[Is the surgical training of French urologists more effective than that of urologists in other European countries?].

Objective: To compare the level of surgical training of French interns with that of interns in other European countries.

Material And Methods: Between 2005 and 2006, an exhaustive questionnaire (www.esnz.net) was sent to 288 young urologists in 30 different European countries. Interns were classified into 3 groups: France (group 1, n = 28), Western Europe (group 2, n = 75) and Eastern Europe (group 3, n = 85). Items concerning surgical practice were analysed.

Results: The mean age of the interns was 30.8 years (25.7-35.8), 34.6 years (27.4-48.0) and 31.3 years (25.3-51.3) in groups 1 to 3, respectively. The mean number of months of urology training was 28 months (6-60), 44 months (6-72) and 37 months (2-120), respectively. The mean of weekly working time was 70 hours (40-90), 60 hours (35-90) and 65 hours (40-100). French interns were technically more at ease than interns in groups 2 or 3 for all surgical procedures (open, laparoscopic, endourological). Certain criteria were significantly (p < 0.05) associated with a better level of technical skills: the number of weekly working hours, the small number of interns per department, the diversity of internships, the use of the intern record and the presence of an active tutor

Conclusion: French interns appear to learn urological surgical procedures more easily than other European interns. However the scientific training of interns must also be evaluated in order to propose a global assessment system of urology training in Europe.