Table 3.

Literature overview and comparison of curricular programs for robotic visceral surgery

	Author	Journal, year	Personnel participation (General/visceral surgery)	Simulator training	Bedside assistance	Console training	Operations/Organ systems	Curricular phases/duration	Curricular connection to surgical experience level/Pgy1	Evaluation method
1	Grannan et al. [31]	Surg Laparosc Endosc Percutan Tech, 2021	Residents	Included	Included	Included	—	1	PGY 1	Post-curriculum survey (resident opinion)
2	Mustafa et al. [32]	J Surg Educ, 2019	Residents	—	—	Included	Hernia repairs	—	—	Retrospective case review
3	Moit et al. [33]	JSLS, 2019	Residents	Included	Included	Included	—	2	Phase 1: PGY 1–2 Phase 2: PGY 3–5	Global Evaluative Assessment of Robotic Skills for resident's operative performance
4	Krause, Bird [12]	J Robot Surg, 2019	Residents, voluntarily	Included	Included	Included	—	2	Phase 1: PGY 1–2 Phase 2: PGY 3 +	Survey (residents’ individual opinion) including 6 questions
5	Ramirez Barriga et al. [34]	J Surg Educ, 2022	Residents	Included	—	—	—	2 week period	PGY 3	Surveys, comparison to laparoscopic and open techniques, performed mentor sessions and exposure in the OR
6	Knab et al. [42, 43]	Ann Surg Oncol, 2018	Fellows	Included	—	Included	Pancreas resections	5 steps	Included	Depending on the step; including fellow’s education portfolio, pre-/ post-test design, OSATS score, video library, feedback, review of operative performance, etc
7	Gonzalez-Hernandez et al. [35]	J Robot Surg, 2018	Residents	Included	Included	Included	Hernia repairs	—	Included	Comparison of surgical experience and patient outcomes with/without resident participation
8	Winder et al. [36]	J Robot Surg, 2016	Residents	Included	Included	Included	CR2, biliary, foregut operations	1 year period	—	Education time and self-reported progress, rate of bedside assistance and operating at the console
9	Arain et al. [37]	Surg Endosc, 2012	Residents, interdisciplinary	Included	—	—	—	2 month period	Included	Task scoring for time and errors using modified FLS metric
10	Formisano et al. [38]	Minerva Chir, 2019	Attendings	—	Included	Included	Right hemi-colectomy	—	Included	Perioperative factors, pathological outcomes
11	Ebeling et al. [39]	Am J Surg, 2020	Residents and fellows	—	—	Included	Inguinal hernia repairs	—	—	Patient and operation characteristics, residents’ technical competency (GEARS), Zwisch scores, number of robotic console cases (residents as primary surgeon)
12	Juza et al. [40]	J Robot Surg, 2014	Residents and fellows	Included	Included	Included	Initially cholecystectomies	—	Novice robotic surgeons	Comparison to laparoscopic cholecystectomies
13	Aradaib et al. [16]	J Robot Surg, 2019	Colorectal surgeons	Included	—	Included	CR2	European Academy of Robotic Colorectal Surgery (EARCS) program	Robotic beginners	Multiple patient and perioperative characteristics, 30-day mortality, pathological outcome
14	Buchs et al. [14]	Surg Endosc, 2013	—Interdisciplinary	Included	Included	Included	—	2-day course	—	Retrospective review of the participants' surgical practice using online research and surveys
15	Rückbeil et al. [41]	Zentralbl Chir, 2022	Residents	—	—	Included	CR2	100 consecutive operations	—	Patient and perioperative characteristics
16	Collins et al. [2]	J Robot Surg, 2021	Residents, nurses, surgeons, medical students	—	Included	—	—	3 stages	—	Pre- and post-Robotic Assistant Surgical Training (RAST) survey (25 questions), between-stages repeated-measures survey (11 questions); including baseline demographics, confidence level, fundamental knowledge, participant feedback, etc
17	Thomas et al. [4]	J Robot Surg, 2021	Colorectal surgeons	Included	—	Included	CR2	1-year period	—	Comparison with prior surgical results of involved surgeons, patient and perioperative characteristics, pathological outcome

¹CR colorectal surgery, ²PGY post-graduate year