Current status of young urologists and residents' activity and academic training in Spain. National survey results

The development and validation of a new simulator for endourology

INTRODUCTION

Simulation in medicine has developed a lot in the last few decades. There is a broad range of simulators available, above all for training in surgical procedures. Endourology can benefit much from simulation because the minimally-invasive procedures of endourology frequently have long learning curves, which can be reduced by training with simulators.

MATERIALS AND METHODS

A low-fidelity simulator was designed for practicing endourology techniques that use cystoscopy. The process of validation involved 5 experts and 19 non-experts. Experts comprised medical professionals working in a department of urology who had performed at least 100 flexible cystoscopy procedures. Non-experts were residents in internal medicine without experience in any type of endoscopy. Information about face and content validity was collected by means of Likert scales from 1 to 5. To evaluate construct validity, we measured the time to complete two tasks, for which the procedure was evaluated by means of the OSATS global evaluation scale.

RESULTS

New simulator was successfully built according to its design. For all evaluated aspects of construct validity, there was a significant difference (p<0.05) between the group of experts and the group of non-experts. Content validity was scored 4.66 (standard deviation ±0.56) by the experts and 4.41 (±0.71) by the non-experts. In the face validity questionnaire, the average score was 4.14 (±0.94), the question receiving the highest score: 4.6 (±0.84) concerned immersion in the procedure.

CONCLUSION

The simulator presented is valid both for training up new urologists in endourology technique and for experts seeking to perfect their skills.

Comparison of urology residency training between the United States and China

OBJECTIVE

This study compares the present status and traits of urology residency programs in the United States and China.

METHODS

The flow path, structure, curriculum, operative experience, scholarly activities, evaluation systems and other aspects of training were comparatively evaluated between China and the United States.

RESULTS

Urology residency training programs are different between China and the United States in many aspects. Admission requirements for the United States urology residency program are more rigorous, and the specialty training program in the United States is more concentrated. Furthermore, residency programs in USA have much more practical clinical and research training, and their evaluation process is more diverse, and it has been designed to assess competencies. Moreover, job opportunities after residency substantially differ between these two countries. Becoming an independent urologic surgeon is not the specific goal of the Urology residency training program in China, and it would require more training time than in the United States.

CONCLUSION

Urology residency training programs in the United States and China have a unique format and characteristics. The training programs in China are focused on general techniques and procedures, while training programs in USA follow a more standardized curriculum. Both USA and China may complement each other to create training programs that would ultimately provide high-quality patient care.

Urology residency training in Greece. Results from the first national resident survey

BACKGROUND AND OBJECTIVES

This is the first national survey assessing Greek Urology residency programs. The main objective of this study is to assess the level of confidence and perception of Greek Urology residents regarding their educational program and detect areas of improvement.

MATERIAL AND METHODS

A 51-question survey was developed via an electronic platform and answered by 91 out of 104 Greek residents from March 2019 until May 2019. Fisher's exact test, chi-squared test and Kruskal-Wallis test were used with statistical significance set at p = .05.

RESULTS

The median overall satisfaction regarding surgical training was 6/10 regardless of working schedule, working in a University Department, PGY or number of residents in clinic. Most residents have not performed any scrotal ultrasound or pressure-flow-studies; however, they are more familiar with KUB ultrasound. Double-J stent insertion and cystoscopy were common procedures for residents. Bureaucracy was reported as a major issue by 70.4% of residents. ESWL has not been performed by 80.2% of residents, 58.2% residents performed less than 10 ureteroscopies, and only the last year trainees performed more than 10 TURBT and TURP. Most residents mentioned to rarely perform basic steps in many open or laparoscopic urological procedures. Surprisingly, 59.3% of residents have not published any study in peer-reviewed journals. Regarding satisfaction, 44% rarely feel satisfied at work and 59.3% sometimes suffer from burnout. Response rate reached 87.5%.

CONCLUSIONS

Considering the results from this survey, regulatory authorities should join forces to establish a structured curriculum of clinical, surgical and research training in Urology across Europe.

Urology residency training in Greece. Results from the first national resident survey

BACKGROUND AND OBJECTIVES

This is the first national survey assessing Greek Urology residency programs. The main objective of this study is to assess the level of confidence and perception of Greek Urology residents regarding their educational program and detect areas of improvement.

MATERIAL AND METHODS

A 51-question survey was developed via an electronic platform and answered by 91 out of 104 Greek residents from March 2019 until May 2019. Fisher's exact test, chi-squared test and Kruskal-Wallis test were used with statistical significance set at p=.05.

RESULTS

The median overall satisfaction regarding surgical training was 6/10 regardless of working schedule, working in a University Department, PGY or number of residents in clinic. Most residents have not performed any scrotal ultrasound or pressure-flow-studies; however, they are more familiar with KUB ultrasound. Double-J stent insertion and cystoscopy were common procedures for residents. Bureaucracy was reported as a major issue by 70.4% of residents. ESWL has not been performed by 80.2% of residents, 58.2% residents performed less than 10 ureteroscopies, and only the last year trainees performed more than 10 TURBT and TURP. Most residents mentioned to rarely perform basic steps in many open or laparoscopic urological procedures. Surprisingly, 59.3% of residents have not published any study in peer-reviewed journals. Regarding satisfaction, 44% rarely feel satisfied at work and 59.3% sometimes suffer from burnout. Response rate reached 87.5%.

CONCLUSIONS

Considering the results from this survey, regulatory authorities should join forces to establish a structured curriculum of clinical, surgical and research training in Urology across Europe.

Urology simulation boot camp: A perspective from non-UK delegates

BACKGROUND

Medical simulation has become an integral part of modern-day surgical training. Despite its benefits, it is still not widely incorporated in the curriculum of trainees. The Urology Boot Camp (USBC) is an innovative 5-day course aimed at trainees entering the UK training scheme. Since its implementation, there's been increasing interest by non-UK trainees.

OBJECTIVE

To assess the experiences of non-UK trainees in the USBC, both quantitatively and qualitatively, including skills progression analysis.

DESIGN, SETTING AND PARTICIPANTS

This double-group cohort retrospective study included 20 delegates from non-UK countries and 76 trainees from UK who attended the USBC in 2017 and 2018. Trainees undertook pre- and post-course MCQs, pre-course operative experience questionnaires and a 12-month post-course survey on the usefulness of the skills acquired.

OUTCOME MEASUREMENTS AND STATISTICAL ANALYSIS

Differences in mean MCQ scores between UK and non-UK delegates at baseline and after the course were assessed by the independent T-test. Each core urology procedural skill was evaluated by an expert and graded according to a Likert scale (1-5). The Kruskal-Wallis test was used to assess the differences in the scores between both groups on endourological techniques. A Likert scale (1-5) was used to grade the participants' answers to the post-course 12-month survey.

RESULTS AND LIMITATIONS

Trainees from UK scored significantly higher in the pre-course MCQ assessment, however after completion of the boot camp, no significant difference was noted. There were no differences between the groups at e-BLUS completion times, and both groups significantly improved their results. A 12-month post-course survey on the utility of training during the boot camp and qualitative evaluation of the course by overseas delegates was very positive.

CONCLUSIONS

The USBC is a valuable learning experience that leads to improvement of technical and soft skills of UK and non-UK trainees alike.

A simple novel training model for teaching suprapubic catheter (SPC) exchange

OBJECTIVES

To develop a suprapubic catheter (SPC) training model as no specific realistic training model exists to replicate SPC exchange where a catheter tract is present.

MATERIALS AND METHODS

We describe a novel, anatomically realistic, animal simulator model for use in SPC training, which was trialed at a national urology simulation boot camp by new urology trainees and validated by expert urologists. A scale reproduction of an abdominal wall was created using a porcine abdominal wall. A segment of small bowel was stitched around a size 16F Foley catheter to form a tract. Abdominal wall tissue was excised cylindrically to create an opening, and the small bowel tract was passed through the abdominal wall and sutured anteriorly, producing a realistic SPC tract: inferiorly, the tract was anastomosed to a porcine urinary bladder. This model was evaluated by 10 expert urologists for content validity with an 8-item 5-point rating scale used to evaluate domains relevant to the simulator.

RESULTS

The domains were scored between 1 and 5 by 10 expert urologists, 1 being «strongly disagree» and 5 being «strongly agree». The average expert ratings of the domains were then calculated and tabulated following the training course. There was an average global rating of 4.2/5 for the model, with an average usefulness for training score of 4.6/5.

CONCLUSION

The feedback from experts and trainees (informal) was overwhelmingly positive. On average, our experts reported high satisfaction with their experience using this simulator as a training tool.