|
The first national resident survey assessing the Greek urology residency training programs
Lazaros Tzelves1, Ioannis Glykas2, Lazaros Lazarou1, Christos Zabaftis3, Panagiotis Velissarios Stamatakos2, Charalampos Fragkoulis2, Aggeliki Leventi2, Napoleon Moulavasilis3, Dimitrios Tzavellas3, Kimon Tsirkas1, Konstantinos Ntoumas2, Panagiotis Mourmouris1, Athanasios Dellis4, Ioannis Varkarakis1, Andreas Skolarikos1, Evangelos Liatsikos5, Ioannis Gkialas6
1 Second Department of Urology, National and Kapodistrian University of Athens, Sismanogleio General Hospital, Athens, Greece
2 Department of Urology, General Hospital of Athens ''G.Gennimatas'', Athens, Greece
3 First Department of Urology, National and Kapodistrian University of Athens, Laiko Hospital, Athens, Greece
4 2nd Department of Surgery, National and Kapodistrian University of Athens, School of Medicine, Aretaieion Hospital; 1st Department of Urology, National and Kapodistrian University of Athens, School of Medicine, Laiko Hospital, Athens, Greece
5 Department of Urology, University of Patras, School of Medicine, Patras, Greece
6 Department of Urology, ''Agios Savvas'' Anti Cancer Oncologic Hospital of Athens, Athens, Greece
Correspondence Address:
Panagiotis Velissarios Stamatakos
Krevvata 44, Piraeus, Athens
Greece
 Source of Support: None, Conflict of Interest: None
DOI: 10.4103/HUAJ.HUAJ_36_21
|
|
Background and Objectives: This is the first national survey regarding Greek Urology residency programs. The main objective of this study is to assess the level of confidence and perception of Greek Urology residents regarding their educational program and detect areas that necessitate improvement. Materials and Methods: A 51-question survey was developed via an electronic platform and 87.5% of residents (91 out of 104) participated from March 2019 until May 2019. Fisher's exact test, Chi-square test, and Kruskal–Wallis test were used with statistical significance set at P = 0.05. Results: The median overall satisfaction from surgical training was 6/10, and was independent of working schedule, working in a University Department, postgraduate years or number of residents in clinic. Among diagnostic and therapeutic procedures, kidney-ureter-bladder ultrasound, cystoscopy, and double-J stent insertion were common for trainees. On the other hand, most residents have not performed any scrotal ultrasound or pressure-flow studies. About 70.4% of residents reported bureaucracy as a major issue. 80.2% have not performed any ESWL, while 58.2% of residents performed <10 ureteroscopies and only the last year trainees performed more than 10 TURBT and transurethral resection of prostate. Most of the participants mentioned to rarely perform basic steps in many open or laparoscopic urological procedures. Surprisingly, 59.3% of residents have not published any study in peer-reviewed journals. 44% rarely feel satisfied from their work and 59.3% sometimes suffer from burnout. Conclusions: Considering the results from this survey regulatory authorities should join forces to establish a structured curriculum of clinical, surgical, and research training in Urology across Europe.
|
