Skip to main content

Advertisement

SpringerLink
Log in

Viewer discretion advised: is YouTube a friend or foe in surgical education?

  • Published:
Surgical Endoscopy Aims and scope Submit manuscript

Abstract

Background

In the current era, trainees frequently use unvetted online resources for their own education, including viewing surgical videos on YouTube. While operative videos are an important resource in surgical education, YouTube content is not selected or organized by quality but instead is ranked by popularity and other factors. This creates a potential for videos that feature poor technique or critical safety violations to become the most viewed for a given procedure.

Methods

A YouTube search for “Laparoscopic cholecystectomy” was performed. Search results were screened to exclude animations and lectures; the top ten operative videos were evaluated. Three reviewers independently analyzed each of the 10 videos. Technical skill was rated using the GOALS score. Establishment of a critical view of safety (CVS) was scored according to CVS “doublet view” score, where a score of ≥5 points (out of 6) is considered satisfactory. Videos were also screened for safety concerns not listed by the previous tools.

Results

Median competence score was 8 (±1.76) and difficulty was 2 (±1.8). GOALS score median was 18 (±3.4). Only one video achieved adequate critical view of safety; median CVS score was 2 (range 0–6). Five videos were noted to have other potentially dangerous safety violations, including placing hot ultrasonic shears on the duodenum, non-clipping of the cystic artery, blind dissection in the hepatocystic triangle, and damage to the liver capsule.

Conclusions

Top ranked laparoscopic cholecystectomy videos on YouTube show suboptimal technique with half of videos demonstrating concerning maneuvers and only one in ten having an adequate critical view of safety. While observing operative videos can be an important learning tool, surgical educators should be aware of the low quality of popular videos on YouTube. Dissemination of high-quality content on video sharing platforms should be a priority for surgical societies.

This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.

Access this article

Log in via an institution

Price excludes VAT (USA)
Tax calculation will be finalised during checkout.

Instant access to the full article PDF.

Institutional subscriptions

Fig. 1

Similar content being viewed by others

References

  1. McGee JB, Begg M (2009) What medical educators need to know about “Web 2.0”. Med Teach 30:164–169. doi:10.1080/01421590701881673

    Article  Google Scholar 

  2. Pugh CM, Watson A, Bell RH, Brasel KJ, Purcell Jackson G, Weber SM, Kao LS (2009) Surgical education in the internet era. J Surg Res 156:177–182. doi:10.1016/j.jss.2009.03.021

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  3. Rapp AK, Healy MG, Charlton ME, Keith JN, Rosenbaum ME, Kapadia MR (2016) YouTube is the most frequently used educational video source for surgical preparation. J Surg Educ 73:1072–1076. doi:10.1016/j.jsurg.2016.04.024

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  4. Topps D, Helmer J, Ellaway R (2013) YouTube as a platform for publishing clinical skills training videos. Acad Med 88:192–197. doi:10.1097/ACM.0b013e31827c5352

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  5. Frongia G, Mehrabi A, Fonouni H, Rennert H, Golriz M, Günther P (2016) YouTube as a potential training resource for laparoscopic fundoplication. J Surg Educ 73:1066–1071. doi:10.1016/j.jsurg.2016.04.025

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  6. Fischer J, Geurts J, Valderrabano V, Hügle T (2013) Educational quality of YouTube videos on knee arthrocentesis. J Clin Rheumatol 19:373–376. doi:10.1097/RHU.0b013e3182a69fb2

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  7. Vassiliou MC, Feldman LS, Andrew CG, Bergman S, Leffondré K, Stanbridge D, Fried GM (2005) A global assessment tool for evaluation of intraoperative laparoscopic skills. Am J Surg 190:107–113. doi:10.1016/j.amjsurg.2005.04.004

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  8. Sanford DE, Strasberg SM (2014) A simple effective method for generation of a permanent record of the critical view of safety during laparoscopic cholecystectomy by intraoperative “Doublet” photography. J Am Coll Surg 218:170–178. doi:10.1016/j.jamcollsurg.2013.11.003

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  9. Kurashima Y, Feldman LS, Al-Sabah S, Kaneva PA, Fried GM, Vassiliou MC (2011) A tool for training and evaluation of laparoscopic inguinal hernia repair: the Global Operative assessment of laparoscopic skills-groin hernia (GOALS-GH). Am J Surg 201:54–61. doi:10.1016/j.amjsurg.2010.09.006

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  10. Hogle NJ, Liu Y, Ogden RT, Fowler DL (2014) Evaluation of surgical fellows’ laparoscopic performance using global operative assessment of laparoscopic skills (GOALS). Surg Endosc 28:1284–1290. doi:10.1007/s00464-013-3324-6

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  11. Kramp KH, van Det MJ, Hoff C, Lamme B, Veeger NJGM, Pierie J-PEN (2015) Validity and reliability of global operative assessment of laparoscopic skills (GOALS) in novice trainees performing a laparoscopic cholecystectomy. J Surg Educ 72:351–358. doi:10.1016/j.jsurg.2014.08.006

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  12. Bellorin O, Kundel A, Sharma S, Ramirez-Valderrama A, Lee P (2016) Training model for laparoscopic Heller and Dor fundoplication: a tool for laparoscopic skills training and assessment-construct validity using the GOALS score. Surg Endosc 30:3654–3660. doi:10.1007/s00464-015-4617-8

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  13. Gumbs AA, Hogle NJ, Fowler DL (2007) Evaluation of resident laparoscopic performance using global operative assessment of laparoscopic skills. Journal Am Coll Surg 204:308–313. doi:10.1016/j.jamcollsurg.2006.11.010

    Article  Google Scholar 

  14. Deal SB, Lendvay TS, Haque MI, Brand T, Comstock B, Warren J, Alseidi A (2016) Crowd-sourced assessment of technical skills: an opportunity for improvement in the assessment of laparoscopic surgical skills. Am J Surg 211:398–404. doi:10.1016/j.amjsurg.2015.09.005

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  15. Buddingh KT, Nieuwenhuijs VB, van Buuren L, Hulscher JBF, de Jong JS, van Dam GM (2011) Intraoperative assessment of biliary anatomy for prevention of bile duct injury: a review of current and future patient safety interventions. Surg Endosc 25:2449–2461. doi:10.1007/s00464-011-1639-8

    Article  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  16. Pucher PH, Brunt LM, Fanelli RD, Asbun HJ, Aggarwal R (2015) SAGES expert Delphi consensus: critical factors for safe surgical practice in laparoscopic cholecystectomy. Surg Endosc 29:1–12. doi:10.1007/s00464-015-4079-z

    Google Scholar 

  17. Wauben LSGL, Grevenstein WMUV, Goossens RHM, der Meulen FHV, Lange JF (2011) Operative notes do not reflect reality in laparoscopic cholecystectomy. Br J Surg 98:1431–1436. doi:10.1002/bjs.7576

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  18. Satava RM (2004) Disruptive visions: surgical education. Surg Endosc 18:1–3. doi:10.1007/s00464-003-8224-8

    Article  Google Scholar 

Download references

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

  1. Department of Surgery, University of Washington, 1959 NE Pacific St., Box 356410, Seattle, WA, 98195, USA

    H. Alejandro Rodriguez, Monica T. Young, Hope T. Jackson, Brant K. Oelschlager & Andrew S. Wright

Authors
  1. H. Alejandro Rodriguez
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  2. Monica T. Young
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  3. Hope T. Jackson
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  4. Brant K. Oelschlager
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  5. Andrew S. Wright
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

Corresponding author

Correspondence to H. Alejandro Rodriguez.

Ethics declarations

Disclosures

H. Alejandro Rodriguez, Monica T. Young, Hope T. Jackson, Brant K. Oelschlager, and Andrew S. Wright declared that they have no competing interests or financial ties to disclose with regards to this work.

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

About this article

Check for updates. Verify currency and authenticity via CrossMark

Cite this article

Rodriguez, H.A., Young, M.T., Jackson, H.T. et al. Viewer discretion advised: is YouTube a friend or foe in surgical education?. Surg Endosc 32, 1724–1728 (2018). https://doi.org/10.1007/s00464-017-5853-x

Download citation

  • Received:

  • Accepted:

  • Published:

  • Issue Date:

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s00464-017-5853-x

Keywords

Search

Navigation