|Authors||Spencer ES, Deal AM, Pruthi NR, Gonzalez CM, Kirby EW, Langston J, McKenna PH, McKibben MJ, Nielsen ME, Raynor MC, Wallen EM, Woods ME, Pruthi RS, Smith AB|
|Journal||J. Urol. Volume: 195 Issue: 2 Pages: 450-5|
|Publish Date||2016 Feb|
The proportion of women in urology has increased from less than 0.5% in 1981 to 10% today. Furthermore, 33% of students matching in urology are now female. In this analysis we characterize the female workforce in urology compared to that of men with regard to income, workload and job satisfaction.We collaborated with the American Urological Association to survey its domestic membership of practicing urologists regarding socioeconomic, workforce and quality of life issues. A total of 6,511 survey invitations were sent via e-mail. The survey consisted of 26 questions and took approximately 13 minutes to complete. Linear regression models were used to evaluate bivariable and multivariable associations with job satisfaction and compensation.A total of 848 responses (660 or 90% male, 73 or 10% female) were collected for a total response rate of 13%. On bivariable analysis female urologists were younger (p <0.0001), more likely to be fellowship trained (p=0.002), worked in academics (p=0.008), were less likely to be self-employed and worked fewer hours (p=0.03) compared to male urologists. On multivariable analysis female gender was a significant predictor of lower compensation (p=0.001) when controlling for work hours, call frequency, age, practice setting and type, fellowship training and advance practice provider employment. Adjusted salaries among female urologists were $76,321 less than those of men. Gender was not a predictor of job satisfaction.Female urologists are significantly less compensated compared to male urologists after adjusting for several factors likely contributing to compensation. There is no difference in job satisfaction between male and female urologists.
|Full Text||Full text available on PubMed Central|