Your browser doesn't support javascript.
Mostrar: 20 | 50 | 100
Resultados 1 - 4 de 4
Más filtros

Base de datos
Intervalo de año de publicación
Can J Urol ; 31(1): 11777-11783, 2024 Feb.
Artículo en Inglés | MEDLINE | ID: mdl-38401257


INTRODUCTION: Grant funding to Urology has decreased over the last decade. Documented lack of gender and race diversity at the faculty level raises concerns for funding disparities. This study sought to characterize disparities based upon race and gender in National Institutes of Health (NIH) funding data to Urologic faculty. METHODS AND MATERIALS: Data from 145 ACGME accredited Urology residency programs incorporating faculty gender and underrepresented in medicine (URiM) status was utilized. The NIH Research Portfolio Online Report Tool was queried between 1985 and 2023 for grants related to current Urology faculty. URiM status, gender, years of practice, academic rank, and Doximity residency program rank were factors in multivariable analysis. RESULTS: A total of 2,131 faculty were included. Three hundred one Urologists received 793 urologic grants for a total of $993,919,052 in funding. By race, grants were awarded to: White 72.9%, Asian 21.8%, Hispanic 3.0%, Black 2.1%. Men received 708 grants (89.3%) worth $917,083,475 total. Women received 85 grants (10.7%) worth $76,835,577 total. Likelihood of being awarded a grant was significantly associated with non-URiM status (p < 0.001) and men (p < 0.0001). On multivariable analysis, Doximity rank (p < 0.001) and academic rank (p < 0.001) were significant predictors of receiving a grant; male gender, URiM status, and years of practice were not. Academic rank was also a significant predictor of number of grants received (p = 0.04) and total funding (p = 0.04); years of practice, Doximity rank, URiM status, and gender were not. CONCLUSIONS: NIH grants were more likely awarded to higher ranked faculty from higher Doximity ranked institutions with no differences based on URiM status or gender.

Investigación Biomédica , Urología , Estados Unidos , Humanos , Masculino , Femenino , Urólogos , National Institutes of Health (U.S.)
Sex Med ; 11(5): qfad053, 2023 Oct.
Artículo en Inglés | MEDLINE | ID: mdl-37965376


Background: Low-intensity shockwave therapy for erectile dysfunction is emerging as a promising treatment option. Aim: This randomized sham-controlled crossover trial assessed the efficacy of low-intensity shockwave therapy in the treatment of erectile dysfunction. Methods: Thirty-three participants with organic erectile dysfunction were enrolled and randomized to shockwave therapy (n = 17) or sham (n = 16). The sham group was allowed to cross over to receive shockwave therapy after 1 month. Outcomes: Primary outcomes were the changes in Sexual Health Inventory for Men (SHIM) score and Erection Hardness Score at 1 month following shockwave therapy vs sham, and secondary outcomes were erectile function measurements at 1, 3, and 6 months following shockwave therapy. Results: At 1 month, mean SHIM scores were significantly increased in the shockwave therapy arm as compared with the sham arm (+3.0 vs -0.7, P = .024). Participants at 6 months posttreatment (n = 33) showed a mean increase of 5.5 points vs baseline (P < .001), with 20 (54.6%) having an increase ≥5. Of the 25 men with an initial Erection Hardness Score <3, 68% improved to a score ≥3 at 6 months. When compared with baseline, the entire cohort demonstrated significant increases in erectile function outcomes at 1, 3, and 6 months after treatment. Clinical Implications: In this randomized sham-controlled crossover trial, we showed that 54.6% of participants with organic erectile dysfunction met the minimal clinically important difference in SHIM scores after treatment with low-intensity shockwave therapy. Strengths and Limitations: Strengths of this study include a sham-controlled group that crossed over to treatment. Limitations include a modest sample size at a single institution. Conclusions: Low-intensity shockwave therapy improves erectile function in men with erectile dysfunction as compared with sham treatment, which persists even 6 months after treatment. Clinical Trial Registration: NCT04434352.

Urology ; 178: 9-16, 2023 Aug.
Artículo en Inglés | MEDLINE | ID: mdl-37149061


OBJECTIVE: To characterize academic productivity for underrepresented minorities (URMs) vs non-URMs and by gender in Urology. METHODS: A database was created from 145 Urology residency programs. URM status was determined by origin of name, photo, biography, Twitter, LinkedIn, and Doximity. A PubMed query was performed for publication output. URM status, gender, post-graduate year/years of practice, and Doximity residency rank were factors in multivariable analysis. RESULTS: For residents, the median total publications was 2 [1,5] for URMs and 2 [1,5] for non-URMs (P=.54). The median first/last author publications was 1 [0,2] for URMs and 1 [0,2] for non-URMs (P=.79). The median total publications was 2 [0,4] for women and 2 [1,6] for men (P=.003). The median first/last author publications was 1 [0,2] for women and 1 [0,2] for men (P=.14). For faculty, the median total publications was 12 [3,32] for URMs and 19 [6,45] for non-URMs (P=.0002). The median first/last author publications was 4.5 [1,12] for URMs and 7 [2,20] for non-URM faculty (P=.0002). The median total publications was 11 [5,25] for women and 20 [6,49] for men (P<.0001). The median first/last author publications was 4 [1,11] for women and 8 [2,22] for men (P<.0001). On multivariable analysis, there was no difference in total publications and first/last author publications for URMs vs non-URMs. There remained a difference between genders for residents and faculty with total publications but not first/last author publications (P=.002/P=.10 residents, P=.004/P=.07 faculty). CONCLUSION: Academic productivity was not different in URMs and non-URMs for both residents and faculty. Men residents and faculty had more total publications compared to women.

Internado y Residencia , Urología , Humanos , Masculino , Femenino , Estados Unidos , Urólogos , Grupos Minoritarios , Instituciones Académicas , Urología/educación , Docentes Médicos
Clin Imaging ; 100: 48-53, 2023 Aug.
Artículo en Inglés | MEDLINE | ID: mdl-37207442


PURPOSE: To investigate whether pre-procedure Computed Tomography Angiography (CTA) improves radiation exposure, procedure complexity, and symptom recurrence after bronchial embolization for massive hemoptysis. MATERIAL AND METHODS: A single-center retrospective review of bronchial artery embolization (BAE) for massive hemoptysis was performed for procedures between 2008 and 2019. Multi-variate analysis was performed to determine the significance of pre-procedure CTA and etiology of hemoptysis on patient radiation exposure (reference point air kerma, RPAK) and rate of recurrent hemoptysis. RESULTS: There were 61 patients (mean age 52.5 years; SD = 19.2 years, and 57.3% male) and CTA was obtained for 42.6% (26/61). Number of vessels selected was a mean of 7.2 (SD = 3.4) in those without CTA and 7.4 (SD = 3.4) in those with CTA (p = 0.923). Mean procedure duration was 1.8 h (SD = 1.6 h) in those without CTA and 1.3 h (SD = 1.0 h) in those with CTA (p = 0.466). Mean fluoroscopy time and RPAK per procedure were 34.9 min (SD = 21.5 min) and 1091.7 mGy (SD = 1316.6 mGy) for those without a CTA and 30.7 min (SD = 30.7 min) and 771.5 mGy (SD = 590.0 mGy) for those with a CTA (p = 0.523, and p = 0.879, respectively). Mean total iodine given was 49.2 g (SD = 31.9 g) for those without a CTA and 70.6 g (SD = 24.9 g) for those with a CTA (p = 0.001). Ongoing hemoptysis at last clinical follow up was 13/35 (37.1%) in those without CTA and 9/26 (34.6%) in those with CTA (p = 0.794). CONCLUSIONS: Pre-procedure CTA did not improve radiation effective dose and symptom recurrence after BAE and is associated with significant increases in total iodine dose.

Embolización Terapéutica , Hemoptisis , Humanos , Masculino , Persona de Mediana Edad , Femenino , Hemoptisis/diagnóstico , Angiografía por Tomografía Computarizada , Tomografía Computarizada por Rayos X/efectos adversos , Angiografía/efectos adversos , Arterias Bronquiales/diagnóstico por imagen , Embolización Terapéutica/métodos , Estudios Retrospectivos , Dosis de Radiación , Resultado del Tratamiento