Occupational Radiation Exposure During Pregnancy: A Survey of Urologists on Perception, Experience, and Practice Patterns.

Introduction: The field of urology is predominantly male; however, there has been an increasing number of women in the workforce. Peak reproductive years frequently overlap with residency training and early attending career timelines. Exposure to ionizing radiation is a common occupational hazard in many procedural specialties. The use of radiation, for example, in interventional cardiology and interventional radiology, has shown little adjustments in practice patterns, with no adverse outcomes reported among pregnant physicians in their fields in the setting of appropriate radiation safety measures. The impact of radiation exposure during pregnancy for urologists is largely unknown. Our objective was to determine attitudes and practices of urologists related to radiation exposure and to characterize the experience of urologists who have previously been pregnant. Methods: An anonymous online survey was distributed through relevant society membership bases, which included the Endourological Society and the Society for Women in Urology, and social media. Demographics, practice patterns, and changes to practice patterns were recorded for respondents. Statistical analysis was performed in R studio. Results: There were 384 respondents, 255 of whom identified as women. Of these, 164 had been previously pregnant. Female respondents were younger, completed training more recently, and were more likely to have adjusted their caseload due to radiation concerns compared with their male counterparts. Of women who had been pregnant, few had access to policies for who to notify (19%), policies for safety precautions (22%), custom-fitted lead (35%), and maternity lead (20%). Most women (66%) relied on their own research for guidance on radiation safety during pregnancy, while some (41%) also used information from colleagues or mentors. Forty-six percent of women would have taken greater precautions during pregnancy than they did. Conclusions: Access to the appropriate tools to safely navigate pregnancy is inconsistent among practicing urologists. Evidence-based guidelines are needed to better empower pregnant urologists.

The ball's in your court: Trends, causes, outcomes, and costs of patient transfer for pediatric testicular torsion.

BACKGROUND: The transfer of pediatric patients with testicular torsion from community hospitals to pediatric centers can be a time and resource-intensive step toward emergent surgical intervention. OBJECTIVE: We sought to describe trends of patient transfer in our state and compare clinical outcomes and health system costs between patients transferred and treated primarily at a pediatric center. STUDY DESIGN: This retrospective cohort study compared patients aged 1-18 years who presented directly to a pediatric center to those transferred for acute testicular torsion from 2018 to 2023. Exclusion criteria included age <1 year, non-urgent surgery, and admission from clinic. Patient age, BMI, Tanner stage, ASA class, insurance coverage, and presentation time were covariates. Group characteristics and times from symptom onset to initial ED presentation to surgery were compared via two-sided Student's t-tests. Clinical outcomes (orchiectomy, testicular atrophy) were compared via Fisher's exact tests. Costs from transferring hospitals were estimated from costs at our institution, and medical transport costs were extrapolated from contract prices between transport agencies and the pediatric center to compare total episode-of-care cost. RESULTS: A total of 133 cases (37 primaries, 96 transfers) met inclusion criteria. Transfers increased over the study period (67%-75%). There were no significant differences in age, Tanner stage, ASA score, BMI, or time of day of presentation between groups. Median transfer distance was 12 miles (IQR 7-22) and time was 1 h (IQR 1-2). More than half of cases (53%) were transferred due to hospital policy regarding surgical treatment of minors, and 25% due to lack of urology coverage. Time from initial ED site to OR was nearly doubled for the transfer group (median 4.5 vs 2.5 h, p = 0.02). Despite a higher rate of orchiectomy in the primary group (43 vs 22%, p = 0.01), this difference was not significant after stratification by symptom duration. The estimated average cost of care for patients transferred was twice that of primary patients ($15,082 vs $6898). DISCUSSION: Transfer of pediatric patients in our state for testicular torsion has increased in recent years. Hospital policies and local urology coverage are primary drivers of patient transfer which nearly doubled time to surgical intervention and more than doubled cost of care. Clinical outcomes were driven by delayed presentation. CONCLUSION: Transfer of pediatric patients for testicular torsion nearly doubles time to surgical intervention and more than doubles cost of care. Restrictive hospital policies and gaps in rural hospital urology coverage present opportunities to improve the quality and efficiency of care for these children.

Impact of Dobbs v. Jackson Women's Health Organization on Professional Decision-Making Among Urology Applicants.

MATERIALS AND METHODS: An Institutional Review Board-exempt REDCap survey was distributed through the Society of Academic Urologists to all 508 applicants registered for the 2023 Urology Match following the rank list submission deadline on January 10, 2023. The survey closed on February 1, 2023. Responses were anonymized, aggregated, and characterized using descriptive statistics. Thematic mapping of open text comments was performed by 2 reviewers. RESULTS: The response rate was 42% (215/508). Eighty-eight percent of respondents disapproved of the Dobbs ruling. Twenty percent of respondents (15% male/24% female) eliminated programs in states where abortion is illegal. Fifty-nine percent (51% male/70% female) would be concerned for their or their partner's health if they matched in a state where abortion was illegal, and 66% (55% male/82% female) would want their program to assist them or their partner if they required abortion care during residency. Due to the competitive nature of Urology, 68% of applicants reported feeling at least somewhat obligated to apply in states where abortion legislation conflicts with their beliefs. Of the 65 comments provided by respondents, 4 common themes emerged: (1) avoidance of states with restrictive abortion laws; (2) inability to limit applications because of the competitiveness of urology; (3) impacts on personal health care; and (4) desire for advocacy from professional urology organizations. CONCLUSION: The Dobbs ruling will impact the urology workforce by affecting urology applicants' decision-making regarding residency selection and ranking. Although the competitiveness of the Urology Match pressures applicants to apply broadly, many are taking reproductive health care access into consideration.