Patients' perceptions of quality of care delivery by urology residents: A nationwide study.
#Urology
patient's perspective
survey
urological education
urology residents
Journal
BJU international
ISSN: 1464-410X
Titre abrégé: BJU Int
Pays: England
ID NLM: 100886721
Informations de publication
Date de publication:
12 2022
12 2022
Historique:
pubmed:
3
5
2022
medline:
15
11
2022
entrez:
2
5
2022
Statut:
ppublish
Résumé
To present the results of a nationwide survey among urological patients to evaluate their perception of the quality of care provided by residents. An anonymous survey was distributed to patients who were referred to 22 Italian academic institutions. The survey aimed to investigate the professional figure of the urology resident as perceived by the patient. A total of 2587 patients were enrolled in this study. In all, 51.6% of patients were able to correctly identify a urology resident; however, almost 40% of respondents discriminated residents from fully trained urologists based exclusively on their young age. Overall, 98.2% patients rated the service provided by the resident as at least sufficient. Urology trainees were considered by more than 50% of the patients interviewed to have good communication skills, expertise and willingness. Overall, patients showed an excellent willingness to be managed by urology residents. The percentage of patients not available for this purpose showed an increasing trend that directly correlated with the difficulty of the procedure. Approximately 5-10% of patients were not willing to be managed by residents for simple procedures such as clinical visits, cystoscopy or sonography, and up to a third of patients were not prepared to undergo any surgical procedure performed by residents during steps in major surgery, even if the residents were adequately tutored. Our data showed that patients have a good willingness to be managed by residents during their training, especially for medium- to low-difficulty procedures. Furthermore, the majority of patients interviewed rated the residents' care delivery as sufficient. Urology trainees were considered to have good communication skills, expertise and willingness.
Identifiants
pubmed: 35491978
doi: 10.1111/bju.15768
pmc: PMC9790253
doi:
Types de publication
Journal Article
Langues
eng
Sous-ensembles de citation
IM
Pagination
832-838Informations de copyright
© 2022 The Authors. BJU International published by John Wiley & Sons Ltd on behalf of BJU International.
Références
Minerva Urol Nefrol. 2020 Jun;72(3):384-387
pubmed: 32182232
Acad Emerg Med. 1999 Apr;6(4):339-44
pubmed: 10230987
World J Surg. 2019 Sep;43(9):2137-2142
pubmed: 31111230
Acad Med. 2004 Feb;79(2):139-43
pubmed: 14744714
J Urol. 2014 Sep;192(3):885-90
pubmed: 24704012
JAMA Surg. 2021 Apr 1;156(4):393-394
pubmed: 33595603
Am Surg. 2021 Dec;87(10):1616-1620
pubmed: 34139895
J Grad Med Educ. 2011 Dec;3(4):487-9
pubmed: 23205196
JAMA Surg. 2020 Sep 02;:
pubmed: 32876660
BJU Int. 2011 Nov;108 Suppl 2:58-61
pubmed: 22085131
BJU Int. 2019 Aug;124(2):349-356
pubmed: 30993851
Urology. 2018 Apr;114:33-40
pubmed: 29288789
JAMA Surg. 2021 Aug 1;156(8):774
pubmed: 33929511
Med Teach. 2002 Jul;24(4):370-3
pubmed: 12193318
Eur Urol Focus. 2018 Mar;4(2):280-287
pubmed: 28753765
World J Urol. 2020 Jan;38(1):239-246
pubmed: 30982099
Acad Med. 2009 Sep;84(9):1182-91
pubmed: 19707055
Urol Ann. 2020 Jan-Mar;12(1):9-14
pubmed: 32015610
Acad Med. 2011 Aug;86(8):996-1009
pubmed: 21670661