Perception of Harrasment or Discrimination during Urology Residency in Colombia

Purpose Workplace bullying (harassment, abuse, or discrimination), practiced persistently against an individual, can generate a hostile workplace environment, consequently leading to exhaustion, with poor psychological outcomes, and the onset of symptoms such as loss of confidence, fatigue, depressive thoughts, desertion, and suicidal thoughts. There are no publications regarding this issue in Colombia.Our objective is to describe the residents' perception of gender and workplace discrimination and verbal/sexual harassment during their urological training. Methods Observational, descriptive, cross-sectional study with anonymous surveys. We evaluated the demographic characteristics and the residents' perception of harassment, the type of harassment, how it affected their performance during residency, and from whom it was perceived. Results We were able to obtain answers from 82/115 residents (71.3%), most of them men (45 [56%]). In total, 66% (54) reported workplace harassment; and 35.4% (29) felt gender discrimination, most of them women (17; 58.6%). Verbal abuse was reported by 64.6% (53), and it affected the work of 92.5%. The parception of workplace harassment was similar among both men and women (32 [69.5%] men and 21 [61.1%] women). A total of 7(19%) women reported sexual abuse. Regarding the source of the abuse, 39 (65.8%) was by professors, 26 (45%), by other residents, and 17 (35.4%), by patients. Conclusion The perception of harassment during urology residency in Colombia is real, and it affects the work of residents. This abuse is greater on the part of men, and is mainly perpetrated by professors. We consider our work the starting point to continue researching a topic of national and international importance.

Contemporary trends for urological training and management of stress urinary incontinence in Ireland

Introduction and hypothesis The aim of this study is to evaluate the trends in stress urinary incontinence (SUI) surgery since the 2018 pause on use of the polypropylene (PP) mid-urethral sling (MUS) and to quantify the effect this has had on surgical training. Methods Two anonymous surveys were sent to all current urology trainees and to all consultant surgeons who specialise in stress urinary incontinence surgery. Results Prior to the pause, 86% (6 out of 7) of consultant urologists and 73% (11 out of 15) of consultant gynaecologists would “always”/“often” perform MUS for SUI. After that, 100% (22 out of 22) of consultants reported that they “never” perform MUS. There has been a modest increase in the use of urethral bulking agent (UBA) procedures among urologists, with 43% (3 out of 7) now “often” performing this, compared with 71% (5 out of 7) “never” performing it pre-2018. Trainee exposure to SUI surgery reduced by 75% between 2016 and 2020. Despite a ten-fold increase in UBA procedures logged by trainees, the decline in MUS has resulted in a major reduction in total SUI surgeries. Coinciding with this decrease in surgeries, there was a 56% reduction in trainees’ self-assessed competence at SUI surgery. Thirteen percent of trainees are interested in specialising in Female Urology and those trainees had significantly greater exposure to SUI procedures during their training than those who did not (p = 0.0072). Conclusions This study has identified a downward trend in SUI surgery, which is concerning for the undertreatment of females with SUI. A decline in SUI surgery training has resulted in reduced trainee confidence and interest in this subspecialty.

Urology trainee perceptions of curriculum checkpoints and challenges to achieving a Certificate of Completion of Training: Results of a national survey

Objective: To determine the views of urology trainees regarding training checkpoints/waypoints, and challenges to achieving a Certificate of Completion of Training (CCT). Methods: A novel survey was devised and distributed to evaluate urology trainee perceptions of the challenges in achieving the current CCT requirements as well as their views on the ST4 waypoint, indicative numbers (INs), workplace-based assessments (WBAs) and critical condition case-based discussions. Results: Of 347 trainees, 59 (17.0%) returned completed surveys from 13 of 19 training regions. The most significant challenges in achieving CCT as perceived by all trainees were, from highest to lowest: publication requirements, paediatric urology experience, achieving FRCS (Urol), INs and WBAs. All questions relating to ST4 waypoints were answered positively by a majority of respondents. Conclusions: The findings of this survey suggest that trainees will approve of the forthcoming changes in training assessment and outcomes embedded within the 2021 curriculum. The ST5 checkpoint, in particular, is an opportunity to better match trainees and placements and will underpin successful ‘phasing’ of training. A future study will inform the success of ‘embedding’ the 2021 curriculum and subsequently play a crucial part in the continuous improvement of urological training. Level of evidence: Not applicable for this multicentre audit.

A global snapshot of endourology residency training

Background: Urology has become more complex over the last decades with surgical sophisticated technologies such as endoscopy, laparoscopy and robotic surgery. As these minimally invasive methods gain popularity throughout the world, this has led in some countries to a serious training gap as compared to other countries, and between generations of surgeons within national training systems. There is a huge heterogeneity in urological training between countries, whether developed or developing. This paper attempts to shed some light onto global urological training, comparing a significant number of various national systems, and to outline global tendencies in urological training. It will enable interested readers to see where their own system stands in international comparison, and hopefully enable them to identify training needs to achieve global quality standards. Materials and methods: This is a questionnaire-based assessment which was sent to 240 members of U-merge from 62 countries. In addition, there is ample literature on the requirements of structured training programs and assessments, and we have tried to briefly outline the key points in this paper. Results: We received responses from 32 countries Urology residency training is hugely heterogenous between countries. Only 44% of nations use a structured training program with assessments. Others use the Halstedian apprenticeship approach. Notably, some developing countries do use modern teaching and assessment methods, whereas some developed countries still use the outmoded apprenticeship model. For the interested reader, results have been tabled in detail, and training systems described country by country. Conclusions: Our results have shown a huge heterogeneity in quality urology training between countries and within continents. In systems without national structure of training, it can be assumed that such differences exist even between hospitals/ training institutions. There is no doubt in times of globalization with resident and doctor migration and exchanges that training needs structure and standardization. The still huge gap in developing countries to catch up and be able to afford latest surgical and learning technologies need to be addressed with the help of responsible outreach programs.

The effects of COVID-19 on training within urology: Lessons learned in virtual learning, human factors, non-technical skills and reflective practice

The COVID-19 pandemic has changed training and recruitment in urology in unprecedented ways. As efforts are made to ensure trainees can continue to progress, lessons can be learned to improve training and urological practice even after the acute phase of the pandemic is over. Novel methods of education through virtual learning have burgeoned amidst the social distancing the pandemic has brought. The importance of training in human factors and non-technical skills has also been brought to the fore while operating under the constraints of personal protective equipment and working in new teams and unfamiliar environments. This paper critically appraises the available evidence of how urological training has been affected by COVID-19 and the lessons we have learned and continue to learn going forward. Level of Evidence: Not Applicable.

Current status of wet lab and cadaveric simulation in urological training: A systematic review

Introduction: We undertook a systematic review of the use of wet lab (animal and cadaveric) simulation models in urological training, with an aim to establishing a level of evidence (LoE) for studies and level of recommendation (LoR) for models, as well as evaluating types of validation. Methods: Medline, EMBASE, and Cochrane databases were searched for English-language studies using search terms including a combination of surgery, surgical training, and medical education. These results were combined with wet lab, animal model, cadaveric, and in-vivo. Studies were then assigned a LoE and LoR if appropriate as per the education-modified Oxford Centre for Evidence-Based Medicine classification. Results: A total of 43 articles met the inclusion criteria. There was a mean of 23.1 (±19.2) participants per study with a median of 20. Overall, the studies were largely of low quality, with 90.7% of studies being lower than 2a LoE (n=26 for LoE 2b and n=13 for LoE 3). The majority (72.1%, n=31) of studies were in animal models and 27.9% (n=12) were in cadaveric models. Conclusions: Simulation in urological education is becoming more prevalent in the literature, however, there is a focus on animal rather than cadaveric simulation, possibly due to cost and ethical considerations. Studies are also predominately of a low LoE; more higher LoEs, especially randomized controlled studies, are needed.