Letter communication to AfPP members
AfPP recently wrote to all our members regarding the recent statement from the Intercollegiate Extended Surgical Team Board (IESTB) concerning the role of Surgical First Assistants (SFAs) in robotic-assisted surgery.
As always, our priority remains the promotion of safe perioperative practice, protection of patients, and support for practitioners navigating an evolving healthcare environment.
Dear Member,
Subject: Update for AfPP Members: IESTB Statement on Surgical First Assistants and Robotic-Assisted Surgery
You may be aware of the recent statement issued by the Intercollegiate Extended Surgical Team Board (IESTB) regarding the role of Surgical First Assistants (SFAs) in robotic-assisted surgery (RAS).
AfPP recognises that this statement may raise questions for practitioners and employers. We encourage members to take a measured and pragmatic approach while reviewing their current practice, local governance arrangements, competency frameworks and role expectations.
The statement reinforces that practitioners should work within their education, competence and scope of practice, and that organisations are responsible for ensuring appropriate governance, training and indemnity arrangements are in place. It also highlights that the RAS bedside assistant role is not currently considered within the recognised scope of practice of an SFA.
AfPP recognises the significant contribution SFAs make to perioperative care and understands that many practitioners have supported robotic services for several years. The publication of this statement should be viewed as an opportunity to review and strengthen governance arrangements rather than a cause for alarm.
- The IESTB statement reinforces several key principles:
- Practitioners should work within their education, competence, scope of practice and professional accountability.
- Organisations remain responsible for ensuring that roles, job descriptions, training, governance arrangements and indemnity align with the activities being undertaken.
- Where service requirements evolve beyond the recognised SFA scope of practice, organisations should undertake a formal review of service needs, education requirements and governance arrangements.
We appreciate that many SFAs have developed valuable experience supporting robotic services over a number of years. The publication of the statement does not diminish the contribution practitioners have made to patient care or service delivery. However, it does provide an opportunity for organisations and practitioners to review current practice against national guidance and consider any actions that may be required to ensure ongoing governance, patient safety and professional protection.
AfPP understands that members may feel uncertain about what this means for their individual practice. We would encourage practitioners not to panic or make immediate assumptions about their role. Instead, we recommend engaging constructively with employers, reviewing local policies and governance arrangements, and seeking clarity regarding role expectations, education, competency frameworks and indemnity arrangements.
As further national discussions develop, AfPP will continue to provide updates, guidance and support to members. Our priority remains the promotion of safe perioperative practice, protection of patients, and support for practitioners navigating an evolving healthcare environment.
If you have specific questions or concerns, please contact the AfPP team, who will endeavour to provide signposting and support where appropriate.
Kind regards,
Lindsay Keeley
Clinical Patient Safety & Quality Lead Association for Perioperative Practice (AfPP) Members