Educational quality of YouTube videos on external versus endoscopic dacryocystorhinostomy surgery Eksternal ve endoskopik dakriyosistorinostomi cerrahisinde YouTube videolarının eğitim kalitesi
Pamukkale Medical Journal, cilt.16, sa.1, ss.13-22, 2023 (Scopus, TRDizin)
- Yayın Türü: Makale / Tam Makale
- Cilt numarası: 16 Sayı: 1
- Basım Tarihi: 2023
- Doi Numarası: 10.31362/patd.1098531
- Dergi Adı: Pamukkale Medical Journal
- Derginin Tarandığı İndeksler: Scopus, TR DİZİN (ULAKBİM)
- Sayfa Sayıları: ss.13-22
- Anahtar Kelimeler: endoscopic dacryocystorhinostomy, external dacryocystorhinostomy, LAP-VEGaS video assessment tool, nasolacrimal duct obstructions, YouTube
- Açık Arşiv Koleksiyonu: AVESİS Açık Erişim Koleksiyonu
- Sağlık Bilimleri Üniversitesi Adresli: Evet
Özet
Purpose: To evaluate whether there is a difference in surgical training quality between endoscopic and external dacryocystorhinostomy (DCR) surgery videos on YouTube with the Laparoscopic Surgery Video Training Guide (LAP-VEGaS) video evaluation tool. Matherials and methods: A comprehensive search was carried out on YouTube, using the following terms “DCR, External Dacryocystorhinostomy, Endoscopic Dacryocystorhinostomy''. Videos with 100 or more views were recorded. The number of views, age, number of likes, number of dislikes, number of comments, length, type of surgery, view ratio, like ratio, viewer interaction, and video power index were recorded. Two researchers independently assessed the videos for surgery educational quality according to LAP-VEGaS video assessment tool. Results: After exclusion criteria, 74 out of a total of 108 videos were included in the study (27: external DCR, 47: endoscopic DSR). After the LAP-VEGaS evaluation, 30 (40.5%) of the videos were found to be of high quality and 44 (59.5%) were of low quality. External DCR videos were statistically significantly more high-quality videos than endoscopic videos (p=0.046). The average LAP- VEGaS score of external DCR videos was 10.65±2.98, and the mean LAP-VEGaS score of endoscopic DCR videos was 8.44±3.70, and the difference between them was statistically significant (p=0.009). Videos performed by ophthalmologists are statistically significantly higher quality videos according to LAP- VEGaS video assessment tool analysis (p=0.017). Concerning the selection of low and high quality videos, there was a significant agreement between two observers (kappa score 0.775). Conclusions: Most of the DCR videos on YouTube are significantly lacking in case presentations, treatment options, and intraoperative and postoperative complications. In the future, we think that evaluating surgical videos on open access platforms such as YouTube with standard guidelines before they are published, and going through a review process may help increase the educational value of video materials.