Open Access

ARTICLE

Time for a mandatory urology rotation? Adequacy of urological exposure during medical school – a survey of graduates of the University of the West Indies, Trinidad and Tobago

Satyendra Persaud^1,4, Belinda Morrison², Kurt A. McCammon³, K Sadho⁴, C Gosine⁴

1 Division of Clinical Surgical Sciences, University of the West Indies, Trinidad and Tobago
2 Division of Surgery, Radiology, Anesthesia and Critical Care, University of the West Indies, Jamaica
3 Department of Urology, Eastern Virginia Medical School, Virginia Beach, Virginia, USA
4 Department of Urology, San Fernando General Hospital, Trinidad and Tobago
Address correspondence to Dr. Satyendra Persaud, Division of Clinical Surgical Sciences, University of the West Indies, St. Augustine, Trinidad and Tobago

Canadian Journal of Urology 2020, 27(4), 10312-10315.

Abstract

Introduction: To objectively assess the self-reported adequacy and utility of exposure of our students to urology during their training.
Materials and methods: A questionnaire was sent to the University of the West Indies graduating class of 2018, now functioning as medical interns. A questionnaire was designed to collect information regarding respondent demographics, perceptions of their urology exposure during their medical school training, as well as their attitudes towards the specialty. The survey was also designed to capture respondents’ comfort levels with commonly encountered urological scenarios and investigations. The survey was distributed in February 2019 using the online survey tool, Survey Monkey.
Results: A total of 196 surveys were distributed, of which 107 responses were returned. Clinic exposure was the most common form of interaction with the specialty during training. Their exposure to common urological procedures was low, with only 9.3% and 4.7% having seen a circumcision or prostate biopsy, respectively, by graduation. Additionally, 21.7% and 47.7% indicated that they were uncomfortable reviewing a KUB X-ray and CT, respectively, to identify a stone. While 96.2% considered urology to be an important clinical sub-specialty, 42.4% indicated that their exposure to urology did not prepare them to manage urological conditions that they have encountered since graduation. Furthermore, 87.8% of respondents supported the idea of a urology rotation.
Conclusion: The exposure of medical students to urology during their medical training is poor. There remains much room for improvement in exposing our medical students to urology during their training. A dedicated urology rotation should be strongly considered. This study has applications not just within the Caribbean, but further afield.

---

Keywords

---