Undergraduate Urology Education: A Fundamental Pillar in Building the Next Generation of Urologists

Role and effectiveness of an information guide in improving catheter confidence and knowledge in junior clinicians

Objective:

Referrals to the on-call urology team for catheter-related problems are common. Experience and previous studies highlight that urology exposure and catheter skills are unsatisfactory in undergraduate training as well as in subsequent junior clinical practice. These deficiencies may compromise patient safety and delay appropriate treatment. This study aimed to assess catheter insertion confidence and associated knowledge in junior doctors and advanced nurse practitioners in a single teaching hospital and evaluate whether this could be improved by introducing a freely available catheter information and problem-solving guide.

Methods:

An online survey assessing confidence inserting two and three-way urethral catheters, changing suprapubic catheters and assessing knowledge related to common catheter problems was delivered to all non-registrar junior clinicians. Based on these results, an information guide was created and made freely available to these clinicians. The survey was then repeated to check for catheter-related knowledge and confidence.

Results:

A total of 58 junior clinicians responded to the initial survey and 61 to the repeat survey. Catheterisation confidence and knowledge was generally low in the first survey but improved in all areas and across all grades after the introduction of the information guide. Of the respondents, 100% thought the guide was helpful and 93.4% said they would use it in future.

Conclusions:

A catheter information guide is a simple and effective method of improving junior clinician confidence with catheter insertion and managing catheter-associated problems.

Level of Evidence:

This study does not directly correlate with a defined level of evidence.

Essentials for Standardising the Undergraduate Urology Curriculum in Europe: Outcomes of a Delphi Consensus from the European School of Urology

Background

The burden of urological diseases is rising as the worldwide population ages. Although specialist urological provision is needed, a large proportion of these conditions will be managed in primary care. The importance of including urology in medical education currently remains unclear.

Objective

To provide recommendations on undergraduate medical education for urology in Europe.

Design, setting, and participants

A three-round Delphi process to reach consensus on standardising the undergraduate urology curriculum in Europe was endorsed by the European School of Urology.

Outcome measurements and statistical analysis

The levels of agreement were set using a nine-point scale according to the GRADE grid: 1–3, disagree; 4–6, uncertain; and 7–9, agree. Consensus was defined as at least 70% of the participants scoring within the same 3-point grouping.

Results and limitations

Overall, consensus was reached for 20 of 34 statements (70.5%) across the three Delphi rounds, with agreement for 75% (n = 15) and disagreement for 25% (n = 5). The following main points were agreed. Urological teaching should be introduced before year 5 of medical school, with at least 20 h of theoretical activities and at least 30 h of practical activities. Urology should be taught as a stand-alone subject rather than combined with another surgical specialty or a nephrology programme. The participants agreed that urology should be taught according to symptoms. A urology programme should include the anatomy and physiology of the urinary tract, and students should know how to clinically assess a urological patient.

Conclusions

Our recommended urology pathway will allow European medical schools to provide a more comprehensive undergraduate urology curriculum. It will also help to improve and maintain standards of urology undergraduate teaching across Europe.

Patient summary

Our survey showed that urology in universities should have, at minimum, time for theoretical and practical activities and should be taught as a stand-alone subject on the basis of symptoms. Students should give feedback to facilitate constant improvement and evolution of the teaching programme.