Understanding the Urology Program Directors Perspective on the Current Resident Selection Process: The Society of Academic Urologists National Survey of Urology Program Directors.

OBJECTIVE: The traditional residency selection process was altered dramatically by the SARS CoV-2 (COVID-19) pandemic. For the 2020-2021 application cycle in-person interviews were transitioned to the virtual format. What was thought to be a temporary transition has now become the new standard with continued endorsement from the Association of American Medical Colleges (AAMC) and the Society of Academic Urologists (SAU) for virtual interviews (VI). We sought to assess the perceived efficacy and satisfaction of the VI format from the urology residency program director's (PDs) perspective. DESIGN: A designated SAU Taskforce on "Optimizing the Applicant Experience in the Virtual Interview Era" developed and refined a survey composed of 69 questions on VI and was distributed to all urology program directors (PD) of member institutions of the SAU. The survey focused on candidate selection, faculty preparation, and interview day logistics. PDs were also asked to reflect on the impact of VI on their match results, recruitment of underrepresented minorities and female gender, and what their preference would be for future applications cycles. PARTICIPANTS: Urology residency PDs (84.7% response rate) between January 13, 2022 - February 10, 2022 were included in the study. RESULTS: Most programs interviewed a total of 36 to 50 applicants (80%), with an average of 10 to 20 applicants per interview day. The top 3 ranked criteria for interview selection reported by urology PDs surveyed included letters of recommendation, clerkship grades, and USMLE Step 1 score. The most common areas of formal training for faculty interviewers were diversity, equity and inclusion (55%), implicit bias (66%), and review of the SAU guidelines on illegal questions (83%). Over half (61.4%) of PDs believed that they were able to accurately represent their training program through the virtual platform, while 51% felt that VI did not afford similar assessments of applicant as in-person interviews. Two-thirds of PDs believed the VI platform improve access for all applicants to attend interviews. Focusing on the impact of the VI platform for recruitment of underrepresented minorities (URM) and female gender applicants, 15% and 24% reported improved visibility respectively for their program, and 24% and 11% reported increased ability to interview URM and female gender applicants respectively. Overall, in-person interviews were reported to be preferred by 42%, and 51% of PDs desired VIs to be included in future years. CONCLUSIONS: PDs opinion and role of the VIs into the future is variable. Despite uniform agreement of cost savings and belief that VI platform improves access for all, only half of PDs expressed interest of the VI format being continued in some form. PDs note limitation of VI in the ability to comprehensively assess applicants as well as the in-person format. Many programs have begun to incorporate vital training in the areas of diversity equity and inclusion bias, and illegal questions. There is a role for continued development and research on ways to optimize virtual interviews.

Virtual Urology Education in the Epicenter of COVID-19: Development and Outcomes of the Educational Multi-Institutional Program for Instructing REsidents (EMPIRE) Lecture Series.

INTRODUCTION: Sustaining resident education efforts during the height of the COVID-19 pandemic required innovative, virtual didactic programs. This article reviews the authors' collaborative experience with launching the Educational Multi-institutional Program for Instructing REsidents (EMPIRE) lecture series in the New York Section of the American Urological Association. METHODS: From April 13, 2020 to May 29, 2020, there were 68 EMPIRE lectures delivered via Zoom videoconferencing that were based on a variety of topics highlighted in the AUA Core Curriculum. Tracking tools from Zoom, Google Analytics from the New York Section website and YouTube Analytics were used to assess participant access of didactic materials. Additionally, a survey regarding the content and impact of the series was distributed and advertised to those who had attended the lecture series. RESULTS: The average number of participants was 159±68 per lecture (range 77 to 334) and the recordings received 9,086 total video views (range 42 to 443 views per video) at the time of survey completion. The survey received 170 total responses. The majority of speakers (77%) and participants (58%) were from the New York Section. Half of the participants were residents (50%) and others were attending urologists (35%), fellows (5%), medical students (9%), and advanced practice providers (1%). Survey respondents reported consistently high ratings of the EMPIRE series. Overall, 99% of respondents said that they would recommend the EMPIRE series to a colleague and 98% requested that the series continue after COVID-19 abates. CONCLUSIONS: The EMPIRE didactic series was well received, with the majority of participants positively endorsing its value. Further initiatives pertaining to virtual education for urology trainees should continue to be explored.

Urology Virtual Education Programs During the COVID-19 Pandemic.

PURPOSE OF REVIEW: This article aims to describe the impact of the COVID-19 pandemic on American urology trainees, with a focus on virtual learning initiatives. RECENT FINDINGS: Urological education was forced to rapidly adapt to the COVID-19 pandemic in 2020. Significant challenges included quarantines, redeployment of residents and faculty, and suspension of regularly scheduled conferences. In response, urologists across the country adopted web-based platforms to develop virtual lecture series to fill the gap. Popular programs for residents included UCSF's COViD (Collaborative Online Video Didactics) series and the New York Section of the American Urological Association's EMPIRE (Educational Multi-institutional Program for Instructing REsidents) series. Virtual education programs have enabled urology trainees to pursue their education during the pandemic. While the long-term impact of the pandemic on urology training remains unknown, some good may be found in the innovative solutions that have arisen in urology education.