Undergraduate Urology in the UK: Does it Prepare Doctors Adequately?

Abstract

Objectives: Undergraduate medical education in the UK has recently changed. Medical schools are expected to provide the core knowledge required for medical practice, with the foundation programme building upon this. However, studies have suggested that both undergraduate and postgraduate exposure to urology have declined. This study aims to evaluate the views of newly qualified doctors regarding undergraduate urology training. Subjects and methods: An online questionnaire was emailed to all UK foundation doctors in August 2010 (total 4339). Results: 289 responses were received, giving a confidence level of 95% with an error rate of 5.6%. 26.6% of respondents had no undergraduate urology attachment, with a further 30.5% receiving one week or less. 68.9% felt that more time should be devoted to urology teaching, with only 9.7% believing that their undergraduate training was adequate. Most (67.8%) thought there was not enough practical skills experience, with 60.4% never having inserted a female urethral catheter. 77.5% felt that a basic urological skills course would be beneficial, with 54% wanting a longer clinical attachment. Interestingly, 70.1% of those surveyed will not complete a urology rotation during the foundation programme, with only 15.6% having considered a career in urology. Conclusion: This survey highlights the wide variation in undergraduate urology teaching across the UK, and demonstrates that the foundation programme does not necessarily compensate for this. A national basic urological skills course may provide a standardised way to improve training across the country.