» Articles » PMID: 39117957

Advancing Minimally Invasive Hepato-pancreato-biliary Surgery: Barriers to Adoption and Equitable Access

Overview
Journal Surg Endosc
Publisher Springer
Date 2024 Aug 8
PMID 39117957
Authors
Affiliations
Soon will be listed here.
Abstract

Background: Despite a growing body of literature supporting the safety of robotic hepatopancreatobiliary (HPB) procedures, the adoption of minimally invasive techniques in HPB surgery has been slow compared to other specialties. We aimed to identify barriers to implementing robotic assisted surgery (RAS) in HPB and present a framework that highlights opportunities to improve adoption.

Methods: A modified nominal group technique guided by a 13-question framework was utilized. The meeting session was guided by senior authors, and field notes were also collected. Results were reviewed and free text responses were analyzed for major themes. A follow-up priority setting survey was distributed to all participants based on meeting results.

Results: Twenty three surgeons with varying robotic HPB experience from different practice settings participated in the discussion. The majority of surgeons identified operating room efficiency, having a dedicated operating room team, and the overall hospital culture and openness to innovation as important facilitators of implementing a RAS program. In contrast, cost, capacity building, disparities/risk of regionalization, lack of evidence, and time/effort were identified as the most significant barriers. When asked to prioritize the most important issues to be addressed, participants noted access and availability of the robot as the most important issue, followed by institutional support, cost, quality of supporting evidence, and need for robotic training.

Conclusions: This study reports surgeons' perceptions of major barriers to equitable access and increased implementation of robotic HPB surgery. To overcome such barriers, defining key resources, adopting innovative solutions, and developing better methods of collecting long term data should be the top priorities.

References
1.
Schneider M, Gero D, Muller M, Horisberger K, Rickenbacher A, Turina M . Inequalities in access to minimally invasive general surgery: a comprehensive nationwide analysis across 20 years. Surg Endosc. 2020; 35(11):6227-6243. PMC: 8523463. DOI: 10.1007/s00464-020-08123-0. View

2.
Bojesen R, Dalton S, Skou S, Jorgensen L, Walker L, Eriksen J . Preoperative multimodal prehabilitation before elective colorectal cancer surgery in patients with WHO performance status I or II: randomized clinical trial. BJS Open. 2023; 7(6). PMC: 10702628. DOI: 10.1093/bjsopen/zrad134. View

3.
Fretland A, Dagenborg V, Bjornelv G, Kazaryan A, Kristiansen R, Fagerland M . Laparoscopic Versus Open Resection for Colorectal Liver Metastases: The OSLO-COMET Randomized Controlled Trial. Ann Surg. 2017; 267(2):199-207. DOI: 10.1097/SLA.0000000000002353. View

4.
Wright J, Ananth C, Lewin S, Burke W, Lu Y, Neugut A . Robotically assisted vs laparoscopic hysterectomy among women with benign gynecologic disease. JAMA. 2013; 309(7):689-98. DOI: 10.1001/jama.2013.186. View

5.
Gall T, Malhotra G, Elliott J, Conneely J, Fong Y, Jiao L . The Atlantic divide: contrasting surgical robotics training in the USA, UK and Ireland. J Robot Surg. 2022; 17(1):117-123. PMC: 9939491. DOI: 10.1007/s11701-022-01399-5. View