Every week the Editor-in-Chief selects the Article of the Week from the current issue of BJUI. The abstract is reproduced below and you can click on the button to read the full article, which is freely available to all readers for at least 30 days from the time of this post.
In addition to the article itself, there is an accompanying editorial written by prominent members of the urological community. This blog is intended to provoke comment and discussion and we invite you to use the comment tools at the bottom of each post to join the conversation.
Finally, the third post under the Article of the Week heading on the homepage will consist of additional material or media. This week we feature a video of Dr. Furriel discussing his paper.
If you only have time to read one article this week, it should be this one.
Training of European urology residents in laparoscopy: results of a pan-European survey
Frederico T.G. Furriel, Maria P. Laguna*, Arnaldo J.C. Figueiredo, Pedro T.C. Nunes and Jens J. Rassweiler†
Department of Urology and Renal Transplantation, University Hospital of Coimbra, Coimbra, Portugal, *Department of Urology, Academic Medical Center, University of Amsterdam, Amsterdam, The Netherlands, and †Department of Urology, Klinikum Heilbronn, University of Heidelberg, Heilbronn, Germany
• To assess the participation of European urology residents in urological laparoscopy, their training patterns and facilities available in European Urology Departments.
MATERIALS AND METHODS
• A survey, consisting of 23 questions concerning laparoscopic training, was published online as well as distributed on paper, during the Annual European Association of Urology Congress in 2012.
• Exposure to laparoscopic procedures, acquired laparoscopic experience, training patterns, training facilities and motivation were evaluated.
• Data was analysed with descriptive statistics.
• In all, 219 European urology residents answered the survey.
• Conventional laparoscopy was available in 74% of the respondents’ departments, while robotic surgery was available in 17% of the departments.
• Of the respondents, 27% were first surgeons and 43% were assistants in conventional laparoscopic procedures. Only 23% of the residents rated their laparoscopic experience as at least ‘satisfactory’; 32% of the residents did not attend any course or fellowship on laparoscopy.
• Dry laboratory was the most frequent setting for training (33%), although 42% of the respondents did not have access to any type of laparoscopic laboratory.
• The motivation to perform laparoscopy was rated as ‘high’ or ‘very high’ by 77% of the respondents, and 81% considered a post-residency fellowship in laparoscopy.
• Urological laparoscopy is available in most European training institutions, with residents playing an active role in the procedure. However, most of them consider their laparoscopic experience to be poor.
• Moreover, the availability of training facilities and participation in laparoscopy courses and fellowships are low and should be encouraged.