Burak Arslan1, Serkan Gönültaş2, Ersin Gökmen2, Oktay Özman2, Özkan Onuk3, Gökhan Yazıcı2, Taha Göv2, Enver Özdemir2. 1. Department of Urology, Istanbul Gaziosmanpasa Taksim Training and Research Hospital, Karayolları Str. No: 621 Gaziosmanpaşa, Istanbul, Turkey. drbarslan@yahoo.com. 2. Department of Urology, Istanbul Gaziosmanpasa Taksim Training and Research Hospital, Karayolları Str. No: 621 Gaziosmanpaşa, Istanbul, Turkey. 3. Department of Urology, Yeni Yüzyıl University, Istanbul, Turkey.
Abstract
PURPOSE: Our aim was to assess the educational quality of the YouTube video content related to laparoscopic and robotic radical prostatectomy (RP). METHODS: An objective scoring tool named as Prostatectomy Assessment and Competency Evaluation (PACE) score was used to measure and quantify seven critical steps in RP including bladder drop, preparation of the prostate, bladder neck dissection, posterior/seminal vesicle dissection, neurovascular bundle preservation, apical dissection, and urethro-vesical anastomosis. A five-point scale was used for grading the seven steps, where a score of 1 and 5 represented the lowest and ideal performance, respectively. Additionally, descriptive statistics including the upload time, video length, view count, number of comments, likes, and dislikes were all recorded. RESULTS: Of the 1688 videos (551 from laparoscopic RP, 567 from robotic RP, and 570 from robot-assisted RP), 226 videos were analyzed after excluding duplicate and irrelevant videos. Robotic/robot-assisted RP videos were found to be statistically longer than laparoscopic RP videos (p = 0.016). The PACE score of urethro-vesical anastomosis step in robotic RP videos was statistically higher than laparoscopic RP videos (p = 0.021). A weak but significant positive correlation between the video length and total PACE score (rho: 0.51; p = 0.04 for laparoscopic RP and rho: 0.43; p = 0.03 for robotic/robot-assisted RP) was found. A weak but positive correlation was also determined between number of likes and total PACE score (rho: 0.39; p = 0.02) for robotic/robot-assisted RP videos. CONCLUSIONS: Although YouTube website includes high-quality videos for both laparoscopic and robotic/robot-assisted RP, there is no objective parameter to predict the educational quality of the videos.
PURPOSE: Our aim was to assess the educational quality of the YouTube video content related to laparoscopic and robotic radical prostatectomy (RP). METHODS: An objective scoring tool named as Prostatectomy Assessment and Competency Evaluation (PACE) score was used to measure and quantify seven critical steps in RP including bladder drop, preparation of the prostate, bladder neck dissection, posterior/seminal vesicle dissection, neurovascular bundle preservation, apical dissection, and urethro-vesical anastomosis. A five-point scale was used for grading the seven steps, where a score of 1 and 5 represented the lowest and ideal performance, respectively. Additionally, descriptive statistics including the upload time, video length, view count, number of comments, likes, and dislikes were all recorded. RESULTS: Of the 1688 videos (551 from laparoscopic RP, 567 from robotic RP, and 570 from robot-assisted RP), 226 videos were analyzed after excluding duplicate and irrelevant videos. Robotic/robot-assisted RP videos were found to be statistically longer than laparoscopic RP videos (p = 0.016). The PACE score of urethro-vesical anastomosis step in robotic RP videos was statistically higher than laparoscopic RP videos (p = 0.021). A weak but significant positive correlation between the video length and total PACE score (rho: 0.51; p = 0.04 for laparoscopic RP and rho: 0.43; p = 0.03 for robotic/robot-assisted RP) was found. A weak but positive correlation was also determined between number of likes and total PACE score (rho: 0.39; p = 0.02) for robotic/robot-assisted RP videos. CONCLUSIONS: Although YouTube website includes high-quality videos for both laparoscopic and robotic/robot-assisted RP, there is no objective parameter to predict the educational quality of the videos.
Authors: M Abdessater; M Rouprêt; V Misrai; X Matillon; B Gondran-Tellier; L Freton; M Vallée; I Dominique; M Felber; Z-E Khene; E Fortier; F Lannes; C Michiels; T Grevez; N Szabla; J Boustany; F Bardet; K Kaulanjan; E Seizilles de Mazancourt; G Ploussard; U Pinar; B Pradere Journal: Prog Urol Date: 2020-04-23 Impact factor: 0.915