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.

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.

Attitudes Among Society of Women in Urology Members Toward Dobbs v. Jackson Women's Health Organization.

OBJECTIVE: To evaluate attitudes of women in urology regarding the Supreme Court ruling Dobbs v. Jackson Women's Health Organization, including impacts on personal/professional decision-making and the urology workforce. METHODS: An IRB-exempt survey including Likert questions on participant views and free text questions was distributed to 1200 members of the Society of Women in Urology on 9/2/2022. Participants were medical students, urology residents, fellows, and practicing/retired urologists over 18. Responses were anonymous and aggregated. Quantitative responses were characterized with descriptive statistics and free-text responses were analyzed using thematic mapping. To complement this analysis, urologist density was mapped by county using 2021 National Provider Identifier data. State abortion laws were categorized based on Guttmacher Institute data on 10/20/2022. Data were analyzed using logistic regression, Poisson regression, and multiple linear regression. RESULTS: 329 respondents completed the survey. 88% disagree/strongly disagree with the Dobbs ruling. 42% of trainees may have changed their rank list if current abortion laws existed during their match. 60% of respondents said Dobbs will impact where they choose their next job. 61.5% of counties had zero urologists in 2021, 76% of which were in states with restrictive abortion laws. Urologist density was inversely associated with abortion law restrictiveness compared with the most protective counties. CONCLUSION: The Dobbs ruling will significantly impact the urology workforce. Trainees may change how they rank programs in states with restrictive abortion laws, and urologists may consider abortion laws when choosing jobs. Restrictive states are at higher risk for worsening access to urologic care.

Understanding Options for the Unmatched Urology Applicant.

PURPOSE OF REVIEW: To evaluate recent literature regarding the pathways and options for unmatched urology applicants. RECENT FINDINGS: Urology remains a competitive surgical sub-specialty with a match process independent of the National Resident Matching Program. Each year a cohort of competitive applicants go unmatched and are faced with the decision to reapply the following cycle while doing a research fellowship or a preliminary internship in the interim or choose a different specialty altogether. In this review, we sought to evaluate the current match process and literature regarding outcomes and options for unmatched applicants as well as to provide future directions for research and improvements to support unmatched urology applicants. Presently, data regarding outcomes for unmatched applicants is relatively limited. Going forward it is imperative for national urology organizations to create centralized resources for applicants to provide the best possible information for applicants and mentors alike.

Perceptions of Gender Equity by Urologic Subspecialty.

OBJECTIVES: To evaluate how urologists in various subspecialties view the climate for female urologists, comparing perceptions of gender inequity based on characteristics including gender, subspecialty training, faculty status, parental status, and years in practice. Despite growth in female representation in urology, gender inequalities in career opportunities and compensation continue to exist. METHODS: An IRB approved survey was sent out to the following list-serves: Society of Urological Oncology (SUO), Society of Endourology (ENDO), Genitourinary Reconstructive Surgeons (GURS), Society of Pediatric Urology (SPU), Society of Urodynamics, Female Pelvic Medicine and Urogenital Reconstruction (SUFU), and American Urogynecologic Society (AUGS). A validated study, the Culture Conducive to Women's Academic Success (CCWAS) was used, and scores analyzed using Wilcoxon Rank-Sum and Kruskal-Wallace tests. RESULTS: There were 430 survey responses (35.3% female, 64.7% male). There was a statistically significant difference in CCWAS score for gender, parental status, and society. On multiple regression analysis controlling for gender, parental status and society were not statistically significant. Years in practice and practice type were not significant. Male urologists perceived practice culture toward women as more equitable than their female colleagues, (median [interquartile range] CCWAS score, 203.5 [184.25, 225.0] vs 162.5 [130.75, 188.0]; P < .0001). This discrepancy in perception between genders was consistent across all subcategories; equal access, work-life balance, freedom of gender bias, and leadership support. CONCLUSIONS: This study suggests that there are gender-based differences in how gender inequities are perceived and experienced in urology. Acknowledgment of these differences is the first step in identifying opportunities for improvement.

Perceptions and Experiences of Gender Equity Among Endourologists.

Introduction: Only 9.9% of practicing urologists in the United States are women. This percentage is even smaller in leadership positions and high-ranking appointments. Endourology is one of the least reported fellowships completed by women urologists. We sought to evaluate how endourologists perceived the climate for women physicians and compare perceptions and experiences of gender equity. Materials and Methods: An IRB approved and validated survey, Culture Conducive to Women's Academic Success (CCWAS) questionnaire was sent out to the Endourological Society listserve. Subcategories of equal access, work-life balance, freedom of gender bias, and leadership support were analyzed. An open comment section was provided for respondents to include their own experiences. Wilcoxon rank-sum and Kruskal-Wallis tests were used to compare CCWAS scores between groups. Results: A total of 104 completed surveys were received. Response rate was 7% (104/1492), 26.9% of which were female. There was a statistically significant difference between male and female respondent CCWAS scores; p < 0.05. The male CCWAS score median was 196.0 (interquartile range [IQR] 176.75-214.0) vs female CCWAS score median of 166.5 (IQR 127.5-210.0). There was no significant difference in CCWAS scores based on years in practice, parental status, or academic vs private practice. Discussion: In this study, male endourologists' perceptions of gender equity were incongruent with the reported experiences of their female colleagues. This indicates that male respondents perceive the culture in their department toward women more positively than their female colleagues. This is suggestive that there are gender-based differences in how gender inequities are perceived and potentially experienced.

Pubertal Suppression and Surgical Management of a Patient With 5-Alpha Reductase Deficiency.

Five-alpha reductase type 2 deficiency (5αRD2) is a rare cause of atypical genitalia in newborns. There are no definitive guidelines regarding management of children with this disorder. While many children are raised as female given the under-virilized appearance of their external genitalia at birth, these patients are historically counseled to undergo male puberty, resulting in a change in gender identity from female to male in more than half of post-pubertal patients. Here we report the first case of a patient with 5αRD2who identified as female from a very early age, strongly desired gender-affirming surgery, and elected to initiate puberty-blocking therapy prior to the onset of male puberty.