H Arnold1, C P Meyer2, J Salem3, M Raspe4, J P Struck5, H Borgmann6. 1. , Berlin, Deutschland. h.arnold@gesru.de. 2. Klinik und Poliklinik für Urologie, Universitätsklinikum Hamburg-Eppendorf, Hamburg, Deutschland. 3. Klinik für Urologie, Universitätsklinikum Köln, Köln, Deutschland. 4. Medizinische Klinik m.S. Infektiologie und Pneumologie, Charité - Universitätsmedizin Berlin, Berlin, Deutschland. 5. Klinik für Urologie, Universitätsklinikum Schleswig-Holstein, Campus Lübeck, Lübeck, Deutschland. 6. Klinik für Urologie, Universitätsklinikum Mainz, Mainz, Deutschland.
Abstract
BACKGROUND: High-quality urologic residency training programs are crucial to secure both the future of our specialty and patient care. However, little is known about the current training and working conditions among German urology residents. OBJECTIVES: To comprehensively assess the training- and working conditions among urologic residents in Germany. MATERIALS AND METHODS: The GeSRU invited all German urologic residents to complete an online survey on training- and work conditions. Furthermore, the model of effort-reward imbalance (ERI) was applied to measure psychosocial strain at work. RESULTS: A total of 476 urologic residents participated in the survey. Workdays are characterized by high pace and workload and economic considerations. This comes at the cost of professional training, research and family time. Due to these circumstances, a relevant part of residents draws or at least considers consequences. Psychosocial strain among participants is high and conveys a risk for physicians' health and patients' quality of care. CONCLUSION: Our findings call for an adjustment of urologic working and training conditions to preserve high-quality medical treatment and to ensure an attractive working environment.
BACKGROUND: High-quality urologic residency training programs are crucial to secure both the future of our specialty and patient care. However, little is known about the current training and working conditions among German urology residents. OBJECTIVES: To comprehensively assess the training- and working conditions among urologic residents in Germany. MATERIALS AND METHODS: The GeSRU invited all German urologic residents to complete an online survey on training- and work conditions. Furthermore, the model of effort-reward imbalance (ERI) was applied to measure psychosocial strain at work. RESULTS: A total of 476 urologic residents participated in the survey. Workdays are characterized by high pace and workload and economic considerations. This comes at the cost of professional training, research and family time. Due to these circumstances, a relevant part of residents draws or at least considers consequences. Psychosocial strain among participants is high and conveys a risk for physicians' health and patients' quality of care. CONCLUSION: Our findings call for an adjustment of urologic working and training conditions to preserve high-quality medical treatment and to ensure an attractive working environment.
Authors: Christopher Simien; Kathleen D Holt; Thomas H Richter; Thomas V Whalen; Michael Coburn; Robert J Havlik; Rebecca S Miller Journal: Ann Surg Date: 2010-08 Impact factor: 12.969
Authors: Olaf von dem Knesebeck; Jens Klein; Kirstin Grosse Frie; Karl Blum; Johannes Siegrist Journal: Dtsch Arztebl Int Date: 2010-04-09 Impact factor: 5.594
Authors: Colin P West; Mashele M Huschka; Paul J Novotny; Jeff A Sloan; Joseph C Kolars; Thomas M Habermann; Tait D Shanafelt Journal: JAMA Date: 2006-09-06 Impact factor: 56.272
Authors: Johannes Siegrist; Natalia Wege; Frank Pühlhofer; Morten Wahrendorf Journal: Int Arch Occup Environ Health Date: 2008-11-19 Impact factor: 3.015
Authors: M May; I Wolff; J Bründl; M C Kriegmair; D Marghawal; C Wülfing; M Burger; U Necknig; C Schäfer Journal: Urologe A Date: 2019-12 Impact factor: 0.639
Authors: A-S Biesalski; C Franke; D Sturm; J Behncke; T Schreckenbach; S Knauß; H Eisenberg; A Hillienhof; F Sand; M Zupanic Journal: Nervenarzt Date: 2018-12 Impact factor: 1.214
Authors: M S Michel; M Himmler; U Necknig; M Kriegmair; T Speck; J Fichtner; J Steffens; H Borgmann; C Bolenz; M Tuellmann; S Ruppin; F Petersilie; U Rebmann; J König; J Westphal; P Goebell; H Leyh; H Borchers Journal: Urologe A Date: 2020-12 Impact factor: 0.639
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