International journal of gynecological cancer : official journal of the International Gynecological Cancer Society · 2026
Access, training, and perceived barriers to robotic surgery in gynecologic practice: findings from a cross-sectional survey of Latin American surgeons.
СтатьяНаблюдательное исследованиеНазвание и аннотация: Перевод пока не подготовлен
Обработка статьи · этапы, ошибки и управление
Загрузка состояния…
Ошибки и ограничения
История · было → стало
Состояние обновляется каждые 5 секунд, пока блок открыт. Процент показывается только там, где известен объём работы. Пауза останавливает продолжение этапа; текущий запрос к источнику может завершиться.
Alvarenga-Bezerra Vanessa, Souza Ana Flávia Nunes de, Faria Luiza Gama Ancona de, Rossette Mariana Costa, Reis Ricardo Dos, Machado Luciana, Tsunoda Audrey Tieko, Guitmann Gustavo, Silva-Filho Agnaldo Lopes da, Baiocchi Glauco, Tondello Giorgio Conte, Noll Florencia, Alves Cassio Bona, Câmara Eduardo, Blanco Aldo López, Sanabria Daniel, Ortiz David Isla, Odetto Diego, Heredia M Fernando, Gutiérrez R Everardo, Ribeiro Paulo Ayroza, Gomes Mariano Tamura Vieira, Podgaec Sérgio, Moretti-Marques Renato
Аннотация
OBJECTIVE: This study aimed to evaluate access to robotic platforms, training pathways, cumulative robotic surgical experience, perceived barriers, and factors associated with self-reported technical confidence among gynecologists, gynecologic oncologists, and oncologic surgeons treating gynecologic tumors in Latin America.
METHODS: This was an observational, cross-sectional survey conducted over 4 weeks using an electronic questionnaire. Gynecologists, gynecologic oncologists, and oncologic surgeons treating gynecologic tumors in Latin American countries were recruited through professional networks and organizations, with subsequent snowball sampling.
RESULTS: A total of 210 responses were analyzed, with the majority from Brazil (81.4%) and from practitioners working in private or mixed health care settings (95.7%). Access to robotic platforms was reported by 88.6% of respondents, mainly involving da Vinci Xi (68.6%) and da Vinci X (57.1%) systems. Training pathways were heterogeneous, including postgraduate programs (27.6%) and industry-sponsored courses (27.1%). In multivariable analysis, cumulative robotic surgical experience and perceived training adequacy were independently associated with technical confidence. For the animal model training variable, both participants with formal training without animal model exposure and those with animal model training reported higher technical confidence compared with participants with no formal training. Specific training modalities, such as simulation hours or fellowships, were not independently associated with technical confidence after adjustment. Economic barriers were nearly universal, with 91.4% identifying costs and insurance denial as the primary obstacle to implementation. Furthermore, 76.7% of respondents perceived access as highly concentrated in major urban centers.
CONCLUSIONS: Among the surveyed gynecologic professionals, access to robotic surgery platforms was commonly reported, although perceived access remained limited by financial and geographic disparities. Support for structured training is widespread, but cumulative operative experience appears to be the key factor associated with technical confidence.
METHODS: This was an observational, cross-sectional survey conducted over 4 weeks using an electronic questionnaire. Gynecologists, gynecologic oncologists, and oncologic surgeons treating gynecologic tumors in Latin American countries were recruited through professional networks and organizations, with subsequent snowball sampling.
RESULTS: A total of 210 responses were analyzed, with the majority from Brazil (81.4%) and from practitioners working in private or mixed health care settings (95.7%). Access to robotic platforms was reported by 88.6% of respondents, mainly involving da Vinci Xi (68.6%) and da Vinci X (57.1%) systems. Training pathways were heterogeneous, including postgraduate programs (27.6%) and industry-sponsored courses (27.1%). In multivariable analysis, cumulative robotic surgical experience and perceived training adequacy were independently associated with technical confidence. For the animal model training variable, both participants with formal training without animal model exposure and those with animal model training reported higher technical confidence compared with participants with no formal training. Specific training modalities, such as simulation hours or fellowships, were not independently associated with technical confidence after adjustment. Economic barriers were nearly universal, with 91.4% identifying costs and insurance denial as the primary obstacle to implementation. Furthermore, 76.7% of respondents perceived access as highly concentrated in major urban centers.
CONCLUSIONS: Among the surveyed gynecologic professionals, access to robotic surgery platforms was commonly reported, although perceived access remained limited by financial and geographic disparities. Support for structured training is widespread, but cumulative operative experience appears to be the key factor associated with technical confidence.