Cargando…

Urologic Education in the Era of COVID-19: Results From a Webinar-Based Reconstructive Urology Lecture Series

OBJECTIVE: To determine the response to a virtual educational curriculum in reconstructive urology presented during the COVID-19 pandemic. To assess learner satisfaction with the format and content of the curriculum, including relevance to learners’ education and practice. MATERIALS AND METHODS: A w...

Descripción completa

Detalles Bibliográficos
Autores principales: Omil-Lima, Danly, Fernstrum, Austin, Gupta, Karishma, Jella, Tarun, Muncey, Wade, Mishra, Kirtishri, Bukavina, Laura, Scarberry, Kyle, DeLong, Jessica, Nikolavsky, Dmitriy, Gupta, Shubham
Formato: Online Artículo Texto
Lenguaje:English
Publicado: Elsevier Inc. 2021
Materias:
Acceso en línea:https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC9186319/
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/33766718
http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.urology.2021.03.004
Descripción
Sumario:OBJECTIVE: To determine the response to a virtual educational curriculum in reconstructive urology presented during the COVID-19 pandemic. To assess learner satisfaction with the format and content of the curriculum, including relevance to learners’ education and practice. MATERIALS AND METHODS: A webinar curriculum of fundamental reconstructive urology topics was developed through the Society of Genitourinary Reconstructive Surgeons and partnering institutions. Expert-led sessions were broadcasted. Registered participants were asked to complete a survey regarding the curriculum. Responses were used to assess the quality of the curriculum format and content, as well as participants’ practice demographics. RESULTS: Our survey yielded a response rate of 34%. Survey responses showed >50% of practices offer reconstructive urologic services, with 37% offered by providers without formal fellowship training. A difference in self-reported baseline knowledge was seen amongst junior residents and attendings (P < .05). Regardless of level of training, all participants rated the topics presented as relevant to their education/practice (median response = 5/5). Responders also indicated that the curriculum supplemented their knowledge in reconstructive urology (median response = 5/5). The webinar format and overall satisfaction with the curriculum was highly rated (median response = 5/5). Participants also stated they were likely to recommend the series to others. CONCLUSION: We demonstrate success of an online curriculum in reconstructive urology. Given >50% of practices surveyed offer reconstruction, we believe the curriculum's educational benefits (increasing access and collaboration while minimizing the risk of in-person contact) will continue beyond the COVID-19 pandemic and that this will remain a relevant educational platform for urologists moving forward