Framework for incorporating simulation into urology training

Study Type – Therapy (case series) Level of Evidence 4 What’s known on the subject? and What does the study add? Simulation‐based training can provide urology trainees with the opportunity to develop their technical and non‐technical skills in a safe and structured environment. Despite its promised benefits, incorporation of simulation into current curricula remains minimal. This paper provides a comprehensive review of the current status of simulation for both technical and non‐technical skills training as it pertains to urology. It provides a novel framework with contextualised examples of how simulation could be incorporated into a stage‐specific curriculum for trainees through to experienced urologists, thus aiding its integration into current training programmes. OBJECTIVES • Changes to working hours, new technologies and increased accountability have rendered the need for alternative training environments for urologists. • Simulation offers a promising arena for learning to take place in a safe, realistic setting. • Despite its benefits, the incorporation of simulation into urological training programmes remains minimal. • The current status and future directions of simulation for training in technical and non‐technical skills are reviewed as they pertain to urology. • A framework is presented for how simulation‐based training could be incorporated into the entire urological curriculum. MATERIALS AND METHODS • The literature on simulation in technical and non‐technical skills training is reviewed, with a specific focus upon urology. RESULTS • To fully integrate simulation into a training curriculum, its possibilities for addressing all the competencies required by a urologist must be realized. • At an early stage of training, simulation has been used to develop basic technical skills and cognitive skills, such as decision‐making and communication. • At an intermediate stage, the studies focus upon more advanced technical skills learnt with virtual reality simulators. • Non‐technical skills training would include leadership and could be delivered with in situ models. • At the final stage, experienced trainees can practise technical and non‐technical skills in full crisis simulations situated within a fully‐simulated operating rooms. CONCLUSIONS • Simulation can provide training in the technical and non‐technical skills required to be a competent urologist. • The framework presented may guide how best to incorporate simulation into training curricula. • Future work should determine whether acquired skills transfer to clinical practice and improve patient care.