. A. et al. Simulated laparoscopic operating room crisis: an approach to enhance the surgical team performance. Surg. Endosc. 22, 885-900 (2008).
43. Davies, H. A. & Archer, J. C. Multi source feedback development and practical aspects. Clin. Teacher 2, 77-81 (2005).
44. Undre, S., Sevdalis, N., Healey, A. N., Darzi, A. & vincent, C. A. Observational teamwork assessment for surgery (OTAS): refinement and application in urological surgery. World J. Surg. 31, 1373-1381 (2007).
45. Kurtz, S., Silverman, J., Benson, J. & Draper, J. Marrying content and process in clinical method teaching: enhancing the Calgary-Cambridge guides. Acad. Med. 78, 802-809 (2003).
46. Makoul, G. Essential elements of communication in medical encounters: the Kalamazoo consensus statement. Acad. Med. 76, 390-393 (2001).
47. violato, C., Lockyer, J. & Fidler, H. Multisource feedback: a method of assessing surgical practice. BMJ 326, 546-548 (2003).
48. Watters, D. A., Green, A. J. & van Rij, A. Guidelines for surgical audit in Australia and New Zealand. ANZ J. Surg. 76, 78-83 (2006).
49. Crossley, J. et al. Can a district hospital assess its doctors for re-licensure? Med. Educ. 42, 359-363 (2008).
50. Dickinson, I., Watters, D., Graham, I., Montgomery, P. & Collins, J. Guide to the assessment of competence and performance in practising surgeons. ANZ J. Surg. 79, 198-204 (2009).
51. Marinopoulos, S. S. et al. Effectiveness of continuing medical education. Evid. Rep. Technol. Assess. (Full Rep.) 149, 1-69 (2007).
52. Reznick, R., Regehr, G., MacRae, H., Martin, J. & McCulloch, W. Testing technical skill via an innovative "bench station" examination. Am. J. Surg. 173, 226-230 (1997).
53. Yap, C. H., Colson, M. E. & Watters, D. A. Cumulative sum techniques for surgeons: a brief review. ANZ J. Surg. 77, 583-586 (2007).
54. Royal College of Surgeons. Specialty Programmes: Urology [online], http:// www.rcseng.ac.uk/education/courses/ specialty/urology.html (2010).
55. Baverstock, R. J., MacNeily, A. E. & Cole, G. The American Urological Association In-Service Examination: performance correlates with Canadian and American specialty examinations. J. Urol. 170, 527-529 (2003).
56. Rassweiler, J., Klein, J., Teber, D., Schulze, M. & Frede, T. Mechanical simulators for training for laparoscopic surgery in urology. J. Endourol. 21, 252-262 (2007).
57. Moorthy, K., Munz, Y., Sarker, S. K. & Darzi, A. Objective assessment of technical skills in surgery. BMJ 327, 1032-1037 (2003).
58. Chou, D. S., Abdelshehid, C., Clayman, R. v. & McDougall, E. M. Comparison of results of virtual-reality simulator and training model for basic ureteroscopy training. J. Endourol. 20, 266-271 (2006).
59. Watterson, J. D., Beiko, D. T., Kuan, J. K. & Denstedt, J. D. Randomized prospective blinded study validating acquistion of ureteroscopy skills using computer based virtual reality endourological simulator. J. Urol. 168, 1928-1932 (2002).
60. Knudsen, B. E. et al. A randomized, controlled, prospective study validating the acquisition of percutaneous renal collecting system access skills using a computer based hybrid virtual reality surgical simulator: phase I. J. Urol. 176, 2173-2178 (2006).
61. Aggarwal, R., Grantcharov, T., Moorthy, K., Milland, T. & Darzi, A. Toward feasible, valid, and reliable video-based assessments of technical surgical skills in the operating room. Ann. Surg. 247, 372-379 (2008).
62. Sambunjak, D., Straus, S. E. & Marusic, A. Mentoring in academic medicine: a systematic review. JAMA 296, 1103-1115 (2006).
63. Shah, J. & Darzi, A. Surgical skills assessment: an ongoing debate. BJU Int. 88, 655-660 (2001).
64. Martin, J. A. et al. Objective structured assessment of technical skill (OSATS) for surgical residents. Br. J. Surg. 84, 273-278 (1997).
65. Beard, J. D., Choksy, S. & Khan, S. Assessment of operative competence during carotid endarterectomy. Br. J. Surg. 94, 726-730 (2007).
66. Datta, v., Mackay, S., Mandalia, M. & Darzi, A. The use of electromagnetic motion tracking analysis to objectively measure open surgical skill in the laboratory-based model. J. Am. Coll. Surg. 193, 479-485 (2001).
67. Fraser, S. A. et al. Evaluating laparoscopic skills: setting the pass/fail score for the MISTELS system. Surg. Endosc. 17, 964-967 (2003).
68. Katz, R. et al. Skill assessment of urological laparoscopic surgeons: can criterion levels of surgical performance be determined using the pelvic box trainer? Eur. Urol. 47, 482-487 (2005).
69. Brehmer, M. & Tolley, D. validation of a bench model for endoscopic surgery in the upper urinary tract. Eur. Urol. 42, 175-180 (2002).
70. Royal Australasian College of Surgeons. Surgical Competence and Performance [online], http:// www.surgeons.org/content/contentfolders/ policies/pub-2008-surgical-competence- performance-guide.pdf (2008).
71. BAUS. British Association of Urological Surgeons. Data & Audit Project [online], http:// www.baus.org.uk/data-audit-project.phtml (2009).
72. Collins, J. P., Civil, I. D., Sugrue, M., Balogh, Z. & Chehade, M. J. Surgical education and training in Australia and New Zealand. World J. Surg. 32, 2138-2144 (2008).
73. van der vleuten, C. P. M. The assessment of professional competence: developments, research and practical implications. Adv. Health Sci. Educ. Theory Pract. 1, 41-67 (1996).
74. Ahmed, K. et al. Role of virtual reality simulation in teaching and assessing technical skills in endovascular intervention. J. Vasc. Interv. Radiol. 21, 55-66 (2010).
75. Allen, I. Doctors crossing borders: Europe's new reality. CMAJ 180, 158-161 (2009).
76. The European Parliament and Council of the European Union. Directive 2004/38/EC of the European Parliament and of the Council: of 29 April 2004 [online], http://eur-lex.europa.eu/ LexUriServ/LexUriServ.do?uri=OJ:L:2004:158:0 077:0123:EN:PDF (2004).
77. Watterson, J. D. & Denstedt, J. D. Ureteroscopy and cystoscopy simulation in urology. J. Endourol. 21, 263-269 (2007).
78. Wong, J. A. & Matsumoto, E. D. Primer: cognitive motor learning for teaching surgical skill-how are surgical skills taught and assessed? Nat. Clin. Pract. Urol. 5, 47-54 (2008).
79. Sweet, R. M. Review of trainers for transurethral resection of the prostate skills. J. Endourol. 21, 280-284 (2007).
80. Hruby, G. W. et al. The EZ Trainer: validation of a portable and inexpensive simulator for training basic laparoscopic skills. J. Urol. 179, 662-666 (2008).
81. Zhang, Y. et al. Novel biologic model for percutaneous renal surgery learning and training in the laboratory. Urology 72, 513-516 (2008).
82. Matsumoto, E. D., Hamstra, S. J., Radomski, S. B. & Cusimano, M. D. A novel approach to endourological training: training at the Surgical Skills Center. J. Urol. 166, 1261-1266 (2001).
83. Shah, J., Munz, Y., Manson, J., Moorthy, K. & Darzi, A. Objective assessment of small bowel anastomosis skill in trainee general surgeons and urologists. World J. Surg. 30, 248-251 (2006).
84. Brehmer, M. & Swartz, R. Training on bench models improves dexterity in ureteroscopy. Eur. Urol. 48, 458-463 (2005).
85. Yang, R. M. & Bellman, G. C. Laparoscopic urethrovesical anastomosis: a model to assess surgical competency. J. Endourol. 20, 679-682 (2006).
86. Grober, E. D. et al. Laboratory based training in urological microsurgery with bench model simulators: a randomized controlled trial evaluating the durability of technical skill. J. Urol. 172, 378-381 (2004).
87. Chatterjee, S., Radomski, S. B. & Matsumoto, E. D. Durability of endourologic skills: two-year follow-up study. J. Endourol. 21, 843-846 (2007).
88. Traxer, O. et al. The impact of intense laparoscopic skills training on the operative performance of urology residents. J. Urol. 166, 1658-1661 (2001).
89. Subramonian, K., DeSylva, S., Bishai, P., Thompson, P. & Muir, G. Acquiring surgical skills: a comparative study of open versus laparoscopic surgery. Eur. Urol. 45, 346-351 (2004).
90. Ogan, K. et al. virtual ureteroscopy predicts ureteroscopic proficiency of medical students on a cadaver. J. Urol. 172, 667-671 (2004).
91. Matsumoto, E. D., Pace, K. T. & D'A Honey, R. J. virtual reality ureteroscopy simulator as a valid tool for assessing endourological skills. Int. J. Urol. 13, 896-901 (2006).
92. Jacomides, L., Ogan, K., Cadeddu, J. A. & Pearle, M. S. Use of a virtual reality simulator for ureteroscopy training. J. Urol. 171, 320-323 (2004).
93. Sweet, R., Kowalewski, T., Oppenheimer, P., Weghorst, S. & Satava, R. Face, content and construct validity of the University of Washington virtual reality transurethral prostate resection trainer. J. Urol. 172, 1953-1957 (2004).
94. Reich, O. et al. High-level virtual reality simulator for endourologic procedures of lower urinary tract. Urology 67, 1144-1148 (2006).
95. Matsumoto, E. D. et al. Assessment of basic human performance resources predicts performance of ureteroscopy. Am. J. Surg. 191, 817-820 (2006).
96. Knoll, T., Trojan, L., Haecker, A., Alken, P. & Michel, M. S. validation of computer-based training in ureterorenoscopy. BJU Int. 95, 1276-1279 (2005).
97. Shah, J., Montgomery, B., Langley, S. & Darzi, A. validation of a flexible cystoscopy course. BJU Int. 90, 833-835 (2002).