Advertisement

Current Urology Reports

, 20:69 | Cite as

Urology in Undergraduate Medical Education

  • Marianne Casilla-Lennon
  • Piruz MotamediniaEmail author
Education (G Badalato, Section Editor)
  • 10 Downloads
Part of the following topical collections:
  1. Topical Collection on Education

Abstract

Purpose of Review

Urology is an essential topic in undergraduate medical education (UME). The objective of this article is to review the current state of exposure to urology in medical school, to discuss why it is critical to maintain a urology curriculum, and to review methods in establishing an effective curriculum for all students with limited resources.

Recent Findings

UME curriculum in urology should be geared toward the widest group of students, namely those entering primary care or internal medicine, where patients with urologic complaints are most likely to first present. Hands-on teaching should focus on skills such as the genitourinary exam and Foley catheter placement, while ancillary modules should be utilized for complex concepts.

Summary

Medical schools do not sufficiently incorporate didactics in urology as part of their core curriculum. As such, educators in urology must develop curricula that provide fundamental knowledge to all students, especially those pursuing non-urologic specialties who will undoubtedly treat patients with urologic complaints.

Keywords

Undergraduate medical education Urology curriculum Urologic education Spaced education 

Notes

Compliance with Ethical Standards

Conflict of Interest

Marianne Casilla-Lennon and Piruz Motamedinia each declare no potential conflicts of interest.

Human and Animal Rights and Informed Consent

This article does not contain any studies with human or animal subjects performed by any of the authors.

References

Papers of particular interest, published recently, have been highlighted as: •• Of major importance

  1. 1.
    Litman HJ, McKinlay JB. The future magnitude of urological symptoms in the USA: projections using the Boston Area Community Health survey. BJU Int. 2007;100(4):820–5.  https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1464-410x.2007.07018.x.CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  2. 2.
    American Urological Association. The state of urology workforce and practice in the United States, 2018. Linthicum, Maryland, U.S.A. April 5, 2019.Google Scholar
  3. 3.
    Kutikov A, Bonslaver J, Casey JT, Degrado J, Dusseault BN, Fox JA, et al. The gatekeeper disparity-why do some medical schools send more medical students into urology? J Urol. 2011;185(2):647–52.  https://doi.org/10.1016/j.juro.2010.09.113.CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  4. 4.
    Cohen A, Nottingham C, Packiam V, Jaskowiak N, Gundeti M. Attitudes and knowledge of urethral catheters: a targeted educational intervention. BJU Int. 2016;118(4):654–9.  https://doi.org/10.1111/bju.13506.CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  5. 5.
    McKimm J. Current trends in undergraduate medical education: program and curriculum design. Samoa Med J. 2010;2(1):40–8.Google Scholar
  6. 6.
    Burns E, Flocks RH, Higgins CC, Hotchkiss RS, Vest SA, Weyrauch HM, et al. The present status of undergraduate urologic training-report of the committee to study status of urology in medical schools. J Urol. 1956;76(4):309–22.  https://doi.org/10.1016/S0022-5347(17)66699-0.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  7. 7.
    Loughlin KR. The current status of medical student urological education in the United States. J Urol. 2008;179(3):1087–91.  https://doi.org/10.1016/j.juro.2007.10.068.CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  8. 8.
    •• Slaughenhoupt B, Ogunyemi O, Giannopoulos M, Sauder C, Leverson G. An update on the current status of medical student urology education in the United States. Urology. 2014;84(4):743–7.  https://doi.org/10.1016/j.urology.2014.06.003 A survey of medical schools described the decline of mandatory urology rotations and the lack of participation in urology elective rotations.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  9. 9.
    Rous SN, Lancaster C. The current status of undergraduate urological teaching. J Urol. 1988;139(6):1160–2.  https://doi.org/10.1016/s0022-5347(17)42846-1.CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  10. 10.
    Rous SN, Mendelson M. Report on present status of undergraduate urologic teaching in medical-schools and some resulting recommendations. J Urol. 1978;119(3):303–4.  https://doi.org/10.1016/s0022-5347(17)57470-4.CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  11. 11.
    •• Kerfoot BP, Turek PJ. What every graduating medical student should know about urology: the stakeholder viewpoint. Urology. 2008;71(4):549–53.  https://doi.org/10.1016/j.urology.2007.12.010 Generalist residency program directors, urology program directors, and medical students identified topics most beneficial to include in a urology curriculum.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  12. 12.
    Teichman JM, Weiss BD, Solomon D. Urological needs assessment for primary care practice: implications for undergraduate medical education. J Urol. 1999;161(4):1282–5.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  13. 13.
    American Urologic Association Medical Student Curriculum. 2017. https://www.auanet.org/education/auauniversity/for-medical-students/medical-student-curriculum. Accessed June 1, 2019.
  14. 14.
    American Urologic Association Urology Core Curriculum. https://auau.auanet.org/core.
  15. 15.
    Kaplan AG, Kolla SB, Gamboa AJ, Box GN, Louie MK, Andrade L, et al. Preliminary evaluation of a genitourinary skills training curriculum for medical students. J Urol. 2009;182(2):668–73.  https://doi.org/10.1016/j.juro.2009.04.037.CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  16. 16.
    Kaplan AG, Abdelshehid CS, Alipanah N, Zamansani T, Lee J, Kolla SB, et al. Genitourinary exam skills training curriculum for medical students: a follow-up study of comfort and skill utilization. J Endourol Endourol Soc. 2012;26(10):1350–5.  https://doi.org/10.1089/end.2012.0284.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  17. 17.
    Parker-Autry CY, Shen E, Nance A, Butler T, Covarrubias JB, Varner RE, et al. Validation and testing of an e-learning module teaching core urinary incontinence objectives in a randomized controlled trial. Female Pelvic Med Reconstr Surg. 2019;25(2):188–92.  https://doi.org/10.1097/SPV.0000000000000695.CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  18. 18.
    Owen LE, Byrne DJ, Ker JS. A learning package for medical students in a busy urology department: design, implementation, and evaluation. Urology. 2008;72(5):982–6.  https://doi.org/10.1016/j.urology.2008.07.037.CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  19. 19.
    Kerfoot BP, Brotschi E. Online spaced education to teach urology to medical students: a multi-institutional randomized trial. Am J Surg. 2009;197(1):89–95.  https://doi.org/10.1016/j.amjsurg.2007.10.026.CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  20. 20.
    Kerfoot BP, Turchin A, Breydo E, Gagnon D, Conlin PR. An online spaced-education game among clinicians improves their patients’ time to blood pressure control: a randomized controlled trial. Circ Cardiovasc Qual Outcomes. 2014;7(3):468–74.  https://doi.org/10.1161/CIRCOUTCOMES.113.000814.CrossRefPubMedPubMedCentralGoogle Scholar
  21. 21.
    Matzie KA, Kerfoot BP, Hafler JP, Breen EM. Spaced education improves the feedback that surgical residents give to medical students: a randomized trial. Am J Surg. 2009;197(2):252–7.  https://doi.org/10.1016/j.amjsurg.2008.01.025.CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  22. 22.
    Kerfoot BP. Learning benefits of on-line spaced education persist for 2 years. J Urol. 2009;181(6):2671–3.  https://doi.org/10.1016/j.juro.2009.02.024.CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer Science+Business Media, LLC, part of Springer Nature 2019

Authors and Affiliations

  1. 1.Department of UrologyYale University School of MedicineNew HavenUSA

Personalised recommendations