Objectives To evaluate the need for structured feedback in urological residency training, we compared two assessment tools—Global Rating Scale (GRS) and Global Assessment of Urological Endoscopic Skills (GAUES)—during the 2024 Endo-Workshop of the German Society of Residents in Urology (GeSRU). Methods The workshop included simulation training on ureterorenoscopy (URS), transurethral resection of bladder (TURB), and prostate (TURP). Feedback was provided using GRS and GAUES. An online survey assessed the need for structured feedback. Descriptive statistics and Spearman correlation were used. Results Among 15 participants, 53% were female, and 60% were early-stage residents. All expressed a desire for feedback, though only 73% had previously received unstructured feedback. Mean scores on GRS were 26 (URS), 28 (TURB), and 25 (TURP); on GAUES: 32, 37, and 33 (max 58). GRS and GAUES scores correlated positively (URS: ρ=0.85; TURB: 0.5; TURP: 0.54). Post-workshop, 93% rated structured feedback as helpful. Most participants found GAUES (86%) and GRS (79%) specific and useful for training. Conclusion Structured assessments like GRS and GAUES show strong potential to improve endourological training. GAUES demonstrates value as a task-specific tool. Continuous evaluation of such tools is essential for high-quality surgical education and patient care.
Kaulfuß et al. (Mon,) studied this question.