Increasing Social Media Use in Urology: 2017 American Urological Association Survey.

The use of social media is growing rapidly in health care. The purpose of this study was to provide updated data on utilization of social media in urology. A survey was emailed to 19 840 American Urological Association (AUA) members in September 2017, and responses were compared to our previous survey in 2013. Overall, 74% of 1731 respondents have a social media account. Facebook and YouTube were the platforms most commonly used. However, use of Instagram, LinkedIn, Twitter, and Pinterest significantly increased. Among social media users, 33% agreed that it has impacted their practice, and one-third have followed a medical conference remotely. At the 2018 AUA meeting (#AUA18), there were 18,863 tweets from 3887 contributors, which achieved 73,878 million impressions, a significant increase since 2013. More than half of users were not familiar with professional guidelines on social media. The most common reasons for non-use were not seeing any value and not wanting invasion of privacy. In conclusion, social media use has increased substantially in urology, providing opportunities for global conference participation and influencing clinical practice for a substantial proportion of users. Professional standards for online conduct should be integrated into medical education as use of social media continues to increase. PATIENT SUMMARY: The use of social media in urology has increased over time. Although Facebook and YouTube are the platforms most commonly used, use of Instagram, LinkedIn, Twitter, and Pinterest has significantly increased over time. Use of social media at medical conferences has increased over time, and a substantial proportion of urologists reported that social media influenced their clinical practice.

Effect of the American Urological Association Annual Review course on the results of the urology qualifying examination.

PURPOSE: In this study we assess the impact of a urology dedicated review course on the scores of the corresponding board qualifying examination for attendees of the urology review course. MATERIALS AND METHODS: The ABU (American Board of Urology) Qualifying Examination scores from 2009, 2010 and 2011 were categorized into group 1 candidates who attended the AUA (American Urological Association) Annual Review Course the same year, and group 2 candidates who did not attend the AUA Annual Review Course that same year, and were compared. The scores of the preceding year's In-Service Examination were also compared for the same groups of candidates and compared to their subsequent first time taken Qualifying Examination scores. RESULTS: There was no difference in Qualifying Examination scores of resident candidates attending vs not attending the AUA Annual Review Course in all 3 years. The overall failure rate was low, and essentially the same for all candidates in all years regardless of attendance at the AUA Annual Review Course at 2% in 2009, 2% in 2010 and 4% in 2011. Of group 1 candidates the majority (80% to 98%) considered the Annual Review Course helpful or very helpful in preparation for the Qualifying Examination. CONCLUSIONS: The majority of candidates are adequately prepared to pass their Qualifying Examination at the conclusion of their residency training program regardless of their attendance of the AUA Annual Review Course. This course may help bolster the confidence of the candidate preparing for their Qualifying Examination.

Perceptions and competence in evidence-based medicine: a survey of the American Urological Association Membership.

PURPOSE: We investigated the attitudes and opinions of urologists toward evidence-based medicine to help guide future efforts of the American Urological Association and other organizations vested in the education and training of urologists. MATERIALS AND METHODS: From August to November 2006 we performed a mail survey of a random sample of 2,000 members of the American Urological Association. Questions in the survey addressed the role of evidence-based medicine in urology, participants' self-assessed understanding of evidence-based medicine related terminology, their familiarity with and use of web based evidence-based medicine resources, as well as their evidence-based medicine competence based on their understanding of core concepts such as randomization and blinding. RESULTS: A total of 889 respondents completed the survey resulting in a response rate of 45%. There was widespread agreement that practicing evidence-based medicine improves patient care (median score 8; IQR 7, 10) and that every urologist should be familiar with critical appraisal techniques (median score 9; IQR 8, 10). The percentage of respondents who indicated that they "understand and could explain to others" the terms number needed to treat, power and level of evidence was 42%, 29% and 18%, respectively. The American Urological Association Guidelines were used regularly by 35% and on occasion by 51% of respondents. Of the participants 44% were unaware of the PubMed(R) search engine and only 14% used it regularly, while 76% were unaware of the Cochrane Database of Systematic Reviews and only 8% had ever used it. The mean evidence-based medicine competence score for all respondents was 67.2% +/- 17.0%. CONCLUSIONS: The findings of this survey confirm that urologists have a favorable attitude toward evidence-based medicine. However, understanding of evidence-based medicine terminology, concepts and use of related resources among American Urological Association members leaves room for improvement. Increased efforts to promote an understanding of evidence-based medicine through workshops, publications and web based resources specifically for a urological audience appear indicated.