Search

Objectives: The transition from the first year of urology residency (PGY1) to the second year (PGY2) is overwhelming for most residents due to their sudden involvement in decision-making regarding urology patients after only general surgical training during PGY1. Therefore, this study tested the effectiveness of a newly developed one-day Preparatory Urology (Prep-U) training course among second-year urology residents in Saudi Arabia. Materials and methods: Urology residents from different regions participated in our Prep-U course over the 3-year study period at King Abdulaziz Medical City, Riyadh, Saudi Arabia. Two surveys were given to all participants following completion of the course and 9 months after urology training (PGY2). Our outcomes included participants' satisfaction with the course, its content, and speakers' experience. Results: A total of 117 completed the first survey, a response rate of 90.7%. Most (90.6%) were satisfied with the course overall, consistent with their satisfaction with the content (94.0%) and speakers' experience (94.8%). The majority (95.7%) felt that the course added value to their urology training. During the 9-month assessment period, 92 respondents (85.9%) found the knowledge acquired during the course very helpful, 72.8% reported that the course helped them maintain their mental wellbeing, and 39.11% found the skills acquired from the course very helpful on beginning urology training. Conclusion: A significant need exists for an annual urology preparatory course before the beginning of training. This will have a positive outcome on residents' training, confidence, and mental wellbeing. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Purpose: This study evaluates the satisfaction of urology residents with the Saudi Board of Urology (SBU) Training Program and identifies areas of weakness and strength to improve the educational environment, surgical competency, and overall satisfaction of urology residents with the program. Methods: We administered an electronic self-made questionnaire that included two sections. One comprised demographic data (age, gender, weight, height, marital status, level of training, city of training, and center of training), while the other concerned SBU evaluation (satisfaction with different aspects of training, such as ways of assessment, mentors' feedback, surgical competency, research, and strengths and weaknesses of SBU). Results: The overall satisfaction of urology residency program was 28.8% while 44.2% of residents had a neutral response. The highest level of satisfaction with clinical and surgical practice was among graduates (56.9%) and Riyadh residents (45.1%). Furthermore, good work/life balance received the lowest level of satisfaction (5.2%) among senior residents, while good clinical experience received the highest level (62.7%) among the graduates. Residents reported a high exposure in endourology and pediatric urology, while transplant, reconstructive, and neurourology had the lowest exposure. Forty-two percent of respondents undertook research during their residency training, but most respondents (54%) did not publish any research papers during their training. Sixty-two percent of graduates felt that their training program did not prepare them adequately to perform well on the board examinations. Conclusion: Our results confirmed that satisfaction of residents with the urology program process is variable according to the city of training. Having high satisfaction level in some cities reflects the improvement of urology training program after restructuring. We identified new areas in need of improvement, namely lack of mentorship, clear and formal assessment process, and variation of training process between central and peripheral programs. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Objectives: To understand and report the perceived impact of the COVID-19 pandemic on radiology residents in Saudi Arabia with respect to their education, clinical activities, and personal well-being., Methods: The survey questionnaire was designed by a team of experts based on a review of the literature and was distributed electronically through the Saudi Commission for Health Specialties to residents registered in all radiology residency training programs in Saudi Arabia during the academic year 2019 to 2020. Categorical variables were presented as counts and percentage. Numerical variables were presented as mean and standard deviation if normally distributed. Chi-square testing was used to compare categorical variables with the perceived impact of the COVID-19 pandemic. Spearman correlation was used to correlate numerical variables at the level of significance p-value < 0.05., Results: A total of 109 residents completed the online survey during the study period, with a response rate of 32.2% (109/337). The mean age was 27.3 years (standard deviation, 1.86). The majority of respondents (71.5%, 78/109) reported either a severe or moderate negative impact on educational activities. Also, the majority (73.4%, 80/109) reported either a minimal or moderate negative impact on clinical activities. Residents training in the western province perceived a statistically higher negative impact on educational activities compared to their peers in other regions (p = 0.01). Residents in their second year of residency training perceived a statistically higher negative impact on their participation in clinical activities (p = 0.014). Less than half of the respondents (45.9%, 50/109) reported that they were redeployed to work in another department. The majority (80%, 40/50) reported a negative impact on their well-being., Conclusion: The majority of radiology residents in Saudi Arabia reported a negative impact of the COVID-19 pandemic on their education, clinical activities, and personal well-being. Our study also identified and explored some of the innovative solutions and strategies implemented by the training programs and the SCFHS to mitigate the negative effects on trainees., (Copyright © 2021 The Association of University Radiologists. Published by Elsevier Inc. All rights reserved.)

Purpose: To assess the satisfaction and competency of Saudi ophthalmology residents and compare their performance against International Council of Ophthalmology (ICO) standards. Methods: A cross-sectional web-based survey of senior ophthalmology residents (postgraduate years [PGY] 3-4) and recent graduates (from 2010 to 2015) assessed various aspects of training. The questionnaire was sent to the participants and was divided into 3 main domains: demographics, training program evaluation, and preparedness for board exams and clinical practice. Results: Out of the 145 invitees, 120 (82.8%) responded. Fifty percent of respondents reported an overall satisfaction with the program. Adequate clinical exposure was reported in most subspecialties except refraction and low vision rehabilitation with inadequate exposure reported by 55.8% and 95.8%, respectively. Surgical exposure was reported as adequate for phacoemulsification (58.3%) and strabismus surgery (68.3%) only. Eighty-nine percent of respondents reported performing less than 80 cases of phacoemulsification. Of the respondents who had graduated, most (89.7%) passed the final board exam at the first attempt. There were 73.5% of respondents who reported that residency training prepared them well for the board exam. Ongoing clinical and call duties were reported as having a negative impact on exam performance. Conclusions: Saudi ophthalmology residents demonstrate a high level of clinical competency. However, additional efforts should aim at improving surgical training to increase the level of satisfaction among residents and improve the quality of training to meet international standards. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

This study estimated whether continued programming of a highly specialized four-year dentistry residency training in Saudi Arabia was cost-beneficial. We utilized a purposive sampling to administer a survey to trainees in major cities. Additionally, we used publically available market information about general practitioners. We employed Benefit-Cost Analysis accounting approach as a conceptual framework. Using general practitioners as the base category, we grouped overall social analytical perspectives into resident trainees and rest of society. The residency program was cost-beneficial to trainees, realizing an estimated return of SR 4.07 per SR 1 invested. The overall societal return was SR 0.98 per SR 1 invested, slightly shy of a bang for the buck, in part because the public sector largely runs the training. Benefits included increased earnings and enhanced restorative dentistry skills accruing to trainees; increased charitable contributions and programming-related payments accruing to programs and the public; and practice-related payments accruing to governmental, professional, and insurance agencies. Rest of society, notably government underwrote much of the cost of programming. A sensitivity analysis revealed the results were robust to uncertainties in the data and estimation. Our findings offer evidence to evaluate whether continued residency training is cost-beneficial to trainees and potentially to overall society., (Copyright © 2018 The Authors. Published by Elsevier Ltd.. All rights reserved.)