[Impact of the experience of urological senior physicians in Germany on professional and personal aspects]. / Welchen Einfluss hat die Dauer der Oberarzttätigkeit auf die Berufsausübung und Zufriedenheit urologischer OberärztInnen in Deutschland?

BACKGROUND: Urological senior physicians in Germany are a heterogeneous group with various clinical priorities and career objectives. To date, there are no reliable data concerning the impact of the time span for which senior physicians have been holding their position on professional, personal and position-linked aspects. MATERIAL AND METHODS: The objective of this study was a comparative analysis of perspectives, private and professional settings, specific job-related activities and individual professional goals of urological senior physicians in Germany based on their experience in this position assessed as number of years (dichotomised at 8 years as senior physician). As part of a cross-sectional study, a 55-item web-based questionnaire was designed, which was sent via a link to members of a mailing list of the German Society of Urology. The survey was available for urological senior physicians between February and April 2019. Group differences were evaluated using multivariate regression models. RESULTS: 107 of 192 evaluable questionnaires were completed by senior physicians holding this position for less than 8 years (< 8y senior physicians), 85 were completed by senior physicians holding this position for at least 8 years (≥ 8y senior physicians). < 8y senior physicians worked significantly more often at university hospitals (42.1 % vs. 18.8 %, p = 0.002). Overall, 82.4 % of ≥ 8y senior physicians assessed themselves autonomously safe in performing open surgery, compared to 39.3 % among < 8y senior physicians (p < 0.001). No significant differences concerning the self-assessment were found for endourological procedures (94.1 % vs. 87.9 %) and for the overall lower-rated self-assessment concerning laparoscopy (29.4 % vs. 20.6 %) and robotic surgery (14.1 % vs. 10.3 %). Despite the high management responsibility associated with their position, only about one third of participants (34.8 %) had received specific postgraduate education preparing them for managing and executive tasks. CONCLUSION: This study shows significant differences among senior physicians regarding surgical skills depending on the time span they hold their position. Moreover, there is considerable dissatisfaction regarding the development of leadership skills and the preparation for managing tasks. In order to ensure availability of senior staff members for the field of urology in the future, it is important to consider their professional needs and to overcome existing shortcomings by education programs within well-orchestrated human resources development strategies.

Does the Identification of a Minimum Number of Cases Correlate With Better Adherence to International Guidelines Regarding the Treatment of Penile Cancer? Survey Results of the European PROspective Penile Cancer Study (E-PROPS).

BACKGROUND: Penile cancer represents a rare malignant disease, whereby a small caseload is associated with the risk of inadequate treatment expertise. Thus, we hypothesized that strict guideline adherence might be considered a potential surrogate for treatment quality. This study investigated the influence of the annual hospital caseload on guideline adherence regarding treatment recommendations for penile cancer. METHODS: In a 2018 survey study, 681 urologists from 45 hospitals in four European countries were queried about six hypothetical case scenarios (CS): local treatment of the primary tumor pTis (CS1) and pT1b (CS2); lymph node surgery inguinal (CS3) and pelvic (CS4); and chemotherapy neoadjuvant (CS5) and adjuvant (CS6). Only the responses from 206 head and senior physicians, as decision makers, were evaluated. The answers were assessed based on the applicable European Association of Urology (EAU) guidelines regarding their correctness. The real hospital caseload was analyzed based on multivariate logistic regression models regarding its effect on guideline adherence. RESULTS: The median annual hospital caseload was 6 (interquartile range (IQR) 3-9). Recommendations for CS1-6 were correct in 79%, 66%, 39%, 27%, 28%, and 28%, respectively. The probability of a guideline-adherent recommendation increased with each patient treated per year in a clinic for CS1, CS2, CS3, and CS6 by 16%, 7.8%, 7.2%, and 9.5%, respectively (each p < 0.05); CS4 and CS5 were not influenced by caseload. A caseload threshold with a higher guideline adherence for all endpoints could not be perceived. The type of hospital care (academic vs. non-academic) did not affect guideline adherence in any scenario. CONCLUSIONS: Guideline adherence for most treatment recommendations increases with growing annual penile cancer caseload. Thus, the results of our study call for a stronger centralization of diagnosis and treatment strategies regarding penile cancer.