Doctor Retention or Migration: From Ireland to the World? Comment on "Doctor Retention: A Cross-sectional Study of How Ireland Has Been Losing the Battle"

The recent study of prospective doctor migration and retention suggests that more than half of junior doctors intend to migrate from Ireland. While intent is not necessarily outcome, such intentions match similar survey results in Ireland and elsewhere. The rationale for migration is described as a function of difficult workplace circumstances (notably long hours and mismanagement). Lifestyle factors may however also be important for both migration and significant levels of return migration. These are related to family formation, and to an established culture of migration, that has contributed to a considerable circularity of mobility and migration, primarily between Anglophone countries. International migration may also have unspecified regional variations and impacts. Migration has taken a similar form for half a century and longstanding policies to constrain its more damaging impacts have been conspicuously unsuccessful yet responses remain urgent.

A global snapshot of endourology residency training

Background: Urology has become more complex over the last decades with surgical sophisticated technologies such as endoscopy, laparoscopy and robotic surgery. As these minimally invasive methods gain popularity throughout the world, this has led in some countries to a serious training gap as compared to other countries, and between generations of surgeons within national training systems. There is a huge heterogeneity in urological training between countries, whether developed or developing. This paper attempts to shed some light onto global urological training, comparing a significant number of various national systems, and to outline global tendencies in urological training. It will enable interested readers to see where their own system stands in international comparison, and hopefully enable them to identify training needs to achieve global quality standards. Materials and methods: This is a questionnaire-based assessment which was sent to 240 members of U-merge from 62 countries. In addition, there is ample literature on the requirements of structured training programs and assessments, and we have tried to briefly outline the key points in this paper. Results: We received responses from 32 countries Urology residency training is hugely heterogenous between countries. Only 44% of nations use a structured training program with assessments. Others use the Halstedian apprenticeship approach. Notably, some developing countries do use modern teaching and assessment methods, whereas some developed countries still use the outmoded apprenticeship model. For the interested reader, results have been tabled in detail, and training systems described country by country. Conclusions: Our results have shown a huge heterogeneity in quality urology training between countries and within continents. In systems without national structure of training, it can be assumed that such differences exist even between hospitals/ training institutions. There is no doubt in times of globalization with resident and doctor migration and exchanges that training needs structure and standardization. The still huge gap in developing countries to catch up and be able to afford latest surgical and learning technologies need to be addressed with the help of responsible outreach programs.