Mp34-10 "Urology, Can You Hold?": Quantifying the Availability of on-Call Urologists in Washington State

This is the authors' abstract. We don't add key points for this paper.

You have accessJournal of UrologyDiversity, Equity & Inclusion: Health Equity & Outcomes II (MP34)1 May 2024MP34-10 "UROLOGY, CAN YOU HOLD?": QUANTIFYING THE AVAILABILITY OF ON-CALL UROLOGISTS IN WASHINGTON STATE Cale T. Hinkle, Kenneth A. Berger, Matthew A. Uhlman, and Kathleen Kieran Cale T. HinkleCale T. Hinkle , Kenneth A. BergerKenneth A. Berger , Matthew A. UhlmanMatthew A. Uhlman , and Kathleen KieranKathleen Kieran View All Author Informationhttps://doi.org/10.1097/01.JU.0001008876.78012.90.10AboutPDF ToolsAdd to favoritesDownload CitationsTrack CitationsPermissionsReprints ShareFacebookLinked InTwitterEmail Abstract INTRODUCTION AND OBJECTIVE: Burnout is endemic in practicing urologists, with responsibilities related to call coverage one of the most frequently cited factors. However, objective data on call coverage are lacking. We undertook this study to describe the current state of adult and pediatric emergency room coverage in Washington State. METHODS: We contacted all 87 hospitals in Washington State and inquired about whether they had a urologist on-call, and if so, how often and whether pediatric emergency services were available. Call coverage at rural and urban hospitals was compared. RESULTS: We were able to contact 86/87 (98.9%) of hospitals statewide. Three hospitals served exclusively pediatric patients; all three hospitals had daily urology call coverage. Of the remaining 83 hospitals, 39 (47.0%) never had a urologist on call, and five (6.0%) had urologists available for phone consultation only, but not in-person evaluation. Two of the hospitals with no urology call coverage had urologists employed by the hospital. Twenty-nine (34.9%) hospitals had daily call coverage for urology, and ten hospitals (12.0%) had coverage for part (range: 4-20 days) of the month. Hospitals located west of the Cascade Mountains were almost five times as likely to have daily urology call coverage (6/36) compared with hospitals east of the Cascades (6/36 [16.7%] vs. 23/47 [48.9%]; OR=4.79, 95% CI: 1.68-13.64, p=0.003). Only four (4.8%) non-pediatric hospitals provided call coverage for pediatric emergencies such as testicular torsion; all of these hospitals were east of the Cascade mountains (4/36 [11.1%] vs. 0/47 (0%); OR=13.2, 95% CI: 0.68-252.7, p=0.09). Most (26/34) urban hospitals had daily urology call coverage, compared with a minority (4/47) of rural hospitals (OR=34.9, 95% CI: 9.6-127.6, p<0.0001). Most (30/34, 88.2%) urban hospitals had at least some in-person coverage, compared with 11/47 (23.4%) rural hospitals (OR=24.5, 95% CI: 7.1-85.1, p<0.0001). CONCLUSIONS: A minority of hospitals in Washington State have urologists on call for emergencies. The lack of call coverage disproportionately affects patients living in rural areas and the east side of the state. These data highlight the ongoing need to support urologic practice outside of rural areas, as well as potential educational opportunities for patients, families, and providers. Download PPT Source of Funding: None © 2024 by American Urological Association Education and Research, Inc.FiguresReferencesRelatedDetails Volume 211Issue 5SMay 2024Page: e574 Advertisement Copyright & Permissions© 2024 by American Urological Association Education and Research, Inc.Metrics Author Information Cale T. Hinkle More articles by this author Kenneth A. Berger More articles by this author Matthew A. Uhlman More articles by this author Kathleen Kieran More articles by this author Expand All Advertisement PDF downloadLoading ...