Skip to main content

Urology in Undergraduate Medical 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.

This is a preview of subscription content, access via your institution.

References

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

  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.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  2. American Urological Association. The state of urology workforce and practice in the United States, 2018. Linthicum, Maryland, U.S.A. April 5, 2019.

  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.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  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.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  5. McKimm J. Current trends in undergraduate medical education: program and curriculum design. Samoa Med J. 2010;2(1):40–8.

    Google Scholar 

  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.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  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.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  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.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  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.

    CAS  Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  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.

    CAS  Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  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.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  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.

    CAS  Article  Google Scholar 

  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. American Urologic Association Urology Core Curriculum. https://auau.auanet.org/core.

  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.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  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.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  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.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  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.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  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.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  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.

    Article  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  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.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  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.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

Download references

Author information

Affiliations

Authors

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Piruz Motamedinia.

Ethics declarations

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.

Additional information

Publisher’s Note

Springer Nature remains neutral with regard to jurisdictional claims in published maps and institutional affiliations.

This article is part of the Topical Collection on Education

Rights and permissions

Reprints and Permissions

About this article

Verify currency and authenticity via CrossMark

Cite this article

Casilla-Lennon, M., Motamedinia, P. Urology in Undergraduate Medical Education. Curr Urol Rep 20, 69 (2019). https://doi.org/10.1007/s11934-019-0937-x

Download citation

  • Published:

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s11934-019-0937-x

Keywords

  • Undergraduate medical education
  • Urology curriculum
  • Urologic education
  • Spaced education