RESUMEN
Introduction: The COVID-19 pandemic has negatively impacted clinical experience and case volumes. Surgical simulation is now an even more powerful training tool and, to maximize potential, we must ensure learner engagement. Our aim was to identify barriers to surgical simulation engagement and strategies to mitigate these. Method(s): Scoping search was performed with a trained librarian of PubMed, EMBASE and Web of Science. Title and screening were completed with inclusion criteria: articles describing barriers to engagement with surgical simulation. After full text screening, data was extracted from included articles: type of study, MERSQI score, type/number of participants, barriers to engagement and strategies to mitigate these. Result(s): Twenty-nine manuscripts were included with 951 faculty and 2,467 residents. The majority (86%) were in high income countries (HIC) and four in LMICs. Most were surveys (22/29), and five involved semi-structured interviews/focus groups. Mean adjusted MERSQI score was 8. Commonest barriers to HIC engagement were learner clinical duties (9/25), lack of learner time (13/25), lack of learner interest/motivation (9/25) and lack of faculty time or interest to participate (12/25). In LMIC, commonest barriers were lack of simulation lab/equipment (4/4), cost (3/4) and inadequate supervision (3/4). Strategies to improve HIC engagement were mandatory/protected resident simulation training (9/25) and, in LMIC, low cost simulators (4/4) and sharing resources (2/4). Conclusion(s): Identification of barriers to simulation engagement is crucial for successful learning. Given the increased importance of simulation education due to the COVID-19 pandemic, surgical educators should strategize to maximize engagement.
RESUMEN
Introduction: The COVID-19 pandemic necessitated proliferation of telesimulation. This pedagogy may be useful in rural areas to increase procedural adoption and reduce healthcare disparities. Our aim was to determine the current status of surgical simulation education to retool rural practicing Urologists. Method(s): Literature search was performed with a trained librarian for PubMed, EMBASE and Web of Science. Title/ screening were performed to include all studies of surgical simulation involving rural surgical learners to identify simulation education opportunities for practicing rural Urologists. Data was then extracted: simulation event, skills focus, MERSQI score, type/number of learners, learner assessment and event evaluation. Result(s): Seven manuscripts met inclusion criteria. Most were published 2019-2020 and were cross sectional (5/7, 71%). Mean adjusted MERSQI score was 13 (range 6-15.5). A wide range of surgical skills were taught (incl. laparoscopy, cricothyroidotomy, chest tube insertion, damage control laparotomy), but no Urological surgical skills. Two articles described mobile simulation units for rural areas. A total of 232 learners were identified including 69 medical students. One fifth of rural learners were non-medical or non-physicians. Only one study involved faculty, who were general surgeons. Conclusion(s): Telesimulation education for practicing Urologists in rural areas is lacking. Current in-operating room telementoring for rural Urologists requires surgeons to travel and perform their first cases utilizing this new technique on patients. Telesimulation to teach Urological skills in rural areas of the US may increase dissemination of techniques with no patient risk and has significant potential to redress current healthcare disparities.