Skip to main content

Advertisement

SpringerLink
Log in

Current status of urology surgical training in Europe: an ESRU–ESU–ESUT collaborative study

  • Original Article
  • Published:
World Journal of Urology Aims and scope Submit manuscript

Abstract

Purpose

To determine the current status of surgical training amongst European Urology Residents, including their satisfaction with training and their confidence in performing procedures.

Methods

A 23-item survey was distributed to the 15th European Urology Residents Education Programme (EUREP) 2017 participants. An analysis of demographics, workload, training resources, surgical exposure, surgical caseload, satisfaction and confidence in performing each procedure was performed.

Results

A total of 152/350 participants completed the survey (response rate 43%), of which 14% think they perform enough surgeries during their training, and 83% would like to continue training with a fellowship. Confidence in performing procedures without supervision and satisfaction with training was associated with higher surgical caseloads. Confidence in all laparoscopic/robotic procedures (except for laparoscopic/robotic partial nephrectomy) was associated with laparoscopic and robotics training, participation in practical courses and having training resources in hospitals. Satisfaction with surgical training was statistically associated with working ≤  50 h per week, laparoscopic training and having laparoscopic training boxes.

Conclusions

Surgical exposure of European Urology residents for major/minimally invasive procedures, confidence in performing these procedures, and overall satisfaction with training is low. A higher volume of cases, as well as resources for training are associated with higher individual confidence and satisfaction with training.

This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.

Access this article

Log in via an institution

Price excludes VAT (USA)
Tax calculation will be finalised during checkout.

Instant access to the full article PDF.

Institutional subscriptions

Fig. 1
Fig. 2

Similar content being viewed by others

References

  1. Carrion DM, Rivas JG, Esperto F, Patruno G, Vasquez JL (2018) Current status of urological training in Europe. Arch Esp Urol 71:11–17

    PubMed  Google Scholar 

  2. van der Vleuten C, Verhoeven B (2013) In-training assessment developments in postgraduate education in Europe. ANZ J Surg 83:454–459. https://doi.org/10.1111/ans.12190

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  3. Rivas JG, Cabello-Benavente R, Bueno-Serrano G, Rodríguez MS, Esteban MF (2018) Current status of urological education in Spain. Arch Esp Urol 71:4–10

    Google Scholar 

  4. Somani BK, Van Cleynenbreugel B, Gozen A, Palou J, Barmoshe S, Biyani S et al (2018) The European Urology residents education programme hands-on training format: 4 years of hands-on training improvements from the European School of Urology. Eur Urol Focus. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.euf.2018.03.002

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  5. Domínguez Escrig JL (2018) Homogeneity of the European training program. The role of the European Board of Urology. Arch Esp Urol 71:129–133

    PubMed  Google Scholar 

  6. Bucholz EM, Sue GR, Yeo H, Roman SA, Bell RH, Sosa JA (2011) Our trainees’ confidence: results from a national survey of 4136 US general surgery residents. Arch Surg 146:907–914. https://doi.org/10.1001/archsurg.2011.178

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  7. Cocci A, Patruno G, Gandaglia G, Rizzo M, Esperto F, Parnanzini D et al (2018) Urology residency training in Italy: results of the first national survey. Eur Urol Focus 4:280–287. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.euf.2016.06.006

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  8. Schatz A, Kogan B, Feustel P (2014) Assessing resident surgical competency in urology using a global rating scale. J Surg Educ 71:790–797. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jsurg.2014.03.012

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  9. Parker DC, Kocher N, Mydlo JH, Simhan J (2016) Trends in urology residents’ exposure to operative urotrauma: a survey of residency program directors. Urology 87:18–24. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.urology.2015.08.032

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  10. Furriel FTG, Laguna MP, Figueiredo AJC, Nunes PTC, Rassweiler JJ (2013) Training of European urology residents in laparoscopy: results of a pan-European survey. BJU Int 112:1223–1228. https://doi.org/10.1111/bju.12410

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  11. Rodríguez-Socarrás ME, Rivas JG, García-Sanz M, Pesquera L, Tortolero-Blanco L, Ciappara M et al (2017) Medical-surgical activity and the current state of training of urology residents in Spain: results of a national survey. Actas Urol Esp 41:391–399. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.acuro.2016.11.003

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  12. Borgmann H, Arnold HK, Meyer CP, Bründl J, König J, Nestler T et al (2018) Training, research, and working conditions for urology residents in Germany: a contemporary survey. Eur Urol Focus 4:455–460. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.euf.2016.12.001

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  13. Eysenbach G (2004) Improving the quality of web surveys: the checklist for reporting results of internet E-Surveys (CHERRIES). J Med Internet Res 6:e34. https://doi.org/10.2196/jmir.6.3.e34

    Article  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  14. Fonseca AL, Reddy V, Longo WE, Gusberg RJ (2014) Graduating general surgery resident operative confidence: perspective from a national survey. J Surg Res 190:419–428. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jss.2014.05.014

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  15. Okhunov Z, Safiullah S, Patel R, Juncal S, Garland H, Khajeh NR et al (2019) Evaluation of urology residency training and perceived resident abilities in the United States. J Surg Educ. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jsurg.2019.02.002

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  16. Abdollah F, Jindal T, Menon M (2017) Surgical training in the robotic surgery era: the importance of structured programs. Eur Urol Focus 3:117–118. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.euf.2016.05.007

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  17. Cadish LA, Fung V, Lane FL, Campbell EG (2016) Surgical case logging habits and attitudes: a multispecialty survey of residents. J Surg Educ 73:474–481. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jsurg.2015.09.007

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  18. Veneziano D, Cacciamani G, Shekhar CB (2018) Simulation and training in Urology—in collaboration with ESU/ESUT. Arch Esp Urol 71:55–62

    PubMed  Google Scholar 

  19. Mattar SG, Alseidi AA, Jones DB, Jeyarajah DR, Swanstrom LL, Aye RW et al (2013) General surgery residency inadequately prepares trainees for fellowship: results of a survey of fellowship program directors. Ann Surg 258:440–449. https://doi.org/10.1097/SLA.0b013e3182a191ca

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  20. Coleman JJ, Esposito TJ, Rozycki GS, Feliciano DV (2013) Early subspecialization and perceived competence in surgical training: are residents ready? J Am Coll Surg 216:764–771. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jamcollsurg.2012.12.045(discussion 771–3)

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  21. Kempenich JW, Willis RE, Blue RJ, Al Fayyadh MJ, Cromer RM, Schenarts PJ et al (2016) The effect of patient education on the perceptions of resident participation in surgical care. J Surg Educ 73:e111–e117. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jsurg.2016.05.005

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  22. Veneziano D, Ploumidis A, Proietti S, Tokas T, Kamphuis G, Tripepi G et al (2018) Evolution and uptake of the endoscopic stone treatment step 1 (EST-s1) protocol: establishment, validation, and assessment in a collaboration by the European School of Urology and the Uro-Technology and Urolithiasis Sections. Eur Urol 74:401–402. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.eururo.2018.05.012

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  23. Gas J, Bart S, Michel P, Peyronnet B, Bergerat S, Olivier J et al (2019) Prevalence of and predictive factors for burnout among French urologists in training. Eur Urol 75:702–703. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.eururo.2018.12.037

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  24. Badash I, Burtt K, Solorzano CA, Carey JN (2016) Innovations in surgery simulation: a review of past, current and future techniques. Ann Transl Med 4:453. https://doi.org/10.21037/atm.2016.12.24

    Article  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  25. Raison N, Ahmed K, Dasgupta P (2016) The role of simulation in surgical training. Eur Urol Focus 2:63–64. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.euf.2015.07.004

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  26. Aydin A, Shafi AMA, Khan MS, Dasgupta P, Ahmed K (2016) Current status of simulation and training models in urological surgery: a systematic review. J Urol 196:312–320. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.juro.2016.01.131

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  27. Aydin A, Ahmed K, Shafi AMA, Khan MS, Dasgupta P (2016) The role of simulation in urological training—a quantitative study of practice and opinions. Surgeon 14:301–307. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.surge.2015.06.003

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  28. Agha RA, Fowler AJ (2015) The role and validity of surgical simulation. Int Surg 100:350–357. https://doi.org/10.9738/INTSURG-D-14-00004.1

    Article  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  29. Veneziano D, Smith A, Reihsen T, Speich J, Sweet RM (2015) The SimPORTAL fluoro-less C-arm trainer: an innovative device for percutaneous kidney access. J Endourol 29:240–245. https://doi.org/10.1089/end.2014.0401

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

Download references

Acknowledgements

We would like to thank Dr. Karl H. Pang, MBChB, BSc, MSc, PhD, MRCS (Eng), from the Academic Urology Unit, University of Sheffield, UK, and board member of the European Society of Residents in Urology for his contribution with editing of the manuscript.

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

  1. Department of Urology, La Paz University Hospital, Madrid, Spain

    Diego M. Carrion & Juan Gómez Rivas

  2. Autonomous University of Madrid, Madrid, Spain

    Diego M. Carrion, Jesús Díez-Sebastian & Juan Gómez Rivas

  3. European Society of Residents in Urology (ESRU), Arnhem, The Netherlands

    Diego M. Carrion, Moises E. Rodriguez-Socarrás, Guglielmo Mantica, Francesco Esperto, Angelika Cebulla, Diederick Duijvesz, Juan L. Vásquez & Juan Gómez Rivas

  4. Department of Urology, San Raffaele-Turro Hospital, San Raffaele University, Milan, Italy

    Moises E. Rodriguez-Socarrás & Guglielmo Mantica

  5. Department of Urology, Humanitas Gavazzeni, Bergamo, Italy

    Francesco Esperto

  6. Department of Urology, University Hospital Ulm, Ulm, Germany

    Angelika Cebulla

  7. Department of Urology, Canisius Wilhemina Hospital, Nijmegen, The Netherlands

    Diederick Duijvesz

  8. Department of Urology, Ospedale San Giovanni Addolorata, Rome, Italy

    Giulio Patruno

  9. Department of Urology, Herlev and Gentofte Hospital, Herlev, Denmark

    Juan L. Vásquez

  10. Department of Urology and Kidney Transplant, Grande Ospedale Metropolitano, Reggio Calabria, Italy

    Domenico Veneziano

  11. School of Medicine, Hofstra University, New York, NY, USA

    Domenico Veneziano

  12. Life and Health Sciences Research Institute (ICVS), School of Medicine, University of Minho, Braga, Portugal

    Domenico Veneziano

  13. European Society of Uro-Technology (ESUT), Arnhem, The Netherlands

    Domenico Veneziano, Ali S. Gozen & Juan Gómez Rivas

  14. Department of Biostatistics, La Paz University Hospital, Madrid, Spain

    Jesús Díez-Sebastian

  15. Department of Urology, SLK-Kliniken, University of Heidelberg, Heilbronn, Germany

    Ali S. Gozen

  16. Department of Urology, Fundacio Puigvert, Barcelona, Spain

    Joan Palou

  17. Autonomous University of Barcelona, Barcelona, Spain

    Joan Palou

  18. European School of Urology (ESU), Arnhem, The Netherlands

    Joan Palou & Juan Gómez Rivas

Authors
  1. Diego M. Carrion
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  2. Moises E. Rodriguez-Socarrás
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  3. Guglielmo Mantica
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  4. Francesco Esperto
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  5. Angelika Cebulla
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  6. Diederick Duijvesz
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  7. Giulio Patruno
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  8. Juan L. Vásquez
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  9. Domenico Veneziano
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  10. Jesús Díez-Sebastian
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  11. Ali S. Gozen
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  12. Joan Palou
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  13. Juan Gómez Rivas
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

Contributions

Protocol development: GP, JGR, JLV; Project development: JGR, MER; Data collection: CA, DD FE; Data analysis: JDS, DC; Manuscript writing: DC, GM; Manuscript editing: JGR, KP, DV, ASG, JP.

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Diego M. Carrion.

Ethics declarations

Conflict of interest

The authors declare that they have no conflict of interest.

Additional information

Publisher's Note

Springer Nature remains neutral with regard to jurisdictional claims in published maps and institutional affiliations.

Electronic supplementary material

Below is the link to the electronic supplementary material.

345_2019_2763_MOESM1_ESM.tiff

Training resources in relation to confidence in laparoscopic and robotic procedures. Associations of training, participation in practical courses, and resources for training with major laparoscopic/robotic procedures in residents who report confidence in performing each surgery. (TIFF 8490 kb)

Supplementary file2 (DOCX 19 kb)

Urology resident training survey distributed to the 15th EUREP 2017 participants. (DOCX 384 kb)

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

About this article

Check for updates. Verify currency and authenticity via CrossMark

Cite this article

Carrion, D.M., Rodriguez-Socarrás, M.E., Mantica, G. et al. Current status of urology surgical training in Europe: an ESRU–ESU–ESUT collaborative study. World J Urol 38, 239–246 (2020). https://doi.org/10.1007/s00345-019-02763-1

Download citation

  • Received:

  • Accepted:

  • Published:

  • Issue Date:

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s00345-019-02763-1

Keywords

Search

Navigation