An Analysis of Gender Diversity in Urology in the UK and Ireland.

Traditionally, surgery and certain surgical sub-specialities in particular have been predominantly male orientated. In recent years, there has been an increased proportion of female medical graduates which will ultimately have an effect on speciality choices. The aim of this study was to assess the gender diversity among urologists in the UK and Ireland. The total number and gender breakdown of consultant urologists and trainees in the UK and Ireland was obtained from the British Association of Urological Surgeons (BAUS) and the Irish Society of Urology (ISU) membership offices. The total number and gender breakdown of medical school entrants and graduates in 2015 was obtained from the six medical schools in the Republic of Ireland. There are a total of 1,012 consultant urologists in the UK and Ireland. In the UK, 141 (14.6%) are female compared to four (8.2%) in Ireland, p= 0.531. There was a significant increase in the number of females between consultant urologists and trainees in both the UK (p=0.0001) and Ireland (p=0.015). In recent years, there has been a significant change in the percentage of female trainees in the UK and Ireland (22.8% (n=75) in 2011 vs 31.7% (n=93) in 2014, p=0.019. Between the six medical schools in Ireland, there were significantly more female entrants (n=726, 56.5%) than female graduates (n=521, 51.2%) in 2015, p=0.013.There has been a significant shift in gender diversity in urology in the UK and Ireland. Efforts to increase diversity should be pursued to attract further trainees to urology.

Geographic Distribution of Urologists in Korea, 2007 to 2012.

The adequacy of the urologist work force in Korea has never been investigated. This study investigated the geographic distribution of urologists in Korea. County level data from the National Health Insurance Service and National Statistical Office was analyzed in this ecological study. Urologist density was defined by the number of urologists per 100,000 individuals. National patterns of urologist density were mapped graphically at the county level using GIS software. To control the time sequence, regression analysis with fitted line plot was conducted. The difference of distribution of urologist density was analyzed by ANCOVA. Urologists density showed an uneven distribution according to county characteristics (metropolitan cities vs. nonmetropolitan cities vs. rural areas; mean square=102.329, P<0.001) and also according to year (mean square=9.747, P=0.048). Regression analysis between metropolitan and non-metropolitan cities showed significant difference in the change of urologists per year (P=0.019). Metropolitan cities vs. rural areas and non-metropolitan cities vs. rural areas showed no differences. Among the factors, the presence of training hospitals was the affecting factor for the uneven distribution of urologist density (P<0.001). Uneven distribution of urologists in Korea likely originated from the relatively low urologist density in rural areas. However, considering the time sequencing data from 2007 to 2012, there was a difference between the increase of urologist density in metropolitan and non-metropolitan cities.

Gender Representation Among Plenary Panel Speakers at the American Urological Association Annual Meeting.

OBJECTIVE: To examine trends in the representation of women in plenary panels at the American Urological Association (AUA) Annual Meeting. METHODS: A review of all plenary sessions from AUA Annual Meetings during 2017-2019 was performed. The number and proportion of invited moderators and panelists by gender were recorded and analyzed by the topic of each plenary session. We performed descriptive analyses and tested temporal trends in gender representation. RESULTS: A total of 168 plenary panels were held at the AUA meetings, 62 panels in 2017, 51 panels in 2018, and 55 panels in 2019. Overall, 59% of panels were all-male panels (61% in 2017, 67% in 2018, and 49% in 2019) with exclusively male moderators and panelists. There was no significant change in the proportion of all-male panels during the study period (P = .20). Among the 168 panels, 153 (91%) had a male moderator, and 107 (64%) had only male panelists. Seventy-five unique female speakers accounted for 90 (12%) of the 742 total panel speaking roles. There was significant variation in the proportion of female speakers among 6 plenary topics (P = .03); the overall proportion of all-male panels was highest for sexual medicine sessions (14 of 18 panels, 78%) and lowest for female pelvic medicine sessions (5 of 19 panels, 26%). CONCLUSION: Female representation in plenary panels at recent AUA Annual Meetings did not significantly change, with the majority of panels composed entirely of male speakers. Continued evaluation of these trends may inform efforts to achieve gender equality at national urology meetings.

Gender Representation in American Urological Association Guidelines.

OBJECTIVE: To study patterns and factors associated with female representation in the American Urological Association (AUA) guidelines. METHODS: We gathered publicly available information about the panelists, including the AUA section, practice setting, academic rank, fellowship training, years in practice, and H-index. The factors associated with the proportion of female panelists and trends were investigated. We also examined the proportion of female panelists in the European Association of Urology (EAU) and National Comprehensive Cancer Network (NCCN) urology guidelines. RESULTS: There were 483 non-unique panelists in AUA guidelines, and 17% are female. Non-urologist female panelists in AUA guidelines represented a higher proportion than female urologists (30% vs 13%, P<0.0001). Compared with male panelists, females had lower H-indices (median 23 vs 35, P<0.001), and fewer were fellowship-trained (77.2% vs 86.8%; P=0.042). On multivariate analysis, non-urologists and panelists with lower H-indices were more likely to be female but there was no association between guideline specialties, academic ranking, geographic section, years in practice, and fellowship training with increased female authorship. Overtime, the proportion of female participation in guidelines remained stable. In the EAU and NCCN guideline panels, 12.2% and 10.7% were female, respectively. CONCLUSION: Female representation among major urologic guidelines members is low and unchanged overtime. Female urologist participation was proportional to their representation in the urology workforce. Being a non-urologist and lower H-indices were associated with female membership in guideline panels.

Who is at the Podium? Women Urologist Speakers at Recent AUA Meetings.

OBJECTIVE: To quantify the representation of women urologists as invited speakers at the AUA Annual Meeting. METHODS: Programs for the AUA Annual Meeting were reviewed from 2017 to 2019. Topics of sessions and genders of moderators and panelists were collected. Percentages of women urologists as well as topics of sessions were compared between years. RESULTS: Women urologists comprised 60 of 467 moderators (12.8%) and 63 of 614 panelists (10.3%). Sessions about infection had the most women urologist moderators while oncology had the least. Sessions about FPMRS has the most women urologists as panelists. Male urologists were more likely to be full professors compared to women urologists. While the percentage of female panelists fluctuated, the percentage of female moderators decreased each year. CONCLUSION: Although the proportion of women to men in urology is increasing, the number and proportion of woman urologist panelists and moderators at the annual AUA meeting does not reflect this trend. It is important to recognize and correct this discrepancy, as well as to increase visibility of women and others underrepresented in the field.

Defining the Current Landscape of Women in Urology: An Analysis of Female Applicants, Residents, and Faculty at AUA-Accredited Residency Programs.

OBJECTIVE: To describe the current landscape of women in academic Urology and determine if there is a correlation between female applicant matches and the proportion of female faculty/residents at their home institution or matched program. METHODS: We obtained 2020 American Urological Association (AUA) Match applicant demographics through social media platforms and program inquiries. The gender of full-time faculty and residents at AUA accredited programs was obtained from program websites. Correlations between proportions of female matched applicants and female faculty and residents were analyzed using linear regression models. RESULTS: A total of 353 residency slots at all 142 non-military programs were filled in the 2020 AUA Match, with 105 filled by women (30%). Of all applicants, 221 of 286 (77%) males and 105 of 122 (86%) females matched. Regarding institutions with urology residencies, women made up 27% of residents and 16% of full-time faculty. A total of 23 (17%) did not have any female faculty and 8 (6%) had no female residents. We found a positive correlation between the proportion of female residents and female faculty (r2 = 0.12, P <.0001). There was no significant correlation between the proportion of female matched applicants and female faculty or female residents at their matched programs or home institutions. CONCLUSION: The proportion of female residents within a urology program is positively correlated with the number of female faculty in the department, although further studies are needed to examine contributing factors. The current distribution of female applicants may demonstrate further narrowing of the gender gap within residency programs.

The Future is Female: Urology Workforce Projection From 2020 to 2060.

OBJECTIVE: To project the size and demographics of the female urology workforce into 2060. METHODS: We assessed current urology workforce estimates using 2019 American Urological Association Annual Census data. We used the Accreditation Council for Graduate Medical Education's Data Resource Book from 2007 to 2018 to determine the incoming urology workforce. With these inputs, we calculated urologic workforce projections using two stock and flow models. RESULTS: In our continued growth model, the total number of urologists will be lowest in 2025 with 11,600 urologists and recover to baseline by 2040 with 13,377 urologists. The total number of female urologists will grow 3.77-fold from 2020 to 2060 with an absolute increase of 3,792 urologists. Comparatively, the total number of male urologists will grow 1.33-fold with an absolute increase of 3,996 urologists. In our stagnant growth model, the total number of urologists will be lowest in 2030 with 11,354 urologists and will not recover to baseline by the end of our projection. The total number of female urologists will grow 2.18-fold from 2020 to 2060 with an absolute increase of 1,615 urologists. Comparatively, the total number of male urologists will decrease by 21.5% with an absolute decrease of 2,579 urologists. CONCLUSION: In the context of the impending urologic workforce shortage, female urologists make up a significant proportion of the workforce growth over the next four decades in both the continued growth and growth stagnant models. This projection highlights the need for purposeful recruitment, structural changes, and advocacy among urology leadership to support female urologists.

Gender and workforce in urology - use of the BG Index to Assess Female Career Promotion in Academic Urology.

PURPOSE: Today, the majority of medical graduates in countries such as the UK, the US or Germany are female. This poses a major problem for workforce planning especially in urology. We here use first the first time the previously established Brüggmann Groneberg (BG) index to assess if female academic career options advance in urology. METHODS: Different operating parameters (student population, urology specialist population, urology chair female:male (f:m) ratio) were collected from the Federal Office of Statistics, the Federal Chamber of Physicians and the medical faculties of 36 German universities. Four time points were monitored (2000, 2005, 2010 and 2015). From these data, female to male (f:m) ratios and the recently established career advancement (BG) index have been calculated. RESULTS: The German hospital urology specialists' f:m ratios were 0.257 (499 female vs. 1944 male) for 2015, 0.195 for 2010, 0.133 for 2005 and 0.12 for 2000. The career advancement (BG) index was 0.0007 for 2000, 0,0005 for 2005, 0.094 for 2010 and 0.073 for 2015. The decrease from 2010 to 2015 was due to an increase in the f:m ratio of hospital urologists and female medical students. CONCLUSION: The BG index clearly illustrated that there is an urgent need for special academic career funding programs to counteract gender problems in urology. The BG index has been shown to be an excellent tool to assess female academic career options and will be very helpful to assess and document positive or negative changes in the next decades.

Combining Drive Time and Urologist Density to Understand Access to Urologic Care.

OBJECTIVE: To improve our understanding of timely access to urologic care, we leveraged driving time combined with a measure of urologist density. MATERIALS AND METHODS: We identified all urologists who billed Medicare using National Provider Identifier in 2015 and geocoded their practice location. We developed drive-time based service areas for each provider using Esri's street network dataset stratified into 30, 60, 90, and 120-minute areas. Population characteristics were aggregated and block groups were assigned to a Hospital Referral Region. RESULTS: We identified 10,170 urologists that billed Medicare in 2015 in the United States. Compared to the northeast, vast expanses of land across the western United States have drive times to urology care >60 minutes. However, less than 13% of the US population is unable to obtain urologic care within 30 minutes. Likely reflecting rural populations, White and American Indian populations are represented in greater proportion among those requiring a longer drive time to urologic care. Disparities were noted between areas with timely access to a high versus low density of urologists; low density areas have a greater proportion of Black and Asian populations and greater income inequality. CONCLUSIONS: Drive time to urologists combined with urologist density is a novel approach to investigating urologic care access and a tool for health disparities research. While almost all of the US population lives within 1-hour drive time to a urologist there remains important differences in the population severed by high compared to low provider density.

Do Women Work Less Than Men in Urology: Data From the American Urological Association Census.

OBJECTIVE: To further explore the issue of work parity between male and female urologists in the context of demographics, practice characteristics, subspecialty affiliation, and planned retirement. MATERIALS AND METHODS: We analyzed data from the 2014 American Urological Association census, which is a specialty wide survey distributed to the entire urology community in the United States. A total of 2204 census samples were weighted to represent 11,703 urologists who practiced in the United States in 2014. We compared clinical and nonclinical hours worked by gender after adjusting for age, practice setting, fellowship type, and whether or not the urologist performed inpatient operations. RESULTS: Of the 11,703 practicing urologists in the United States, female urologists make up approximately 7.7% of the workforce (n ~ 897). Female practicing urologists were younger (66.4%, <45 years old), had shorter training intervals, and a younger planned retirement age than their male counterparts (63 years vs 68.5 years, P <.001). More women were fellowship-trained in a urologic subspecialty (54.9% vs 34.9%, P <.001) and more were in academic practices (33.2% vs 21.9%, P = .03). After adjusting for age, practice type, subspecialty, and inpatient operations performed, there was no difference in hours worked between women and men (beta-coefficient -2.8, 95% confidence interval -6.4 to 0.7, P = .12). CONCLUSION: Gender does not appear to drive the number of hours urologists work per week. There is work hour parity between women and men practicing urologists in both clinical and nonclinical hours. Women are proportionately more likely to pursue fellowship training and hold academic positions.

[Education of medical students in urology in Germany: present status]. / Ausbildung von Medizinstudenten auf dem Gebiet der Urologie in Deutschland : Aktuelle Situation.

BACKGROUND: There is a growing demand for doctors in Germany and diseases of the genitourinary tract have become more prevalent in recent years. Politicians plan to increase the number of students in an already heavily overloaded system but data on quality and structure of medical education in Urology are lacking. The purpose of this study was to investigate the extent and quality of undergraduate medical education in urology. MATERIAL AND METHODS: Departments of Urology at German University Hospitals were surveyed using a questionnaire. Questions covered four different fields of medical education and answers were analyzed by descriptive statistics. RESULTS: Of the teachers involved in medical education 97% are physicians and 4% of these have special didactic qualifications. On average 1 teacher is responsible for 13 students and 44% of departments also have to carry out medical duties during teaching lessons. More than half of the departments offer modern learning forms, such as e-learning, problem-oriented learning or skills laboratory training. CONCLUSIONS: Urology departments at German University Hospitals spend much time on medical education. Nearly all physicians are involved in medical education, whether they are experienced or not and in many cases teaching is carried out in parallel to patient care. In more than half of the cases modern education tools were employed which implies a good standard of quality but there are no data on outcome.