Skip to main content
SpringerLink
Log in

Does YouTube include high-quality resources for training on laparoscopic and robotic radical prostatectomy?

  • Original Article
  • Published:
World Journal of Urology Aims and scope Submit manuscript

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.

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

Similar content being viewed by others

References

  1. Siegel R, Ma J, Zou Z, Jemal A (2014) Cancer statistics. CA Cancer J Clin 64(1):9–29

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  2. Mottet N, Bellmunt J, Bolla M, Briers E, Cumberbatch MG, De Santis M et al (2017) EAU-ESTRO-SIOG guidelines on prostate cancer. Part 1: screening, diagnosis, and local treatment with curative intent. Eur Urol 71(4):618–629

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  3. Wang Y, Qin Z, Wang Y, Chen C, Wang Y, Meng X et al (2018) The role of radical prostatectomy fort he treatment of metastatic prostate cancer: a systematic review and meta-analysis. Biosci Rep. https://doi.org/10.1042/bsr20171379

    Article  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  4. Berge V, Berg RE, Hoff JR, Wessel N, Diep LM, Karlsen SJ et al (2013) A prospective study of transition from laparoscopic to robot-assisted radical prostatectomy: quality of life outcomes after 36-month follow-up. Urology 81(4):781–786

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  5. Altok M, Achim MF, Matin SF, Pettaway CA, Chapin BF, Davis JW (2018) A decade of robot-assisted radical prostatectomy training: time-based metrics and qualitative grading for fellows and residents. Urol Oncol 36(1):13.e19–13.e25

    Article  Google Scholar 

  6. Davis JW, Kamat A, Munsell M, Pettaway C, Pisters L, Matin S (2010) Initial experience of teaching robot-assisted radical prostatectomy to surgeons-in-training: can training be evaluated and standardized? BJU Int 105(8):1148–1154

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  7. MacMillan C (2013) Social media revolution and blurring of professional boundaries. Imprint 60(3):44–46

    PubMed  Google Scholar 

  8. YouTube (2018) YouTube for press. https://www.youtube.com/yt/about/press/. Accessed 12 Dec 2018

  9. 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(6):1072–1076

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  10. Topps D, Helmer J, Ellaway R (2013) Youtube as a platform for publishing clinical skills training videos. Acad Med 88(2):192–197

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  11. Hussein AA, Ghani KR, Peabody J, Sarle R, Abaza R, Eun D et al (2017) Development and validation of an objective scoring tool for robot-assisted radical prostatectomy: prostatectomy assessment and competency evaluation. J Urol 197(5):1237–1244

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  12. Petrucci AM, Chand M, Wexner SD (2017) Social media: changing the paradigm for surgical education. Clin Colon Rectal Surg 30(4):244–251

    Article  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  13. Pugh CM, Watson A, Bell RH, Brasel KJ, Jackson GP, Weber SM et al (2009) Surgical education in the internet era. J Surg Res 156(2):177–182

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  14. Maertens H, Madani A, Landry T, Vermassen F, Van Herzeele I, Aggarwal R (2016) Systematic review of e-learning for surgical training. Br J Surg 103(11):1428–1437

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  15. Struck JP, Siegel F, Kramer MW, Tsaur I, Heidenreich A, Haferkamp A et al (2018) Substantial utilization of Facebook, Twitter, YouTube, and Instagram in the prostate cancer community. World J Urol 36(8):1241–1246

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  16. Borgmann H, Cooperberg M, Murphy D, Loeb S, Dow J, Ribal MJ et al (2018) Online professionalism-2018 update of European Association of Urology (@Uroweb) recommendations on the appropriate use of social media. Eur Urol 74(5):644–650

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  17. Farnan J, Paro JA, Higa J, Edelson J, Arora VM (2008) The YouTube generation: implications for medical professionalism. Perspect Biol Med 51(4):517–524

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  18. Keelan J, Pavri-Garcia V, Tomlinson G, Wilson K (2007) YouTube as a source of information on immunization: a content analysis. JAMA 298(21):2482–2484

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  19. Murugiah K, Vallakati A, Rajput K, Sood A, Challa NR (2011) YouTube as a source of information on cardiopulmonary resuscitation. Resuscitation 82(3):332–334

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  20. Hughes JP, Quraishi MS (2012) YouTube resources for the otolaryngology trainee. J Laryngol Otol 126(1):61–62

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  21. Steinberg PL, Wason S, Stern JM, Deters L, Kowal B, Seigne J (2010) YouTube as source of prostate cancer information. Urology 75(3):619–622

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  22. Loeb S, Sengupta S, Butaney M, Macaluso JN Jr, Czarniecki SW, Robbins R et al (2019) Dissemination of misinformative and biased information about prostate cancer on YouTube. Eur Urol. 75(4):564–567

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  23. Erdem H, Sisik A (2018) The reliability of bariatric surgery videos in YouTube platform. Obes Surg 28(3):712–716

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  24. 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(6):1066–1071

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  25. Lee JS, Seo HS, Hong TH (2015) YouTube as a potential training method for laparoscopic cholecystectomy. Ann Surg Treat Res. 89(2):92–97

    Article  CAS  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

Download references

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

  1. Department of Urology, Istanbul Gaziosmanpasa Taksim Training and Research Hospital, Karayolları Str. No: 621 Gaziosmanpaşa, Istanbul, Turkey

    Burak Arslan, Serkan Gönültaş, Ersin Gökmen, Oktay Özman, Gökhan Yazıcı, Taha Göv & Enver Özdemir

  2. Department of Urology, Yeni Yüzyıl University, Istanbul, Turkey

    Özkan Onuk

Authors
  1. Burak Arslan
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  2. Serkan Gönültaş
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  3. Ersin Gökmen
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  4. Oktay Özman
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  5. Özkan Onuk
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  6. Gökhan Yazıcı
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  7. Taha Göv
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  8. Enver Özdemir
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

Contributions

AB: protocol/project development, manuscript writing/editing, and data analysis. GS: data collection or management and data analysis. GE: manuscript editing and data analysis. OO: data collection or management. OÖ: data collection or management. YG: data collection or management. GT: manuscript editing and data analysis. OE: data collection or management, and manuscript writing/editing.

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Burak Arslan.

Ethics declarations

Conflict of interest

All the authors declare that they have no conflict of interest.

Ethical approval

This article does not contain any studies with human participants or animals performed by any of the authors.

Additional information

Publisher's Note

Springer Nature remains neutral with regard to jurisdictional claims in published maps and institutional affiliations.

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

About this article

Check for updates. Verify currency and authenticity via CrossMark

Cite this article

Arslan, B., Gönültaş, S., Gökmen, E. et al. Does YouTube include high-quality resources for training on laparoscopic and robotic radical prostatectomy?. World J Urol 38, 1195–1199 (2020). https://doi.org/10.1007/s00345-019-02904-6

Download citation

  • Received:

  • Accepted:

  • Published:

  • Issue Date:

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s00345-019-02904-6

Keywords

Search

Navigation