Andrea Cocci1, Giulio Patruno2, Giorgio Gandaglia3, Michele Rizzo4, Francesco Esperto5, Daniele Parnanzini6, Amelia Pietropaolo7, Emanuele Principi8, Michele Talso9, Ramona Baldesi10, Antonino Battaglia11, Ervin Shehu12, Francesca Carrobbio13, Alfio Corsaro14, Roberto La Rocca15, Michele Marchioni16, Lorenzo Bianchi17, Eugenio Miglioranza18, Guglielmo Mantica19, Eugenio Martorana20, Leonardo Misuraca21, Dario Fontana22, Saverio Forte23, Giancarlo Napoli24, Giorgio Ivan Russo25. 1. Department of Urology, Careggi Hospital, University of Florence, Florence, Italy. 2. Department of Urology, Hospital Policlinico Tor Vergata, University of Roma Tor Vergata, Roma, Italy. 3. Department of Urology, San Raffaele Hospital, University Vita Salute San Raffaele di Milano, Milano, Italy. 4. Department of Urology, Cattinara Hospital, University of Trieste, Italy. 5. Department of Urology, Sant'Andrea Hospital, University La Sapienza, Rome, Italy. 6. Department of Urology, Santissima Trinità Hospital, University of Cagliari, Cagliari, Italy. 7. Department of Urology, Hospital Santa Maria della Misericordia, University of Perugia, Perugia, Italy. 8. Department of Urology Ospedali riuniti di Ancona, University of Marche, Ancona, Italy. 9. Department of Urology, Hospital Maggiore Policlinico Mangiagalli e Regina Elena, University of Milan, Milan, Italy. 10. Department of Urology, Cisanello Hospital, University of Pisa, Pisa, Italy. 11. Department of Urology, Molinette hospital,University of Torino, Torino, Italy. 12. Department of Urology, Campus Biomedico Hospital, University Campus Biomedico, Rome, Italy. 13. Department of Urology, A.O. Spedali Civili di Brescia, University of Brescia, Brescia, Italy. 14. Department of Surgery, Urology Section, University of Catania, Catania, Italy. 15. Department of Urology, Policlinico Federico II Hospital, University Federico II of Naples, Naples, Italy. 16. Department of Urology, SS. Annunziata Hospital, University of Chieti, Chieti, Italy. 17. Department of Urology, S. Orsola Hospital, University of Bologna, Bologna, Italy. 18. Department of Urology, Gemelli Hospital, Cattolica University of Rome, Rome, Italy. 19. Department of Urology, San Martino Hospital, University of Genova, Genova, Italy. 20. Department of Urology, Policlinico di Modena Hospital, University of Modena, Modena, Italy. 21. Department of Urology, Umberto I Hospital, University La Sapienza of Rome, Rome, Italy. 22. Department of Urology, Policlinico Paolo Giaccone Hospital, University of Palermo, Palermo, Italy. 23. Department of Urology, Policlinico di Bari Hospital, University of Bari, Bari, Italy. 24. Department of Urology, Policlinico G.B. Rossi Hospital, University of Verona, Verona, Italy. 25. Department of Surgery, Urology Section, University of Catania, Catania, Italy. Electronic address: giorgioivan@virgilio.it.
Abstract
BACKGROUND: Numerous surveys have been performed to determine the competence and the confidence of residents. However, there is no data available on the condition of Italian residents in urology. OBJECTIVE: To investigate the status of training among Italian residents in urology regarding scientific activity and surgical exposure. DESIGN, SETTING, AND PARTICIPANTS: A web-based survey that included 445 residents from all of the 25 Italian Residency Programmes was conducted between September 2015 and November 2015. OUTCOME MEASUREMENTS AND STATISTICAL ANALYSIS: The main outcomes were represented by scientific activity, involvement in surgical procedures, and overall satisfaction. RESULTS AND LIMITATIONS: In total, 324 out of 445 (72.8%) residents completed the survey. Overall, 104 (32%) residents had not published any scientific manuscripts, 148 (46%) published ≤5, 38 (12%) ≤10, 26 (8%) ≤15, four (1%) ≤20, and four (1%) >20 manuscripts, respectively. We did not observe any differences when residents were stratified by sex (p=0.5). Stent positioning (45.7%), extracorporeal shock wave lithotripsy (30.9%), transurethral resection of bladder tumor (33.0%), hydrocelectomy (24.7%), varicocelectomy (17%), ureterolithotripsy (14.5%), and orchiectomy (12.3%) were the surgical procedures more frequently performed by residents. Overall, 272 residents (84%) expressed a good satisfaction for urology specialty, while 178 (54.9%) expressed a good satisfaction for their own residency programme. We observed a statistically decreased trend for good satisfaction for urology specialty according to the postgraduate year (p=0.02). CONCLUSIONS: Italian Urology Residency Programmes feature some heavy limitations regarding scientific activity and surgical exposure. Nonetheless, satisfaction rate for urology specialty remains high. Further improvements in Residency Programmes should be made in order to align our schools to others that are actually more challenging. PATIENT SUMMARY: In this web-based survey, Italian residents in urology showed limited scientific productivity and low involvement in surgical procedures. Satisfaction for urology specialty remains high, demonstrating continuous interest in this field of study from residents.
BACKGROUND: Numerous surveys have been performed to determine the competence and the confidence of residents. However, there is no data available on the condition of Italian residents in urology. OBJECTIVE: To investigate the status of training among Italian residents in urology regarding scientific activity and surgical exposure. DESIGN, SETTING, AND PARTICIPANTS: A web-based survey that included 445 residents from all of the 25 Italian Residency Programmes was conducted between September 2015 and November 2015. OUTCOME MEASUREMENTS AND STATISTICAL ANALYSIS: The main outcomes were represented by scientific activity, involvement in surgical procedures, and overall satisfaction. RESULTS AND LIMITATIONS: In total, 324 out of 445 (72.8%) residents completed the survey. Overall, 104 (32%) residents had not published any scientific manuscripts, 148 (46%) published ≤5, 38 (12%) ≤10, 26 (8%) ≤15, four (1%) ≤20, and four (1%) >20 manuscripts, respectively. We did not observe any differences when residents were stratified by sex (p=0.5). Stent positioning (45.7%), extracorporeal shock wave lithotripsy (30.9%), transurethral resection of bladder tumor (33.0%), hydrocelectomy (24.7%), varicocelectomy (17%), ureterolithotripsy (14.5%), and orchiectomy (12.3%) were the surgical procedures more frequently performed by residents. Overall, 272 residents (84%) expressed a good satisfaction for urology specialty, while 178 (54.9%) expressed a good satisfaction for their own residency programme. We observed a statistically decreased trend for good satisfaction for urology specialty according to the postgraduate year (p=0.02). CONCLUSIONS: Italian Urology Residency Programmes feature some heavy limitations regarding scientific activity and surgical exposure. Nonetheless, satisfaction rate for urology specialty remains high. Further improvements in Residency Programmes should be made in order to align our schools to others that are actually more challenging. PATIENT SUMMARY: In this web-based survey, Italian residents in urology showed limited scientific productivity and low involvement in surgical procedures. Satisfaction for urology specialty remains high, demonstrating continuous interest in this field of study from residents.
Authors: Diego M Carrion; Moises E Rodriguez-Socarrás; Guglielmo Mantica; Francesco Esperto; Angelika Cebulla; Diederick Duijvesz; Giulio Patruno; Juan L Vásquez; Domenico Veneziano; Jesús Díez-Sebastian; Ali S Gozen; Joan Palou; Juan Gómez Rivas Journal: World J Urol Date: 2019-04-13 Impact factor: 4.226
Authors: Guglielmo Mantica; Pietro Fransvea; Francesco Virdis; Timothy C Hardcastle; Hilgard Ackermann; Carlo Terrone; Gianluca Costa; André Van der Merwe; Genoveffa Balducci; Elmin Steyn Journal: World J Surg Date: 2019-09 Impact factor: 3.352
Authors: Domenico Veneziano; A Tafuri; J Gomez Rivas; A Dourado; Z Okhunov; B K Somani; N Marino; G Fuchs; G Cacciamani Journal: World J Urol Date: 2019-11-07 Impact factor: 4.226
Authors: Amandeep S Taggar; Kevin Martell; Siraj Husain; Michael Peacock; Michael Sia; Geoffrey Gotto Journal: Can Urol Assoc J Date: 2018-05-28 Impact factor: 1.862