Objective To describe the prevalence and predictors of burnout in USA and European urology residents, as although the rate of burnout in urologists is high and associated with severe negative sequelae, the extent and predictors of burnout in urology trainees remains poorly understood. Subjects and methods An anonymous 32‐question survey of urology trainees across the USA and four European countries, analysing personal, programme, and institutional factors, was conducted. Burnout was assessed using the validated abridged Maslach Burnout Inventory. Univariate analysis and multivariable logistic regression models assessed drivers of burnout in the two cohorts. Results Overall, 40% of participants met the criteria for burnout as follows: Portugal (68%), Italy (49%), USA (38%), Belgium (36%), and France (26%). Response rates were: USA, 20.9%; Italy, 45.2%; Portugal, 30.5%; France, 12.5%; and Belgium, 9.4%. Burnout was not associated with gender or level of training. In both cohorts, work–life balance (WLB) dissatisfaction was associated with increased burnout (odds ratio [OR] 4.5, P < 0.001), whilst non‐medical reading (OR 0.6, P = 0.001) and structured mentorship (OR 0.4, P = 0.002) were associated with decreased burnout risk. Lack of access to mental health services was associated with burnout in the USA only (OR 3.5, P = 0.006), whilst more weekends on‐call was associated with burnout in Europe only (OR 8.3, P = 0.033). In both cohorts, burned out residents were more likely to not choose a career in urology again (USA 54% vs 19%, P < 0.001; Europe 43% vs 25%, P = 0.047). Conclusion In this study of USA and European urology residents, we found high rates of burnout on both continents. Despite regional differences in the predictors of burnout, awareness of the unique institutional drivers may help inform directions of future interventions.

Introduction The Spies™ system (Karl-Storz®) was introduced into digital ureteroscopy to improve endoscopic vision. To date, there is no data to either indicate which of the Spies modalities is better for improving diagnosis and treatment procedures, nor to compare the modalities in terms of image quality. The aim of this study was to evaluate and compare the image quality of five Spies™ modalities (SM) to the standard white light in an in-vitro model.Materials and Methods Two standardized grids and 3 stones of different composition were recorded in white light and the 5SM (Clara, Chroma, Clara+Chroma), Spectra A and B) using 4 standardized aqueous scenarios. Twelve templates were done in order to simultaneously compare the same objective in the different modalities. Six urologists, five medical students, five urology residents, and five persons not involved with urology evaluated each video on a scale of 1 (very bad) to 5 (very good).Results Comparing white light to SM, subjects scored better the quality of Clara and Clara+Chroma than white light (p=0.0139 and p<0.05) and scored worse Spectra A and B (p=0.0005 and p=0.0023)). When comparing Clara to the other SM, it was ranked equivalent to Clara+Chroma (p=0.67) and obtained a higher rank than Chroma, Spectra A and B (p<0.05, p=0.0001 and p=0.0001). In the multivariate analysis mean scores were higher among urologists.Conclusion In all analyzed scenarios, the subjects ranked Clara and Clara+Chroma as the modalities with better image quality compared to white light.

In terms of quality of vision and water flow, the FC Isiris α is comparable to the other digital FC tested. Field of view is narrower. The results displayed a valid alternative to the standard procedure for DJ removal.