Urology Residency Training at the Time of COVID-19 in Italy: 1 Year After the Beginning

Daniele Amparore; Enrico Checcucci; Sergio Serni; Andrea Minervini; Mauro Gacci; Francesco Esperto; Cristian Fiori; Francesco Porpiglia; Riccardo Campi; European Society of Residents in Urology (ESRU)

doi:10.1016/j.euros.2021.07.002

Urology Residency Training at the Time of COVID-19 in Italy: 1 Year After the Beginning

Eur Urol Open Sci. 2021 Jul 17:31:37-40. doi: 10.1016/j.euros.2021.07.002. eCollection 2021 Sep.

Authors

Affiliations

¹ Division of Urology, Department of Oncology, School of Medicine, San Luigi Hospital, University of Turin, Orbassano, Turin, Italy.
² European Society of Residents in Urology (ESRU), Arnhem, The Netherlands.
³ Unit of Urological Robotic Surgery and Renal Transplantation, University of Florence, Careggi Hospital, Florence, Italy.
⁴ Department of Experimental and Clinical Medicine, University of Florence, Florence, Italy.
⁵ Unit of Urological Oncologic Minimally-Invasive Robotic Surgery and Andrology, University of Florence, Careggi Hospital, Florence, Italy.
⁶ Department of Urology, Campus Biomedico University, Rome, Italy.

Abstract

The coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) pandemic has led to significant changes in urology practice and residency programs. One year ago, the first nationwide survey on this topic showed a dramatic impact of the acute phase of the pandemic on residents' training activities. Aiming to assess for the first time how the COVID-19 scenario reshaped the pattern of urology training over a whole pandemic year, a cross-sectional, 38-item, web-based survey was developed. Residents scored the percentage decrease of their involvement in various clinical and surgical activities during the period of March 2020-March 2021 (as compared with the pre-COVID period). Overall, 312/585 (53.3%) residents from 27 schools of urology were included. The proportions of those experiencing a significant decrease of training exposure were 13.6%, 28.8%, 26.7%, 46.9%, 37.6%, and 33.3% (as compared with 40.2%, 85.8%. 82.3%, 69.7%, 59.7%, and 50.2% in the previous survey) for on-call activities, outpatient visits, diagnostic procedures, endoscopic surgery, open surgery, and minimally invasive surgery, respectively. The most impactful reductions in training activities were reached by final-year residents. Our findings highlight that, even if less burdensome than expected, urology residency training (especially in endoscopic surgery) was highly affected throughout the whole past year. This critical gap of skills may jeopardize residents' training even beyond the COVID-19 pandemic.

Patient summary: In this study, we assessed whether the training activities of Italian urology residents were impacted negatively by a whole year of COVID-19 pandemic (March 2020-March 2021). We also compared our results with those reported in a previous survey evaluating how the coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) pandemic changed the training pattern of urology residents during the peak of the outbreak in March 2020. We found a critical decrease in residents' activities (especially for those in their final years of residency and for surgical procedures) that, even if lower than expected, might negatively impact their education and training in the future.

Keywords: COVID-19; Residency; Survey; Training; Urology.