Positive environmental impact of remote teleconsultation in urology during the COVID-19 pandemic in a highly populated area.

INTRODUCTION: Greenhouse gas (GHG) emissions are a serious environmental issue. The healthcare sector is an important emitter of GHGs. Our aim was to assess the environmental cost of teleconsultations in urology compared to face-to-face consultations. MATERIALS AND METHODS: Prospective study of all patients who had a remote teleconsultation over a 2-week period during COVID-19 pandemic. Main outcome was the reduction in CO2e emissions related to teleconsultation compared to face-to-face consultation and was calculated as: total teleconsultation CO2e emissions-total face-to-face consultation CO2e emissions. Secondary outcome measures were the reduction in travel distance and travel time related to teleconsultation. RESULTS: Eighty patients were included. Face-to-face consultations would have resulted in 6699km (4162 miles) of travel (83.7km (52 miles) per patient). Cars were the usual means of transport. CO2e avoided due to lack of travel was calculated at 1.1 tonnes. Teleconsultation was responsible for 1.1kg CO2e while face-to-face consultation emitted 0.5kg of CO2e. Overall, the total reduction in GHGs with teleconsultation was 1141kg CO2e, representing a 99% decrease in emissions. Total savings on transport were 974 € and savings on travel time were 112h (1.4h/patient). CONCLUSIONS: Teleconsultation reduces the environmental impact of face-to-face consultations. The use of teleconsultation in our urology departments resulted in the avoidance of more than 6000km of travel, equivalent to a reduction of 1.1 tonnes of CO2e. Teleconsultation should be considered for specific indications as the healthcare system attempts to become greener. LEVEL OF EVIDENCE: 3.

Private Equity and Urology: An Emerging Model for Independent Practice.

Independent urology practices are under increasing competitive pressure in a changing marketplace. By providing access to capital and business management expertise, private equity can help practices consolidate and scale to unlock new growth opportunities, navigate an increasingly complex regulatory environment, and institute best practice across a network, while retaining physician ownership and an opportunity for equity appreciation. This article examines the role of private equity in urology and the potential benefits of private equity investment. It also looks at what firms look for in investment partners, how to prepare for private equity investment, and how private equity investments are structured.

Urological litigation trends in the UK National Health Service: an analysis of claims over 20 years.

OBJECTIVE: To look into the urology litigation trends and successful claims in the National Health Service (NHS) over the last 20 years. METHODS: We requested data from NHS Resolutions to investigate current litigation numbers, costs and causes for claims. Data collected included the number of claims dating from 1996 to 2019, the total sum of damages paid out each year for urology and the causes for the claims dating from 2009 to 2019. Data from NHS Resolutions were analysed, stratified and categorized by the authors from this information, which was provided as two separate documents. RESULTS: The total cost of damages between 1997 and 2017 was £74.5m (range: £241 325-£7.8m per year). While the number of successful claims was 1653 (range 7-168 per year), the total number of claims was 3341 (range 31-347 per year) and, over time, this has increased almost sevenfold. The cost of damages has increased roughly in line with the number of claims. Over the last 10 years, non-operative-related claims accounted for 984 claims, of which the largest subset was for 'the failure to diagnose and/or treat' (n = 639, 65%), with 88 (9%) successful consent-related claims. There were 226 intra-operative-related claims. Of these, wrong-site surgery, a never-event, accounted for eight claims and there were six successful claims for failing to supervise juniors. A total of 1129 claims were postoperative claims, with retained foreign body or instrument accounting for 71 (6%) of these. CONCLUSIONS: The number and cost of litigation claims have increased year on year. There is a need for continual improvement in patient care, surgical training, counselling, informed consent and early management of complications. The evidence reviewed in this paper suggests that the best approach to this is the combination of rigid adherence to and re-enforcement of common surgical guidelines and implementation of the national 'Getting it right first time' initiative.

Challenges in Urology during the COVID-19 Pandemic.

The COVID-19 pandemic has caused a global health threat. This disease has brought about huge changes in the priorities of medical and surgical procedures. This short review article summarizes several test methods for COVID-19 that are currently being used or under development. This paper also introduces the corresponding changes in the diagnosis and treatment of urological diseases during the COVID-19 pandemic. We further discuss the potential impacts of the pandemic on urology, including the outpatient setting, clinical work, teaching, and research.

Gender Disparities in Industry Payments to Urologists.

OBJECTIVE: To analyze and compare industry payments to urologists in the Open Payments Database by gender. We hypothesized that industry payments might be greater to male vs women urologists. METHODS: The Open Payments Database was analyzed from 2013-2017 and gender determined for all urologists receiving payments in the following categories: (1) research (made in connection to a research program or protocol), (2) ownership (ownership or investment interests held by the physician or immediate family member), and (3) general. Payment form and amount was collected and average payment per category, by gender, was calculated. RESULTS: A total of 12,161 urologists received industry payments from 2013-2017, of which 90% were male. Over the study period, there was a greater proportional increase in female urologists participating in industry payments: 46.8% for female urologists, vs 12.3% for male urologists (P <.01). Male urologists earned twice as much as women in all categories except for Ownership. Average payment (USD) per urologist was $3,106 vs $1338, $34, 494 vs $16,020, and $39,062 vs $252,710 for General, Research, and Ownership, respectively. Although the number of female urologists receiving industry payment increased during the study period, the average payment amount increased by 14.6% for women, compared to 107.8% for men (P <.01). CONCLUSION: Analysis of the Open Payments Database shows that on average women urologists earned half as much as men in their industry reported payments.

Salary Disparities in Academic Urogynecology: Despite Increased Transparency, Men Still Earn More Than Women.

OBJECTIVE: To understand the compensation differences between male and female academic urogynecologists at public institutions. METHODS: Urogynecologists at public universities with publicly available salary data as of June 2019 were eligible for the study. We collected characteristics, including sex, additional advanced degrees, years of training, board certification, leadership roles, number of authored scientific publications, and total National Institutes of Health funding projects and number of registered clinical trials for which the physician was a principal or co-investigator. We also collected total number of Medicare beneficiaries treated and total Medicare reimbursement as reported by the Centers for Medicare & Medicaid Services. We used linear regression to adjust for potential confounders. RESULTS: We identified 85 academic urogynecologists at 29 public state academic institutions with available salary data eligible for inclusion in the study. Males were more likely to be an associate or a full professor (81%) compared with females (55%) and were more likely to serve as department chair, vice chair, or division director (59%) compared with females (30%). The mean annual salary was significantly higher among males ($323,227 ± $97,338) than females ($268,990 ± $72,311, P = 0.004). After adjusting for academic rank and leadership roles and years since residency, the discrepancy persisted, with females compensated on average $37,955 less annually. CONCLUSIONS: Salaries are higher for male urogynecologists than female urogynecologists, even when accounting for variables such as academic rank and leadership roles. Physician compensation is complex; the differences observed may be due to variables that are not captured in this study. Nevertheless, the magnitude of disparity found in our study warrants further critical assessment of potential biases within the field.

Underrepresentation of functional conditions of the lower urinary tract in adults in US federal research funding.

AIMS: Evaluation and treatment of functional conditions of the lower urinary tract (fcLUT), a subset of benign urinary tract conditions, is highly subjective due to overlapping symptomatology. Despite high prevalence and socioeconomic cost, there has been little improvement in their treatment and lack of progress in understanding their pathophysiology. This study investigates trends in quantity, monetary amounts, and awardees' characteristics of federally funded research awards for fcLUT compared to nonurologic benign conditions (NUBCs) and urologic malignancies. METHODS: Data were extracted from the National Institutes of Health (NIH) and federal RePORTER databases in December 2019. We identified currently active awards in fcLUT, NUBC, and malignant urologic conditions and the associated demographic features of awardees. The authors also examined temporal funding trends for such awards. RESULTS: These database searches revealed that there are consistently fewer awards and funding dollars for the study of fcLUT compared to other benign conditions with similar prevalences. While most research topics have received increased funding in awards and overall funding dollars over time, fcLUT funding has remained relatively flat. Urologists are also underrepresented; only 11 of the 86 recipients of NIH R01 awards to study fcLUT have clinical training in urology. CONCLUSIONS: Even when compared to NUBC, funding for the study of fcLUT remains low and has stagnated over time. Further, investigators who are clinicians in the field of urology are in the minority of those doing this study. Given the need for clinical perspectives in fcLUT research, the lack of urologist representation will inhibit discovery and translational advances.

Contemporary Patterns of Third-line Treatments for Privately Insured Individuals With Overactive Bladder in the United States.

OBJECTIVE: To evaluate utilization of third-line overactive bladder (OAB) treatments including percutaneous tibial nerve stimulation (PTNS), sacral nerve stimulation (SNS), and intradetrusor botulinum toxin A (BTX) among privately insured patients and examine factors associated with their use. MATERIALS AND METHODS: Using MarketScan claims (2015-2017), we identified patients who underwent third-line OAB treatments based on procedure codes. Factors of interest included location, age, health plan, among others. We fit multivariable logistic regression models to estimate associations between pertinent factors with receipt of PTNS and SNS relative to BTX and associations between provider type and practice location with each treatment modality. RESULTS: We identified 7383 patients (mean age 50.9) in our cohort. SNS was used most frequently (n = 3602, 48.8%), while PTNS was used least frequently (n = 955, 12.9%). PTNS patients were more likely to reside in metropolitan areas (vs BTX: OR 1.6, 95%CI 1.3-2.1; vs SNS: OR 2.2, 95%CI 1.7-2.8), be aged 55 years or older (vs BTX: 54% vs 47%, OR 1.6, 95%CI 1.2-2.1; vs SNS: 54% vs 45%, OR 1.6, 95%CI 1.2-2.0), and be covered under a health maintenance organization (vs BTX: 17% vs 10%; vs SNS: 17% vs 10%, P <.01). Urologists were most likely to perform SNS, and gynecologists were most likely to perform BTX. 91% of PTNS procedures were performed in office settings. CONCLUSION: Among patients receiving third-line OAB treatment, PTNS was used infrequently. PTNS utilization was concentrated within urban areas, and among older patients and those covered by cost-conscious health maintenance organizations.

Strong Conflict of Interest Policies are not Associated With Decreased Industry Payments to Academic Urology Departments.

OBJECTIVE: To identify whether institutions with strong conflicts of interest (COI) policies receive less industry payments than those with weaker policies. While industry-physician interactions can have collaborative benefits, financial COI can undermine preservation of the integrity of professional judgment and public trust. To address this concern, academic institutions have adopted COI policies. It is unclear whether the strength of COI policy correlates with industry payments in urology. MATERIALS AND METHODS: 131 US academic urology programs were surveyed on their COI policies, and graded according to the American Medical Student Association (AMSA) criteria. Strength of COI policy was compared against industry payments in the Center for Medicare and Medicaid Services Open Payments database. RESULTS: Fifty-seven programs responded to the survey, for a total response rate of 44%. There was no difference between COI policy groups on total hospital payments (P = .05), total department payments (P = .28), or dollars per payment (P = .57). On correlation analysis, there was a weak but statistically nonsignificant correlation between AMSA Industry Policy Survey Score and Open Payments payments (ρ = -0.14, P = .32). CONCLUSION: Strength of conflicts of interest policy in academic urology did not correlate to industry payments within the Open Payments database. Establishment of strong COI policy may create offsetting factors that mitigate the intended effects of the policy. Further studies will be required to develop the evidence base for policy design and implementation across various specialties.

Patterns of Industry Payments to Urologists From 2014-2018.

OBJECTIVES: To evaluate the patterns of financial transaction between industry and urologists in the first 5 years of reporting in the Open Payments Program (OPP) by comparing transactions over time, between academic and nonacademic urologists, and by provider characteristics among academic urologists. METHODS: The Center for Medicare & Medicaid Services OPP database was queried for General Payments to urologists from 2014-2018. Faculty at ACGME-accredited urology training programs were identified and characterized via publicly available websites. Industry transfers were analyzed by year, practice setting (academic vs nonacademic), provider characteristics, and AUA section. Payment nature and individual corporate contributions were also summarized. RESULTS: A total of 12,521 urologists - representing 75% of the urology workforce in any given year - received $168 million from industry over the study period. There was no significant trend in payments by year (P = .162). Urologists received a median of $1602 over the study period, though 14% received >$10,000. Payment varied significantly by practice setting (P <.001), with nonacademic urologists receiving more but smaller payments than academic urologists. Among academic urologists, gender (P <.001), department chair status (P <.001), fellowship training (P <.001), and subspecialty (P <.001) were significantly associated with amount of payment from industry. Annual payments from industry varied significantly by AUA section. CONCLUSION: Reporting of physician-industry transactions has not led to a sustained decline in transactions with urologists. Significant differences in industry interaction exist between academic and nonacademic urologists, and values transferred to academic urologists varied by gender, chair status, subspecialty, and AUA section.

Characteristics, Burden, and Necessity of Inpatient Consults for Academic and Private Practice Urologists.

OBJECTIVE: To compare differences in the characteristics and outcomes of inpatient consults between academic and private practice urologists. MATERIALS AND METHODS: We performed a retrospective review of urology consults at a large tertiary-care hospital from June 1st, 2017 to June 30th, 2018. Patient demographics, timing of consult, location of consult, reasons for consult, requesting physicians, and procedures performed were analyzed and compared. RESULTS: A total of 613 consults were identified. The most common consults were for a Foley catheter/suprapubic tube (16%), urinary retention (15%), kidney/bladder stones (11%), and hematuria (11%). Seventy-seven percent of the consults were seen in the day time and 79% were seen on the weekdays. One hundred and ten (18%) consults resulted in an operative intervention during the same admission. The others required a Foley catheter placement or suprapubic exchange (17%), bedside procedure (9%), or interventional radiology procedure (4%). The remaining 319 consults (52%) required no intervention and were considered potentially unnecessary. There were no differences in the timing of the consults and the need for intervention between academic and private practice urologists (P = .20). Only 37% of patients followed up as an outpatient. These potentially unnecessary consults resulted an annual loss of 265.8 hours for the urologists and $44,376.09 in excess health care costs. CONCLUSION: Over half of inpatient urologic consultations required no urologic intervention and therefore represented potential overuse of urgent inpatient specialty care. This may contribute towards the growing epidemic of burnout in urology. Further work needs to be done to educate other hospital services and nurses to minimize these unnecessary consults.

[Legal pitfalls in urology]. / Juristische "pitfalls" in der Urologie.

The juridification of medicine affects all disciplines, including urology. Therefore, in this discipline it can well happen that patients not only feel wrongly treated or complain that a treatment was not performed lege artis but also demand compensation or even bring criminal charges. From the patient point of view, the doctor is often more likely to blame for a complication that has arisen or for a hoped for but failed treatment success, than that it is accepted that a complication is typical for the intervention, which, despite the greatest medical care, unfortunately can become reality and is a fateful course. Insurance against claims for damages can be taken out. Not to be underestimated, however, is the personal burden of the accusations with which doctors are confronted by patients, relatives, expert witnesses and courts and against which one must defend oneself. This can mean additional work in addition to the normal medical workload. Therefore, the legal pitfalls in urology should be known.

Variation in Practice Patterns and Reimbursements Between Female and Male Urologists for Medicare Beneficiaries.

Importance: Previous assessments of practice patterns and reimbursements for female urologists relied on surveys or board certification logs. A current evaluation of the geographic distribution and practice patterns by female urologists would reveal contemporary patterns of access for Medicare beneficiaries. Objective: To characterize the variation in practice patterns and reimbursements by urologist sex and the regional deficiencies in care provided by female urologists. Design, Setting, and Participants: This population-based cohort study used the publicly available Centers for Medicare & Medicaid Services Provider Payment database to evaluate payments for US urologists. The cohort (n = 8665) included urologists who provided and were paid for 11 or more services to Medicare beneficiaries in 2016. Data collection and analysis were performed from October 3, 2018, through June 19, 2019. Main Outcomes and Measures: Proportion of female-specific services, payments per beneficiary, and payments per work relative value unit (wRVU) by urologist sex were assessed. Density of female urologists across hospital markets was also identified. Results: Among the 8665 urologists who received payments in 2016, 7944 (91.7%) were men and 721 (8.3%) were women. Female urologists, compared with male urologists, saw a lower proportion of patients with cancer (mean [SD], 16.3% [9.2%] vs 22.7% [8.8%]; P < .001) and a greater proportion of female Medicare beneficiaries (mean [SD], 52.8% [23.2%] vs 24.4% [10.3%]; P < .001). Female urologists generated a greater proportion of wRVU from urodynamics (median [IQR], 2.88% [1.26%-4.84%] vs 1.07% [0.31%-2.26%]; P < .001) and gynecological operations (median [IQR], 0.68% [0.45%-1.07%] vs 0.41% [0.20%-0.81%]; P < .001) than male urologists. In addition, female urologists, compared with their male counterparts, received lower median payments per beneficiary seen ($70.12 [interquartile range (IQR), $60.00-$84.81] vs $72.37 [IQR, $59.63-$89.29]; P = .03) and lower payments per wRVU ($58.25 [IQR, $48.39-65.26] vs $60.04 [IQR, $51.93-$67.88]; P < .001). One-third (103 [33.7%]) of 306 hospital referral regions had 0 female urologists, and 80 (26.1%) had only 1 female urologist. Conclusions and Relevance: Female urologists were more likely to provide care for female Medicare beneficiaries, to receive lower payments per wRVU generated and beneficiaries seen, and to be difficult to access in certain geographic areas; these findings have policy-related implications and highlight the regional deficiencies in urological care and reimbursement discrepancies according to urologist sex.

Impact of Three-dimensional Printing in Urology: State of the Art and Future Perspectives. A Systematic Review by ESUT-YAUWP Group.

CONTEXT: Three-dimensional (3D) printing has profoundly impacted biomedicine. It has been used to pattern cells; replicate tissues or full organs; create surgical replicas for planning, counseling, and training; and build medical device prototypes and prosthetics, and in numerous other applications. OBJECTIVE: To assess the impact of 3D printing for surgical planning, training and education, patient counseling, and costs in urology. EVIDENCE ACQUISITION: A systematic literature review was performed according to the Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses statement. EVIDENCE SYNTHESIS: After screening, 4026 publications were identified for detailed review, of which 52 were included in the present systematic review: two papers reported the use of 3D-printing modeling for adrenal cancer, two papers for urethrovesical anastomosis, 24 papers for kidney transplantation and renal cancer, 13 papers for prostate cancer, seven papers for pelvicalyceal system procedures, and three papers for ureteral stents, and three papers reported 3D-printed biological scaffold development. CONCLUSIONS: Three-dimensional printing shows revolutionary potentials for patient counseling, pre- and intraoperative surgical planning, and education in urology. Together with the "patient-tailored" presurgical planning, it puts the basis for 3D-bioprinting technology. Although costs and "production times" remain the major concerns, this kind of technology may represent a step forward to meet patients' and surgeons' expectations. PATIENT SUMMARY: Three-dimensional printing has been used for several purposes to help the surgeon better understand anatomy, sharpen his/her skills, and guide the identification of lesions and their relationship with surrounding structures. It can be used for surgical planning, education, and patient counseling to improve the decision-making process.