A Pilot Study Evaluating a Virtual Reality-Based Nontechnical Skills Training Application for Urology Trainees: Usability, Acceptability, and Impact.

OBJECTIVE: This study aimed to develop and evaluate a virtual reality (VR)-based nontechnical skills (NTS) training application for urology trainees and assess its effectiveness in improving their skills and confidence. DESIGN: A mixed-methods study was conducted to develop and evaluate a VR-based NTS training application for 32 urology trainees. The development process involved collaboration with 5 urology experts, 2 medical education specialists, and a human factors researcher. The study evaluated the application's usability, acceptability, and efficacy through 3 phases: scenario development with expert feedback integration, storyboarding and creation processes with facilitators and urology trainees, and a final evaluation by trainees. SETTING: The data were collected during a 4-day urology boot camp in October 2022. PARTICIPANTS: Thirty-two urology trainees participated in the study and completed 2 VR scenarios designed to enhance their NTS skills RESULTS: The System Usability Scale (SUS) showed a moderate usability score of 66. The Training Evaluation Inventory (TEI) and additional feedback demonstrated positive effects on trainees' learning and confidence in their NTS abilities. Most participants found the application easy to use, and effective and they expressed interest in using similar VR applications for other aspects of surgical training. CONCLUSIONS: VR-based NTS training applications show potential for enhancing urology trainees' nontechnical skills. The integration of expert feedback and immersive technology offers a promising, accessible, and cost-effective solution to the challenges of delivering NTS training. Future research should explore the long-term impact of VR-based NTS training on trainees' performance and patient outcomes and consider incorporating advanced AI technologies for personalized and dynamic learning experiences.

The need for a course to complete urological education for consultant practice using a simulated 'boot camp' structure at the end of specialist training: A survey-based study.

BACKGROUND AND AIMS: To obtain opinions from urology trainees and consultants regarding the need for, and structure of, a post-specialty training Urology Simulation Boot Camp (USBC) for consultant practice. METHODS AND RESULTS: A survey-based study was conducted, and 'Google Forms' were distributed electronically via social media. Urology specialist trainees (ST) in years 5-7 (ST5-ST7), post-certification of completion of training (CCT) fellows and ST3 boot camp faculty consultants in practice for ≤5 years and >5 years were included. One hundred and seven responses were received. 97.2% of responders thought a pre-consultant USBC was worthwhile; 55.1% selected the course duration to be 2 days. 47.7% felt that the USBC should be delivered post-exam in ST7. 91.6%, 43.9%, 73.8%, 87.9% and 74.8% considered that modules in emergency operative procedures, novel uro-technologies, delivering multidisciplinary team (MDT) meetings, non-clinical consultant roles and responsibilities, stress and burnout to be important, respectively. 62.6% and 31.8% felt that the course should be wholly or part-funded by Health Education England (HEE). CONCLUSIONS: A post-specialty training, pre-consultant, USBC delivered post-exam in ST7, is worthwhile and should include modules on emergency operative procedures, leading MDTs, non-clinical roles and responsibilities and managing stress and burnout in consultant careers. Ideally, it should be fully/part-funded by HEE.

Adaptations in models of urological regulation and their application to sub-Saharan Africa.

Regulation of medical care is something that has grown from humble roots in professional craft groups to huge establishment in well-resourced, high-income countries. Self-regulation was the preferred method of determining appropriate behaviour initially, but a lack of public trust in this, and the desire of patients to contribute to the establishment of the standard of care that they receive, has meant that most Anglophone countries have adopted some form of independent regulation. Regulators are responsible for the registration of doctor's qualifications, licensing them to practise, accrediting institutions to provide undergraduate and postgraduate education and certifying the attainment of accepted standards of achievement by some form of assessment process. Regulators also have powers to sanction individuals whose practice falls outside expected levels of competence. Both centralized and devolved models of regulation have evolved. Much of the accreditation for postgraduate education and training has been handed down to collegiate bodies, or non-governmental organizations, who can also certify completion of training. Evidence-based medicine and clinical practice guidelines have enforced an informal tier of regulation in high-income countries; guideline-derived practice is now widely regarded as an accepted standard of care. In low- and middle-income countries in sub-Saharan Africa the governmental and legislative structures and finance available to provide the regulation espoused in more privileged environments is rarely available. The workforce is structured in a completely different way and some care groups are totally unregulated. Medical councils in sub-Saharan Africa fulfil a registration and licensing function but surgical collegiate bodies provide the structure for postgraduate training. The East and West African Colleges of Surgeons have developed into robust organizations, who have verifiable, quality-assured, accreditation systems that have helped improve standards of care for the large populations for which their member surgeons are responsible. Formal regulation of continuing practice and sanctions are challenges that are, at present, largely unaddressed.

Stone disease in low- and middle-income countries: could augmented reality have a role in its management?

Urolithiasis is a global phenomenon. Cystolithiasis is common in parts of Africa due to low protein intake and dehydration from endemic diarrhoeal illnesses. Nephrolithiasis is less prevalent than in high-income countries, probably due to a variety of lifestyle issues, such as a more elemental diet, higher physical activity, and less obesity. Although renal stones are less common in low- and middle-income countries (LMICs), the social and economic impacts of nephrolithiasis are still considerable; many stones present late or with complications such as upper urinary tract obstruction or urosepsis. These may lead to the development of chronic kidney disease, or end-stage renal failure in a small proportion of cases, conditions for which there is very poor provision in most LMICs. Early treatment of nephrolithiasis by the least invasive method possible can, however, reduce the functional consequences of urinary stone disease. Although extracorporeal lithotripsy is uncommon, and endoscopic interventions for stone are not widespread in most of Africa, percutaneous nephrolithotomy and ureteroscopic renal surgery are viable techniques in those regional centres with infrastructure to support them. Longitudinal mentoring has been shown to be a key step in the adoption of these minimally invasive procedures by local surgeons, something that has been difficult during the coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) pandemic due to travel restriction. Augmented reality (AR) technology is an alternative means of providing remote mentoring, something that has been trialled by Urolink, the MediTech Trust and other global non-governmental organisations during this period. Our preliminary experience suggests that this is a viable technique for promulgating skills in LMICs where appropriate connectivity exists to support remote communication. AR may also have long-term promise for decreasing the reliance upon short-term surgical visits to consolidate competence, thereby reducing the carbon footprint of global surgical education.

Paediatric urology in Sub-Saharan Africa: challenges and opportunities.

The need for paediatric urological care in low- and middle-income countries in sub-Saharan Africa (SSA) is enormous due to a burgeoning paediatric-aged population and a disproportionate burden of congenital malformations. There are formidable challenges in the provision of a skilled workforce and appropriate infrastructure, resulting in a huge unmet need with consequent effects on the long-term health and prosperity of the population. Constraints of funding, geography, culture, surgical and anaesthetic skills, and instrumentation means that many conditions present late and with complications that could have been avoided by an earlier attendance. It also means that the management of congenital malformations, e.g., bladder exstrophy and congenital obstructive posterior urethral membrane, differ substantially from that seen in the developed world, with the outlook for children with renal failure being particularly bleak. Collaborations between paediatric urologists from high- and low-income countries are beginning to help with the development of a surgical infrastructure customised to paediatric care, and with the training of specific paediatric urological knowledge and skills. These collaborations, whilst welcome, still require substantial expansion to achieve more equitable access to appropriate paediatric urological care for children in SSA. Future efforts have to focus on the creation of sustainable and equal partnerships between urologists from low- and high-income healthcare environments, with an emphasis on providing sustainable management, appropriate to local need and available resources. The provision of shared learning, utilising the benefits of global digital communication, will improve mutual understanding of needs in a resource-poor environment and the involvement of trainees from both income settings can help perpetuate long-term collaborations.

Male urethral stricture disease: why management guidelines are challenging in low-income countries.

Urethral stricture disease (USD) is one of the commonest urological pathologies in adult men in low- or low-middle-income countries, providing a significant work burden for the small number of specialist surgeons who are able to provide appropriate treatment. The underlying causes of anterior urethral stricture relate to urethral fibrosis from sexually transmitted infection, with posterior urethral disruption secondary to pelvic trauma being an equally common cause of USD in many countries in sub-Saharan Africa. Anterior urethral strictures are often long, and multifocal, and bulbo-prostatic disruptions are usually due to relatively low-velocity pelvic trauma. The management options available in resource-poor settings are often severely limited by the individual's ability to pay for care, the availability of a specialist surgeon and, importantly, a shortage of functioning endoscopic equipment for less-invasive treatments. Consequently, reconstructive surgery is often regarded by the patient, and surgeon, as the most cost-effective and, therefore, primary means of treating a urethral stricture once urethral dilatation has failed. Regional anaesthetic techniques have limited the adoption of free-graft augmentation as an alternative to pedicled flaps of locally available skin for reconstruction, whilst an inability to provide tension-free bulbo-prostatic anastomoses has negatively impacted the outcome from the treatment of pelvic fracture disruption injuries in much of sub-Saharan Africa. However, Urolink has found that local surgeons can be taught sustainable skills required for successful complex urethroplasty when supported by longitudinal mentorship in the management of difficult clinical issues. Evidence-based practice is known to improve the standard of care in specific conditions in high-income countries, including the management of male USD. However, guidelines developed in high-income countries are not necessarily appropriate for stricture management in less well-resourced healthcare environments but could be adapted to help improve the delivery of stricture care for men in low- or low-middle income countries.

The feasibility of endourological surgery in low-resource settings.

One of the widest variations in contemporary surgical practice between high and low, or low-middle, income countries is the utilisation of endoscopy as a means of treating urological pathology. The endoscopic management of lower urinary tract problems such as benign prostatic hypertrophy, bladder cancer and urethral strictures was established in the UK in the late 1970s, whilst its adoption into everyday practice in sub-Saharan Africa (SSA) has been significantly retarded. It is still neither a major feature of urological training in those countries nor widely available to the patients that established consultants treat. Likewise, the explosion of less invasive technologies for treating upper tract stone disease in the 1980s, particularly the management of renal stone disease, has also lagged behind practice established in the UK over the last 40 years. This is not due to a lack of patients who could be treated endoscopically or restricted by the abilities of the surgeons in SSA. The restraint in assumption of these less-invasive management options is rather due to the physical availability of trained specialist surgeons, their access to basic infrastructure such as electricity and water, access to endoscopes and the peripheral equipment necessary to successfully deploy them, and the ability of patients to afford the disposable items required for less-invasive forms of management. Some endoscopic procedures are viable in resource-poor settings. However, they are largely dependent upon the supply of equipment from non-governmental organisations in high-income countries, frugal innovation to reduce individual procedure costs, adequately skilled mentors, and maintenance and supply chains to make them a durable option in patient management. Urolink and the Medi Tech Trust present their experience of how endoscopic surgery can be taught, and used sustainably, in a resource-poor healthcare environment.

Understanding cultural and logistical contexts for urologists in low-income countries.

The provision of effective urological management in low- and middle-income countries requires the delivery of appropriate and effective care adapted to the needs, capability and resources of the host country. However, a deeper cognisance of the culture, the religious practices and the logistics of healthcare in that environment determines the ability to effectively to 'twin', that is, to provide a long-term healthcare partnership. Patient beliefs can have profound effects on the understanding of the aetiology of illness, its relevance to their long-term health and the stigmatization of their family's social status. Consequently, individuals may have a greater willingness to seek help from practitioners of traditional medicine due to its availability as well as the lower costs of such medicine by comparison to those of medicine from high-income countries (HICs). This can influence the treatment of many urological conditions and lead to late-presenting states such as malignant ureteric obstruction. Social mores, such as cultural paternalism, can also influence many practices that are assumed by HICs to be part of normal healthcare provision, including the delivery of patient information and provision of informed consent to treatment. Doctor's status and dress have greater importance in many countries in sub-Saharan Africa (sSA) than in the UK and the modes of greeting and addressing colleagues and patients can affect the fluency and effectiveness of clinical interactions. A local cultural and religious knowledge is essential, therefore, to optimize the assimilation of external help. Logistics are perhaps the most important factor that needs to be grasped to provide a sustainable healthcare environment. Limitations in resource allocation are a major factor in planning effective urological treatment in many countries in sSA, whether this is the provision of trained personnel, basic infrastructure, a tenable workspace, equipment or drugs. This paper explores all of these factors, and looks at how their recognition assists urologists in providing a twinning process.

Understanding the needs of low-income countries: how urologists can help.

Delivering urological humanitarian aid to countries with greater need has been provided by urologists associated with British Association of Urological Surgeons (BAUS) Urolink over the last 30 years. Urolink has realised the need to understand where that need is geographically, what tangible help is required, and how assistance can be delivered in the most ethically appropriate way. The World Bank stratification of countries by per capita gross national income has helped in the identification of low-come countries or lower-middle-income countries (LMICs), the vast majority of which are in sub-Saharan Africa. The medical and socioeconomic needs of those country's populations, which constitute 17% of the global community, are substantially different from that required in higher income countries. More than 40% of sub-Saharan Africa's population is aged <14 years, it has a substantially reduced life expectancy, which influences the type of pathologies seen, and perinatal complications are a major cause of morbidity for both mother and child. There is a significant problem with the availability of medical care in these countries and almost a third of global deaths have been attributed to the lack of access to emergency and elective surgery. Urologically, the main conditions demanding the attention of the very few available urologists are congenital anomalies, benign prostatic hypertrophy, urolithiasis, urethral stricture, and pelvic cancer. The management of these conditions is often substantially different from that in the UK, being limited by a lack of personnel, equipment, and access to geographically relevant guidelines appropriate to the healthcare environment. Assisting LMICs to develop sustainable urological services can be helped by understanding the local needs of linked institutions, establishing trusting and durable relationships with partner centres and by providing appropriate education that can be perpetuated, and disseminated, across a region of need.

Analysis of a 7-year national online audit of the management of open reconstructive urethral surgery in men.

OBJECTIVE: To conduct an audit of the management of urethral pathology in men presenting for reconstructive urethral surgery in the UK. METHODS: Between 1 June 2010 and 31 May 2017, data on men presenting with urethral pathologies requiring reconstruction were entered onto a secure online data platform. Surgeon-entered information was collected in 95 fields regarding the stricture aetiology, prior management, mode of presentation, type of surgery and outcomes, with a potential 283 variable responses in the 95 fields. Data were analysed to compare UK practice with that reported in the contemporary literature and with guidelines. RESULTS: Data on 4809 men were entered by 39 centres and 50 surgeons. Field completeness was 70.7%, 74.3% and 53.7% for preoperative, operative and follow-up data, respectively. Referral for stricture reconstruction frequently followed two prior endoscopic procedures and the stricture was not always assessed anatomically before surgery. Urinary retention was a common symptom in men awaiting reconstruction. Short unifocal strictures of the anterior urethra were the commonest reason for referral, whilst lichen sclerosus and hypospadias generated a significant volume of revisional stricture surgery. Lower numbers of very complex interventions are required for the management of posterior urethral pathology. Although precise criteria for determining success are not clear, management of urethral reconstruction in the UK was found to have a low risk of Clavien-Dindo grade 3 or higher complications, and was associated with outcomes similar to those reported in contemporary series except in the management of posterior urethral fistulae. CONCLUSIONS: Online databases can provide volume data on the management of reconstructive urethral surgery across a multiplicity of centres in one country. They can also indicate compliance with accepted standards of, and expected outcomes from, this tertiary practice.

UK practice regarding reversal of vasectomy 2001-2010: relevance to best contemporary patient management.

UNLABELLED: Study Type - Practice trends (survey) Level of Evidence 2c What's known on the subject? and What does the study add? Approximately 6% of men who have had a vasectomy subsequently decide to have it reversed. For such men there are various options available, including vasal reconstruction, surgical sperm retrieval with assisted reproductive techniques, use of donated sperm or adoption. The decision-making process with regard to the most appropriate management is challenging and the urologist requires both an intimate knowledge of the advantages and disadvantages of each of the available options and the opportunity to counsel a couple appropriately. The study confirms that patient management after previous vasectomy is a complex process, demanding detailed knowledge about the availability and outcomes of alternatives to vasectomy reversal. It recommends that couples should not be seen by urologists with diverse interests but by those with appropriate knowledge of all of the factors influencing outcome and the available management options and their costs. Urologists should also have appropriate facilities to offer intra-operative demonstration of and, potentially, storage of sperm. OBJECTIVES: To review the management of men presenting for reversal of vasectomy amongst consultant members of the British Association of Urological Surgeons (BAUS) between 2001 and 2010. • To make recommendations for contemporary practice. SUBJECTS AND METHODS: Three consecutive questionnaire-based surveys were undertaken by BAUS consultant members in 2001, 2005 and 2010. • Standard questionnaires were sent on each occasion asking urologists about their counselling of couples regarding options in achieving a conception, expectation of outcome from reconstructive surgery and the techniques of vaso-vasostomy used. • In 2005 additional information was obtained about the availability of fertility treatments and sub-specialization of the urologist and in 2010 about the eligibility criteria for in-vitro fertilization (IVF) treatment and synchronous sperm retrieval. RESULTS: Overall there was a 47% response rate with >80% of respondents still performing vaso-vasostomy. • More than 75% of respondents were doing <15 procedures a year and <50% of respondents counselled couples about other management options. • Only 41% gave their personalized outcomes from vaso-vasostomy, whilst >80% were using some form of magnification intra-operatively. • Members of the BAUS section of andrology were more likely to discuss options for becoming a parent and criteria for IVF treatment, to present their individualized outcomes from vaso-vasotomy and to carry out >15 procedures a year than urologists with no andrological affiliation. CONCLUSIONS: • Patient management after previous vasectomy is a complex process necessitating detailed knowledge concerning the availability and outcomes of alternatives to vaso-vasostomy. • Couples should not be seen by urologists with diverse interests but by those with appropriate knowledge of all of the factors influencing outcome. • Vaso-vasostomy should no longer be seen as a procedure within the remit of any adequately trained urologist but as one option to be considered by a sub-specialist with access to appropriate micro-surgical training and assisted reproductive technologies.

Factors affecting successful outcome from ICSI in men following previous vasectomy.

There are conflicting reports as to whether the interval between vasectomy and surgical sperm retrieval (SSR) for intra-cytoplasmic sperm injection (ICSI) is related to clinical pregnancy (CPR), and live birth (LBR), rates. This study aimed to evaluate factors that may influence the outcome of ICSI in males with secondary azoospermia due to previous vasectomy. We analysed the medical records of 198 azoospermic males following vasectomy who underwent percutaneous epididymal sperm aspiration (PESA) and/or testicular sperm extraction (TeSE), between 1997 and 2005 by a single urologist, and whose sperm was subsequently frozen for use in an IVF treatment programme on their partner's behalf. Hundred and forty-four (73%) males had a positive PESA, and the remaining 54 (27%) had a positive TeSE. Forty-four percent of males with no clinical evidence of epididymal distension still had epididymal sperm retrieved successfully. Hundred and twenty-eight patients proceeded with ICSI, and a total of 237 cycles were performed. The CPR and LBR overall were 29 and 27%, respectively. Using logistic regression there was no association between time since vasectomy and CPR (P = 0.17) or LBR (P = 0.31). A history of an attempted reversal of vasectomy did not negatively affect retrieval rates or CPR and LBR. The success of SSR and the outcome of ICSI, using frozen sperm, are independent of male age and time since vasectomy. Epididymal sperm may be retrieved in over 40% of men in whom there is no clinical evidence of epididymal distension.

Sperm retrieval rates in subgroups of primary azoospermic males.

OBJECTIVES: Men presenting with primary infertility and azoospermia may be offered surgical sperm retrieval (SSR) as a prelude to intracytoplasmic sperm injection (ICSI). We evaluated sperm retrieval rates in subgroups of men with azoospermia, based on obstructive aetiology, testicular volume and FSH. METHODS: 106 patients with primary infertility underwent clinical evaluation and SSR with percuataneous epididymal aspiration (PESA) and/or testicular sperm extraction (TeSE) by a single urologist over a five year period. Ten percent of this group (11 patients) had a clear cause of obstruction, congenital absence of the vas deferens (CBAVD), labelled group A. Ninety percent (95 patients) had no definite cause of obstruction, labelled group B. RESULTS: All eleven patients in group A had adequate sperm retrieved, compared with 56% of 95 men in group B. Clinical pregnancy and live birth rates were 47% and 44% for group A respectively compared with 21% and 20% for group B. Twenty-one men had testes <4 cm and FSH>10; a significantly lower sperm retrieval rate was seen in this subgroup (29%) compared to men with normal testicular volume and FSH (77%), p=0.0001, which corresponded to a LBR of 28% and 14% respectively. CONCLUSIONS: In the absence of testicular histology prior to SSR clinical parameters can be used to aid in counselling. Azoospermic males with normal sized testes and normal FSH can expect acceptable numbers of sperm to be retrieved by SSR for ICSI. Less than one third of men with raised FSH and small testes will have successful SSR.