Understanding the prevalence and distribution of fellowship trained female and male genitourinary reconstruction and men's health/andrology academic faculty in the United States.

Abstract

We evaluated the prevalence, distribution, and specialist to population ratio of male and female reconstruction and andrology/prosthetics faculty within United States urologic training programs. Our objective was to help determine the current need/demand for reconstructive fellowship trained faculty for necessary clinical exposure during residency in the midst of a nationwide residency expansion. All non-military urology residency programs were evaluated. Programs were sorted into their American Urologic Association Sections and websites were analyzed for evidence of fellowship training and/or clinical expertise/interest: (I) male genitourinary reconstruction (MGR); (II) female genitourinary reconstruction (FGR) and (III) infertility/andrology/men's health (AMH). The 2020 US Census data was used to determine specialist to population ratios by sections. Of 137 evaluated programs, FGR had the highest percentage of fellowship-trained faculty (76%) followed by AMH (66%) and MGR (61%). Clinical/surgical interest was noted in pelvic organ prolapse (88%), inflatable penile prosthesis (79%) and urethral stricture disease (75%). Over 10% of training programs had two or more faculty with MGR, FGR and AMH fellowship training. Significant geographic variation amongst academic programs exists with the South and Southeastern parts of the US being relatively underserved, both in percentage of programs with fellowship-trained faculty, and by faculty per 1,000,000 inhabitants. The majority of US urology residencies have faculty with fellowship training and/or stated clinical interest in MGR, FGR and AMH. Still, many programs remain without these faculty while others have two or more in their respective fields. The geographic trends noted here have both educational and recruitment significance.