Eighteen-Year Review of Resident Performance on the American Urological Association In-Service Examination

• Published in: Urology (Ridgewood, N.J.) N.J.), 2020-03, Vol.137, p.33-37
• Main Authors: El-Arabi, Ahmad M., Niu, Sida, Chase, Brian, Sherman, Garth, Mirza, Moben, Thrasher, J. Brantley, Nangia, Ajay K.
• Format: Article
• Language: English
• Subjects: Clinical Competence; Internship and Residency - trends; Societies, Medical; Time Factors; United States; Urology - education
• ISSN: 0090-4295; 1527-9995
• DOI: 10.1016/j.urology.2019.10.027

To analyze national performance trends of urology residents on the American Urological Association In-Service Examination (ISE) over the last 18 years. Trends in the national averages on the in-service examination for each year of residency training were collected and analyzed between the years 2000 and 2017. Mean and standard error were calculated for examination performance for each year of residency. Subject-specific performance was also determined for each given year of residency. Regression analysis was used to model trends in performance as a function of residency year. There was no significant difference in examination performance over 18 years with respect to each specific residency year. While there was an overall improvement in total scores with each advancing training year, year-over-year improvement in total examination performance began to plateau after Uro-2. Largest absolute performance improvement from Pre-Uro to Uro-4 were in subjects of “Urinary Diversion,” “Obstructive Uropathy” and “Neoplasm.” Scores in “Sexual Dysfunction, Endocrinopathy, Fertility Problems”, and “Congenital Anomalies, Embryology, Anatomy” were consistently the lowest regardless of year of training. No significant change in performance was seen in each given year of residency over the 18-year period. There was improvement in overall scores as residents progressed through training, but scores plateaued after Uro-2 with minimal improvement between Uro-3 and Uro-4 years. Difference in subject scores suggests a disparity in educational focus in residency curricula and a potential need to improve the teaching strategies for subjects that tested less well throughout residency training.