Are We Exposing Urology Residents to Rural or Non-metropolitan Practice? A Program Director Survey of Urology Residency Training.

Publication/Presentation Date

5-1-2026

Abstract

OBJECTIVE: To determine how many urology residency training programs offer rural rotations. Given that 60% of US counties do not have a urologist and medium-range projected urology workforce shortages, we endeavored to understand this and the barriers and interest in developing such rotations.

METHODS: A collaboration with the American Urological Association Leadership program and the Society of Academic Urology, produced a survey of urology residency program directors to assess current rural training opportunities, barriers, impact on residents, and desire for alternative training tracks.

RESULTS: Of the 151 training programs that received the survey, 64 responded (42.3%). Currently, 18.75% have a non-metropolitan resident experience, while 75% occur in the PGY-3 or 4 training year and range from 2-12 weeks. Case mix is broad encompassing nearly all aspects of urology. The most common barrier was managing call schedules (25%) and resident salary support (21%) during these rotations.

CONCLUSION: Nearly 1 in 6 responding programs have a non-metropolitan urology resident training rotation. Program directors perceive these to offer high value to trainees, though barriers to greater implementation exist. Such a rotation may help improve urology workforce distribution.

Volume

211

First Page

129

Last Page

131

ISSN

1527-9995

Disciplines

Business Administration, Management, and Operations | Health and Medical Administration | Management Sciences and Quantitative Methods

PubMedID

41713615

Department(s)

Administration and Leadership

Document Type

Article

Link to Full Text

Share

COinS