Browsing by Author "Pearce, Ian (7004629077)"

Background: The burden of urological diseases is rising as the worldwide population ages. Although specialist urological provision is needed, a large proportion of these conditions will be managed in primary care. The importance of including urology in medical education currently remains unclear. Objective: To provide recommendations on undergraduate medical education for urology in Europe. Design, setting, and participants: A three-round Delphi process to reach consensus on standardising the undergraduate urology curriculum in Europe was endorsed by the European School of Urology. Outcome measurements and statistical analysis: The levels of agreement were set using a nine-point scale according to the GRADE grid: 1–3, disagree; 4–6, uncertain; and 7–9, agree. Consensus was defined as at least 70% of the participants scoring within the same 3-point grouping. Results and limitations: Overall, consensus was reached for 20 of 34 statements (70.5%) across the three Delphi rounds, with agreement for 75% (n = 15) and disagreement for 25% (n = 5). The following main points were agreed. Urological teaching should be introduced before year 5 of medical school, with at least 20 h of theoretical activities and at least 30 h of practical activities. Urology should be taught as a stand-alone subject rather than combined with another surgical specialty or a nephrology programme. The participants agreed that urology should be taught according to symptoms. A urology programme should include the anatomy and physiology of the urinary tract, and students should know how to clinically assess a urological patient. Conclusions: Our recommended urology pathway will allow European medical schools to provide a more comprehensive undergraduate urology curriculum. It will also help to improve and maintain standards of urology undergraduate teaching across Europe. Patient summary: Our survey showed that urology in universities should have, at minimum, time for theoretical and practical activities and should be taught as a stand-alone subject on the basis of symptoms. Students should give feedback to facilitate constant improvement and evolution of the teaching programme. © 2021 The Author(s)