Show simple item record

dc.contributor.authorBorque-Fernando, Ángel
dc.contributor.authorRedondo-Redondo, Cristina
dc.contributor.authorOrna-Montesinos, Concepción
dc.contributor.authorEsteban, Luis Mariano
dc.contributor.authorDenizon Arranz, Sophia
dc.contributor.authorTejero-Sánchez, Arlanza
dc.contributor.authorGarcía-Ruiz, Ramiro
dc.contributor.authorSanchez-Zalabardo, José Manuel
dc.contributor.authorGracia-Romero, Jesús
dc.contributor.authorMonreal-Híjar, Antonio
dc.contributor.authorGil-Sanz, María Jesús
dc.contributor.authorSanz, Gerardo
dc.contributor.authorSanz Pozo, Mónica
dc.contributor.authorRomero-Fernández, Francisco
dc.date.accessioned2022-03-03T12:05:06Z
dc.date.available2022-03-03T12:05:06Z
dc.date.issued2021
dc.identifier.issn1660-4601spa
dc.identifier.urihttp://hdl.handle.net/10641/2876
dc.description.abstractBackground: Higher education training in Medicine has considerably evolved in recent years. One of its main goals has been to ensure the training of students as future adequately qualified general practitioners (GPs). Tools need to be developed to evaluate and improve the teaching of Urology at the undergraduate level. Our objective is to identify the knowledge and skills needed in Urology for the real clinical practice of GPs. Methods: An anonymous self-administered survey was carried out among GPs of Primary Care and Emergencies which sought to evaluate urological knowledge and necessary urological skills. The results of the survey were exported and descriptive statistics were performed using IBM SPSS Statistics version 19.0. Results and limitations: A total of 127 answers were obtained, in which ‘Urological infections’, ‘Renal colic’, ‘PSA levels and screening for prostate cancer’, ‘Benign prostatic hyperplasia’, ‘Hematuria’, ‘Scrotal pain’, ‘Prostate cancer diagnosis’, ‘Bladder cancer diagnosis’, ‘Urinary incontinence’, and ‘Erectile dysfunction’ were rated as Very high or High formative requirements (>75%). Regarding urological skills, ‘Abdominal examination’, ‘Interpretation of urinalysis’, ‘Digital rectal examination’, ‘Genital examination’, and ‘Transurethral catheterization’ were assessed as needing Very high or High training in more than 80% of the surveys. The relevance of urological pathology in clinical practice was viewed as Very high or High in more than 80% of the responses. Conclusions: This study has shown helpful results to establish a differentiated prioritization of urological knowledge and skills in Primary Care and Emergencies. Efforts should be aimed at optimizing the teaching in Urology within the Degree of Medicine which consistently ensures patients’ proper care by future GPsspa
dc.language.isoengspa
dc.publisherInternational Journal of Environmental Research and Public Healthspa
dc.rightsAtribución-NoComercial-SinDerivadas 3.0 España*
dc.rights.urihttp://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc-nd/3.0/es/*
dc.subjectUrological training needsspa
dc.subjectUrological knowledge and skillsspa
dc.subjectPractitioners viewsspa
dc.subjectUndergraduate medical degreespa
dc.subjectCurriculum developmentspa
dc.titleTeaching Urology to Undergraduates: A Prospective Survey of What General Practitioners Need to Know.spa
dc.typearticlespa
dc.description.versionpost-printspa
dc.rights.accessRightsopenAccessspa
dc.description.extent1136 KBspa
dc.identifier.doi10.3390/ijerph182111687spa
dc.relation.publisherversionhttps://www.mdpi.com/1660-4601/18/21/11687spa


Files in this item

FilesSizeFormatView
ijerph-18-11687 (1).pdf1.108MbPDFView/Open

This item appears in the following Collection(s)

Show simple item record

Atribución-NoComercial-SinDerivadas 3.0 España
Except where otherwise noted, this item's license is described as Atribución-NoComercial-SinDerivadas 3.0 España