Comparing the educational quality of free flap technique videos on public and paid platforms

Author:

Ku Ying C.1ORCID,Mulvihill Lianne1,Lammers Jacob1ORCID,Al‐Malak Mazen1ORCID,Figueroa Brian A.1ORCID,Jo Diane1,Fodor R'ay S.1,Rampazzo Antonio1,Bassiri Gharb Bahar1ORCID

Affiliation:

1. Department of Plastic and Reconstructive Surgery Cleveland Clinic Foundation Cleveland Ohio United States

Abstract

AbstractBackgroundSurgical videos are reshaping the landscape for surgical education. As this form of education has rapidly grown and become a valuable resource for experienced surgeons, residents, and students, there is great variability in the presentation of what is offered. This study aimed to assess and compare the educational quality of free flap instructional videos on public and paid platforms.MethodsFree flap videos from public (YouTube) and paid (American Society of Plastic Surgeons Education Network and Plastic and Reconstructive Surgery Journal) sources were screened independently by three reviewers. Sample size was calculated to reach 80% power. The educational quality of the videos was determined using a modified version of Laparoscopic Surgery Video Educational Guidelines (0–6 low, 7–12 medium, 13–18 high). Professionally‐made videos were identified per lighting, positioning, and video/imaging quality. Interrater reliability between the three reviewers was calculated. The educational quality of the videos was compared between public and paid sources using Mood's median test. Pearson's correlation coefficient was utilized to assess the correlation between video length and educational quality.ResultsSeventy‐six videos were included (40 public, 36 paid). The median video lengths for public and paid platforms were 9.43(IQR = 12.33) and 5.07(IQR = 6.4) min, respectively. There were 18 high, 16 medium, and 6 low‐quality public videos, versus 13 high, 21 medium, and 2 low‐quality paid videos. Four public and seven paid videos were identified as professionally made. Interrater reliability was high (α = .9). No differences in educational quality were identified between public and paid platforms. Video length was not correlated with quality (p = .15). A video library compiling public high‐quality videos was created (https://www.youtube.com/playlist?list=PL‐d5BBgQF75VWSkbvEq6mfYI‐‐9579oPK).ConclusionsPublic and paid platforms may provide similar surgical education on free tissue transfer. Therefore, whether to subscribe to a paid video platform for supplemental free flap education should be determined on an individual basis.

Publisher

Wiley

Subject

Surgery

Cited by 1 articles. 订阅此论文施引文献 订阅此论文施引文献,注册后可以免费订阅5篇论文的施引文献,订阅后可以查看论文全部施引文献

同舟云学术

1.学者识别学者识别

2.学术分析学术分析

3.人才评估人才评估

"同舟云学术"是以全球学者为主线,采集、加工和组织学术论文而形成的新型学术文献查询和分析系统,可以对全球学者进行文献检索和人才价值评估。用户可以通过关注某些学科领域的顶尖人物而持续追踪该领域的学科进展和研究前沿。经过近期的数据扩容,当前同舟云学术共收录了国内外主流学术期刊6万余种,收集的期刊论文及会议论文总量共计约1.5亿篇,并以每天添加12000余篇中外论文的速度递增。我们也可以为用户提供个性化、定制化的学者数据。欢迎来电咨询!咨询电话:010-8811{复制后删除}0370

www.globalauthorid.com

TOP

Copyright © 2019-2024 北京同舟云网络信息技术有限公司
京公网安备11010802033243号  京ICP备18003416号-3