METHODS: The Asian Urological Surgery Training and Educational Group (AUSTEG) Laparoscopic Upper Tract Surgery Course implemented and validated the FLS program for its usage in laparoscopic surgical training. Delegates' basic laparoscopic skills were assessed using three different training models (peg transfer, precision cutting, and intra-corporeal suturing). They also performed live porcine laparoscopic surgery at the same workshop. Live surgery skills were assessed by blinded faculty using the OSATS rating scale.
RESULTS: From March 2016 to March 2019, a total of 81 certified urologists participated in the course, with a median of 5 years of post-residency experience. Although differences in task time did not reach statistical significance, those with more surgical experience were visibly faster at completing the peg transfer and intra-corporeal suturing FLS tasks. However, they took longer to complete the precision cutting task than participants with less experience. Overall OSATS scores correlated weakly with all three FLS tasks (peg transfer time: r=-0.331, r 2=0.110; precision cutting time: r=-0.240, r 2=0.058; suturing with intra-corporeal knot time: r=-0.451, r 2=0.203).
CONCLUSION: FLS task parameters did not correlate strongly with OSATS globing rating scale performance. Although FLS task models demonstrated strong validity, it is important to assimilate the inconsistencies when benchmarking technical proficiency against real-life operative competence, as evaluated by FLS and OSATS, respectively.
MATERIAL AND METHODS: A comprehensive review of all "surveys in urology answered by urologists" was performed through the PubMed and Scopus databases, according to the SPICE framework. Included surveys were divided according to the subject: "Uro-oncology", "Urolithiasis", "Mental health" "Resident training", and "Miscellaneous". Publications were then divided into 2 main periods: Period-1 (2000-2011) and Period-2 (2012-2023).
RESULTS: A total of 361 surveys have been published since 2000, with a significant overall increasing trend in the recent decade (p <0.001). A significantly increasing focus is seen for publications on resident training (n = 86; +660%; p = 0.003), mental health (n = 31; +650%; p = 0.001), urolithiasis (n = 40; +371%; p = 0.002), and uro-oncology (n = 94; +230%, p ≤0.001). In subanalysis, the largest increase in publications was noted for surveys on radical prostatectomy (+175%, p = 0.024), surgical treatment of urolithiasis (+320%, p = 0.040), quality of resident education (+483%, p <0.001), and personal satisfaction with resident training (+500%, p = 0.005).
CONCLUSIONS: Over the decades, surveys have served as an effective interactive tool for urologists to engage and investigate different aspects of practice and training across sub-specialties. In modern times, better evaluation tools integrated with AI will provide a bigger platform for urologists to use surveys as part of their armamentarium to address and evaluate not only clinical practices but also emotional challenges, training needs, and inequalities that hinder progress in urology.