Literature DB >> 33616730

Video is better: why aren't we using it? A mixed-methods study of the barriers to routine procedural video recording and case review.

Laura Mazer1, Oliver Varban2, John R Montgomery2, Michael M Awad3, Allison Schulman4.   

Abstract

INTRODUCTION: Video-based case review for minimally invasive surgery is immensely valuable for education and quality improvement. Video review can improve technical performance, shorten the learning curve, disseminate new procedures, and improve learner satisfaction. Despite these advantages, it is underutilized in many institutions. So far, research has focused on the benefits of video, and there is relatively little information on barriers to routine utilization.
METHODS: A 36-question survey was developed on video-based case review and distributed to the SAGES email list. The survey included closed and open-ended questions. Numeric responses and Likert scales were compared with t-test; open-ended responses were reviewed qualitatively through rapid thematic analysis to identify themes and sub-themes.
RESULTS: 642 people responded to the survey for a response rate of 11%. 584 (91%) thought video would improve the quality of educational conferences. 435 qualitative responses on the value of video were analyzed, and benefits included (1) improved understanding, (2) increased objectivity, (3) better teaching, and (4) better audience engagement. Qualitative comments regarding specific barriers to recording and editing case video identified challenges at all stages of the process, from (1) the decision to record a case, (2) starting the recording in the OR, (3) transferring and storing files, and (4) editing the file. Each step had its own specific challenges.
CONCLUSION: Minimally invasive surgeons want to increase their utilization of video-based case review, but there are multiple practical challenges to overcome. Understanding these barriers is essential in order to increase use of video for education and quality improvement.
© 2021. The Author(s), under exclusive licence to Springer Science+Business Media, LLC part of Springer Nature.

Entities:  

Keywords:  Education; Implementation; Quality improvement; Survey; Video recording

Mesh:

Year:  2021        PMID: 33616730     DOI: 10.1007/s00464-021-08375-4

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  Surg Endosc        ISSN: 0930-2794            Impact factor:   4.584


  9 in total

1.  Low-fat/high-fibre diet prehabilitation improves anastomotic healing via the microbiome: an experimental model.

Authors:  S K Hyoju; C Adriaansens; K Wienholts; A Sharma; R Keskey; W Arnold; D van Dalen; N Gottel; N Hyman; A Zaborin; J Gilbert; H van Goor; O Zaborina; J C Alverdy
Journal:  Br J Surg       Date:  2019-12-26       Impact factor: 6.939

2.  Hawthorne Effect Should Be Controlled for in Quality Control Studies-Reply.

Authors:  Floyd W van de Graaf; Johan F Lange
Journal:  JAMA Surg       Date:  2019-10-01       Impact factor: 14.766

Review 3.  The role of technology in minimally invasive surgery: state of the art, recent developments and future directions.

Authors:  Michele Tonutti; Daniel S Elson; Guang-Zhong Yang; Ara W Darzi; Mikael H Sodergren
Journal:  Postgrad Med J       Date:  2016-11-22       Impact factor: 2.401

4.  The Utilization of Video Technology in Surgical Education: A Systematic Review.

Authors:  Jason L Green; Visakha Suresh; Peter Bittar; Leila Ledbetter; Suhail K Mithani; Alexander Allori
Journal:  J Surg Res       Date:  2018-10-26       Impact factor: 2.192

5.  A randomized controlled study to evaluate the role of video-based coaching in training laparoscopic skills.

Authors:  Pritam Singh; Rajesh Aggarwal; Muaaz Tahir; Philip H Pucher; Ara Darzi
Journal:  Ann Surg       Date:  2015-05       Impact factor: 12.969

6.  Ethical Recommendations for Video Recording in the Operating Room.

Authors:  Jake G Prigoff; Marc Sherwin; Celia M Divino
Journal:  Ann Surg       Date:  2016-07       Impact factor: 12.969

7.  Association of Adjuvant Chemotherapy With Survival in Patients With Stage II or III Gastric Cancer.

Authors:  Yuming Jiang; Tuanjie Li; Xiaoling Liang; Yanfeng Hu; Lei Huang; Zhenchen Liao; Liying Zhao; Zhen Han; Shuguang Zhu; Menglan Wang; Yangwei Xu; Xiaolong Qi; Hao Liu; Yang Yang; Jiang Yu; Wei Liu; Shirong Cai; Guoxin Li
Journal:  JAMA Surg       Date:  2017-07-19       Impact factor: 14.766

8.  Risks of Bariatric Surgery Among Patients With End-stage Renal Disease.

Authors:  John R Montgomery; Seth A Waits; Justin B Dimick; Dana A Telem
Journal:  JAMA Surg       Date:  2019-12-01       Impact factor: 14.766

9.  Development and Validation of a Predictive Model for Internal Hernia After Roux-en-Y Gastric Bypass in a Multicentric Retrospective Cohort: The Swirl, Weight Excess Loss, Liquid Score.

Authors:  Guillaume Giudicelli; Pierre-Alexandre Poletti; Alexandra Platon; Jacques Marescaux; Michel Vix; Michele Diana; Alfonso Lapergola; Marc Worreth; Alend Saadi; Aurélie Bugmann; Philippe Morel; Christian Toso; Stefan Mönig; Monika E Hagen; Minoa K Jung
Journal:  Ann Surg       Date:  2020-10-14       Impact factor: 12.969

  9 in total

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.