Ann Surg Treat Res.  2015 Aug;89(2):92-97. 10.4174/astr.2015.89.2.92.

YouTube as a potential training method for laparoscopic cholecystectomy

• Lee JS
• Seo HS
• Hong TH

• KMID: 2166977
• DOI: http://doi.org/10.4174/astr.2015.89.2.92

Abstract

PURPOSE
The purpose of this study was to analyze the educational quality of laparoscopic cholecystectomy (LC) videos accessible on YouTube, one of the most important sources of internet-based medical information.
METHODS
The keyword 'laparoscopic cholecystectomy' was used to search on YouTube and the first 100 videos were analyzed. Among them, 27 videos were excluded and 73 videos were included in the study. An arbitrary score system for video quality, devised from existing LC guidelines, were used to evaluate the quality of the videos. Video demographics were analyzed by the quality and source of the video. Correlation analysis was performed.
RESULTS
When analyzed by video quality, 11 (15.1%) were evaluated as 'good', 40 (54.8%) were 'moderate', and 22 (30.1%) were 'poor', and there were no differences in length, views per day, or number of likes, dislikes, and comments. When analyzed by source, 27 (37.0%) were uploaded by primary centers, 20 (27.4%) by secondary centers, 15 (20.5%) by tertiary centers, 5 (6.8%) by academic institutions, and 6 (8.2%) by commercial institutions. The mean score of the tertiary center group (6.0 +/- 2.0) was significantly higher than the secondary center group (3.9 +/- 1.4, P = 0.001). The video score had no correlation with views per day or number of likes.
CONCLUSION
Many LC videos are accessible on YouTube with varying quality. Videos uploaded by tertiary centers showed the highest educational value. This discrepancy in video quality was not recognized by viewers. More videos with higher quality need to be uploaded, and an active filtering process is necessary.

Keyword

YouTube; Gallbladder; Laparoscopic cholecystectomy

MeSH Terms

Cholecystectomy, Laparoscopic*
Demography
Gallbladder

Reference

1. Web 2.0 [Internet]. San Francisco (CA): Wikimedia Foundation Inc.;c2015. cited 2014 Apr 3. Available from: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Web_2.0.

2. Sorensen JA, Pusz MD, Brietzke SE. YouTube as an information source for pediatric adenotonsillectomy and ear tube surgery. Int J Pediatr Otorhinolaryngol. 2014; 78:65–70.

3. Strychowsky JE, Nayan S, Farrokhyar F, MacLean J. YouTube: a good source of information on pediatric tonsillectomy? Int J Pediatr Otorhinolaryngol. 2013; 77:972–975.

4. Tan ML, Kok K, Ganesh V, Thomas SS. Patient information on breast reconstruction in the era of the world wide web. A snapshot analysis of information available on youtube.com. Breast. 2014; 23:33–37.

5. Fischer J, Geurts J, Valderrabano V, Hugle T. Educational quality of YouTube videos on knee arthrocentesis. J Clin Rheumatol. 2013; 19:373–376.

6. Koya KD, Bhatia KR, Hsu JT, Bhatia AC. YouTube and the expanding role of videos in dermatologic surgery education. Semin Cutan Med Surg. 2012; 31:163–167.

7. Topps D, Helmer J, Ellaway R. YouTube as a platform for publishing clinical skills training videos. Acad Med. 2013; 88:192–197.

8. Yoo EH, Lee SY. The prevalence and risk factors for gallstone disease. Clin Chem Lab Med. 2009; 47:795–807.

9. Duncan CB, Riall TS. Evidence-based current surgical practice: calculous gallbladder disease. J Gastrointest Surg. 2012; 16:2011–2025.

10. Eikermann M, Siegel R, Broeders I, Dziri C, Fingerhut A, Gutt C, et al. Prevention and treatment of bile duct injuries during laparoscopic cholecystectomy: the clinical practice guidelines of the European Association for Endoscopic Surgery (EAES). Surg Endosc. 2012; 26:3003–3039.

11. Overby DW, Apelgren KN, Richardson W, Fanelli R. Society of American Gastrointestinal and Endoscopic Surgeons. SAGES guidelines for the clinical application of laparoscopic biliary tract surgery. Surg Endosc. 2010; 24:2368–2386.

12. Strasberg SM, Brunt LM. Rationale and use of the critical view of safety in laparoscopic cholecystectomy. J Am Coll Surg. 2010; 211:132–138.

13. Wauben LS, Goossens RH, van Eijk DJ, Lange JF. Evaluation of protocol uniformity concerning laparoscopic cholecystectomy in the Netherlands. World J Surg. 2008; 32:613–620.

14. Keelan J, Pavri-Garcia V, Tomlinson G, Wilson K. YouTube as a source of information on immunization: a content analysis. JAMA. 2007; 298:2482–2484.

15. Lee JS, Seo HS, Hong TH. YouTube as a source of patient information on gallstone disease. World J Gastroenterol. 2014; 20:4066–4070.

16. Ross S, Rosemurgy A, Albrink M, Choung E, Dapri G, Gallagher S, et al. Consensus statement of the consortium for LESS cholecystectomy. Surg Endosc. 2012; 26:2711–2716.

17. Li L, Tian J, Tian H, Sun R, Wang Q, Yang K. The efficacy and safety of different kinds of laparoscopic cholecystectomy: a network meta analysis of 43 randomized controlled trials. PLoS One. 2014; 9:e90313.

18. Gurusamy KS, Vaughan J, Rossi M, Davidson BR. Fewer-than-four ports versus four ports for laparoscopic cholecystectomy. Cochrane Database Syst Rev. 2014; 2:CD007109.

19. Madathil KC, Rivera-Rodriguez AJ, Greenstein JS, Gramopadhye AK. Healthcare information on YouTube: a systematic review. Health Informatics J. 2014; 03. 25. [Epub]. DOI: 10.1177/1460458213512220.

20. Sampson M, Cumber J, Li C, Pound CM, Fuller A, Harrison D. A systematic review of methods for studying consumer health YouTube videos, with implications for systematic reviews. PeerJ. 2013; 1:e147.