YouTube as a potential training method for laparoscopic cholecystectomy.
10.4174/astr.2015.89.2.92
- Author:
Jun Suh LEE
1
;
Ho Seok SEO
;
Tae Ho HONG
Author Information
1. Department of Surgery, Seoul St. Mary's Hospital, The Catholic University of Korea College of Medicine, Seoul, Korea. gshth@catholic.ac.kr
- Publication Type:Original Article
- Keywords:
YouTube;
Gallbladder;
Laparoscopic cholecystectomy
- MeSH:
Cholecystectomy, Laparoscopic*;
Demography;
Gallbladder
- From:Annals of Surgical Treatment and Research
2015;89(2):92-97
- CountryRepublic of Korea
- Language:English
-
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.
