Proficiency-Based Progression on Hugo Ras Robot for Learning Nerve-Sparing RARP: Feasibility Study

Status

Enrolling by invitation

Phases

Unknown

Study type

Observational

Source

ClinicalTrials.gov

Registry ID

NCT07180797

Enrollment

Registered

2025-09-18

Start date

2025-09-12

Completion date

2026-03-31

Last updated

2025-09-18

For informational purposes only — not medical advice. Sourced from public registries and may not reflect the latest updates. Terms

Conditions

Training Effectiveness

Keywords

surgery, training, robotic assisted surgery

Brief summary

Feasibility study 1. To evaluate the feasibility of PBP training for nerve-sparing RARP on the Hugo Ras system 2. To assess time to proficiency for participants with varying experience 3. To identify challenges in PBP RARP training through observed errors and feedback

Detailed description

As robotic surgery advances, the emergence of new platforms such as the Hugo™ Robotic-Assisted Surgery System calls for robust training frameworks. Proficiency-Based Progression (PBP) provides a structured method to ensure skill acquisition through clearly defined, measurable benchmarks. This study evaluates the feasibility of implementing a PBP curriculum to train urologists in nerve-sparing robot-assisted radical prostatectomy (RARP) using the Hugo™ system. Twelve urologists and urology residents will participate, divided into three groups based on experience: Robotic-naïve Intermediate (Da Vinci experience only) Expert RARP surgeons (Da Vinci experience without prior Hugo exposure) The PBP training pathway comprises: Cognitive modules (e-learning with MCQ validation) Psychomotor skills training (device familiarization and basic surgical skills) Procedural training (nerve-sparing RARP on porcine models) Performance will be evaluated both in real time and via blinded video review. Primary endpoints include the time to reach proficiency in basic skills and procedural steps, analyzed by prior experience. Secondary endpoints encompass error profiles, participant and instructor feedback, and the feasibility of standardizing proficiency metrics.

Interventions

None listed

Study design

Observational model

OTHER

Time perspective

PROSPECTIVE

Eligibility

Sex/Gender

ALL

Age

18 Years to No maximum

Healthy volunteers

Yes

Inclusion criteria

* We'll only include urologist or urology residents to ensure that they have all the same interest and area of expertise

Exclusion criteria

Prior experience with the Hugo robotic system. Participants unable to attend all training days. Non-urology residents or consultants

Design outcomes

Primary

Measure	Time frame	Description
time-to-proficiency for basic skills and procedural steps	9 months	* Time taken to achieve proficiency in basic robotic skills on the Hugo system. * Time taken to achieve proficiency in RARP using the Hugo system in the simulated setting.

Secondary

Measure	Time frame	Description
Error patterns and feasibility of PBP RARP training on the Hugo system	9 months	Identification of challenging steps/phases in the PBP RARP procedure based on: Number of errors committed Feedback from trainers Participant feedback on the training process (structured questionnaire)

Countries

Belgium

Outcome results