Hendrik Borgmann1, Hannah K Arnold2, Christian P Meyer3, Johannes Bründl4, Justus König5, Tim Nestler6, Christian Ruf6, Julian Struck7, Johannes Salem8. 1. Department of Urology, University Hospital Mainz, Mainz, Germany. Electronic address: borgmann.hendrik@gmail.com. 2. Department of Urology, Hospital Berlin-Buch, Berlin, Germany. 3. Department of Urology, University Hospital Hamburg-Eppendorf, Hamburg, Germany. 4. Department of Urology, University Hospital Regensburg, Regensburg, Germany. 5. Department of Urology, Hospital Garmisch-Patenkirchen, Garmisch-Patenkirchen, Germany. 6. Department of Urology, Federal Armed Services Central Hospital Koblenz, Koblenz, Germany. 7. Department of Urology, University Hospital Lubeck, Lubeck, Germany. 8. Department of Urology, University Hospital Cologne, Cologne, Germany.
Abstract
BACKGROUND: Excellent uniform training of urology residents is crucial to secure both high-quality patient care and the future of our specialty. Residency training has come under scrutiny following the demands of subspecialized care, economical aspects, and working hour regulations. OBJECTIVE: To comprehensively assess the surgical training, research opportunities, and working conditions among urology residents in Germany. DESIGN, SETTING, AND PARTICIPANTS: We sent a 29-item online survey via email to 721 members of the German Society of Residents in Urology. OUTCOME MEASUREMENTS AND STATISTICAL ANALYSIS: Descriptive analyses were conducted to describe the surveys' four domains: (1) baseline characteristics, (2) surgical training (cumulative completed case volume for all minor-, medium-, and major-complexity surgeries), (3) research opportunities, and (4) working conditions. RESULTS AND LIMITATIONS: Four hundred and seventy-two residents completed the online survey (response rate 65%). Surgical training: the median number of cumulative completed cases for postgraduate yr (PGY)-5 residents was 113 (interquartile range: 76-178). Minor surgeries comprised 57% of all surgeries and were performed by residents in all PGYs. Medium-complexity surgeries comprised 39% of all surgeries and were mostly performed by residents in PGYs 2-5. Major surgeries comprised 4% of all surgeries and were occasionally performed by residents in PGYs 3-5. Research opportunities: some 44% have attained a medical thesis (Dr. med.), and 39% are currently pursuing research. Working conditions: psychosocial work-related stress was high and for 82% of residents their effort exceeded their rewards. Some 44% were satisfied, 32% were undecided, and 24% were dissatisfied with their current working situation. Limitations include self-reported survey answers and a lack of validated assessment tools. CONCLUSIONS: Surgical exposure among German urology residents is low and comprises minor and medium-complex surgeries. Psychosocial work-related stress is high for the vast majority of residents indicating the need for structural improvements in German urology residency training. PATIENT SUMMARY: In this study, we evaluated the surgical training, research opportunities, and working conditions among urology residents in Germany. We found low surgical exposure and high rates for psychosocial work-related stress, indicating the need for structural improvements in German urology residency training.
BACKGROUND: Excellent uniform training of urology residents is crucial to secure both high-quality patient care and the future of our specialty. Residency training has come under scrutiny following the demands of subspecialized care, economical aspects, and working hour regulations. OBJECTIVE: To comprehensively assess the surgical training, research opportunities, and working conditions among urology residents in Germany. DESIGN, SETTING, AND PARTICIPANTS: We sent a 29-item online survey via email to 721 members of the German Society of Residents in Urology. OUTCOME MEASUREMENTS AND STATISTICAL ANALYSIS: Descriptive analyses were conducted to describe the surveys' four domains: (1) baseline characteristics, (2) surgical training (cumulative completed case volume for all minor-, medium-, and major-complexity surgeries), (3) research opportunities, and (4) working conditions. RESULTS AND LIMITATIONS: Four hundred and seventy-two residents completed the online survey (response rate 65%). Surgical training: the median number of cumulative completed cases for postgraduate yr (PGY)-5 residents was 113 (interquartile range: 76-178). Minor surgeries comprised 57% of all surgeries and were performed by residents in all PGYs. Medium-complexity surgeries comprised 39% of all surgeries and were mostly performed by residents in PGYs 2-5. Major surgeries comprised 4% of all surgeries and were occasionally performed by residents in PGYs 3-5. Research opportunities: some 44% have attained a medical thesis (Dr. med.), and 39% are currently pursuing research. Working conditions: psychosocial work-related stress was high and for 82% of residents their effort exceeded their rewards. Some 44% were satisfied, 32% were undecided, and 24% were dissatisfied with their current working situation. Limitations include self-reported survey answers and a lack of validated assessment tools. CONCLUSIONS: Surgical exposure among German urology residents is low and comprises minor and medium-complex surgeries. Psychosocial work-related stress is high for the vast majority of residents indicating the need for structural improvements in German urology residency training. PATIENT SUMMARY: In this study, we evaluated the surgical training, research opportunities, and working conditions among urology residents in Germany. We found low surgical exposure and high rates for psychosocial work-related stress, indicating the need for structural improvements in German urology residency training.
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: 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
Authors: Alexandre Danilovic; Fabio Cesar Miranda Torricelli; Gabriel Dos Anjos; Mauricio Dener Cordeiro; Marcos Giannetti Machado; Miguel Srougi; William C Nahas Journal: Int Braz J Urol Date: 2021 Mar-Apr Impact factor: 1.541
Authors: H Arnold; M Fassbach; A Mattigk; V Zehe; A Beck; F Wundrack; L Bellut; J König; C Siech Journal: Urologe A Date: 2021-07-14 Impact factor: 0.639