Development and validation of a recommended checklist for assessment of surgical videos quality: the LAParoscopic surgery Video Educational GuidelineS (LAP-VEGaS) video assessment tool.

INTRODUCTION: There has been a constant increase in the number of published surgical videos with preference for open-access sources, but the proportion of videos undergoing peer-review prior to publication has markedly decreased, raising questions over quality of the educational content presented. The aim of this study was the development and validation of a standard framework for the appraisal of surgical videos submitted for presentation and publication, the LAParoscopic surgery Video Educational GuidelineS (LAP-VEGaS) video assessment tool. METHODS: An international committee identified items for inclusion in the LAP-VEGaS video assessment tool and finalised the marking score utilising Delphi methodology. The tool was finally validated by anonymous evaluation of selected videos by a group of validators not involved in the tool development. RESULTS: 9 items were included in the LAP-VEGaS video assessment tool, with every item scoring from 0 (item not presented in the video) to 2 (item extensively presented in the video), with a total marking score ranging from 0 to 18. The LAP-VEGaS video assessment tool resulted highly accurate in identifying and selecting videos for acceptance for conference presentation and publication, with high level of internal consistency and generalisability. CONCLUSIONS: We propose that peer review in adherence to the LAP-VEGaS video assessment tool could enhance the overall quality of published video outputs.

Use of laparoscopic videos amongst surgical trainees in the United Kingdom.

BACKGROUND: Surgical trainers consider laparoscopic videos as a useful teaching aid to maximize trainees' learning and skill development given the backdrop of time constraints and productivity demands. Aim of this study is to assess the current use of laparoscopic videos amongst surgical trainees in the United Kingdom. METHODS: A steering committee of 15 experienced laparoscopic trainers from 8 countries developed a survey on the use of laparoscopic videos by surgical trainees. The survey items were finalized by discussion through e-mails, teleconferences, and face-to-face meetings and a finalised questionnaire was distributed amongst surgical trainees in the United Kingdom. RESULTS: 92 trainees were invited and 75 returned the questionnaire (81.5%). 86.7% of the trainees routinely watched online surgical videos and the more frequently used websites were Youtube.com and Websurg.com. Trainees require laparoscopic videos to have supplementary educational content such as English commentary (90.7%) and use of snapshots (93.3%) and diagrams (86.7%). Position of the patient and trocars, indication for surgery, preoperative data and postoperative outcomes are required characteristics of laparoscopic videos. 29 trainees (38.7%) do not record the laparoscopic procedures they perform, despite the majority of them recognising the usefulness of routine video-recording for training purposes (78.7%). CONCLUSIONS: Surgical trainees consider videos a useful adjunct in laparoscopic surgery training, with preference for open access sources. Trainees value highly informative videos with supplementary educational content.

LAP-VEGaS Practice Guidelines for Reporting of Educational Videos in Laparoscopic Surgery: A Joint Trainers and Trainees Consensus Statement.

OBJECTIVE: Consensus statement by an international multispecialty trainers and trainees expert committee on guidelines for reporting of educational videos in laparoscopic surgery. SUMMARY OF BACKGROUND DATA: Instructive laparoscopy videos with appropriate exposition could be ideal for initial training in laparoscopic surgery, but there are no guidelines for video annotation or procedural educational and safety evaluation. METHODS: Delphi questionnaire of 45 statements prepared by a steering group and voted on over 2 rounds by committee members using an electronic survey tool. Committee selection design included representative surgical training experts worldwide across different laparoscopic specialties, including general surgery, lower and upper gastrointestinal surgery, gynecology and urology, and a proportion of aligned surgical trainees. RESULTS: All 33 committee members completed both the first and the second round of the Delphi questionnaire related to 7 major domains: Video Introduction/Authors' information; Patient Details; Procedure Description; Procedure Outcome; Associated Educational Content; Peer Review; and Use in Educational Curriculae. The 17 statements that did not reach at least 80% agreement after the first round were revised and returned into the second round. The committee consensus approved 37 statements to at least an 82% agreement. CONCLUSION: Consensus guidelines on how to report laparoscopic surgery videos for educational purposes have been developed. We anticipate that following our guidelines could help to improve video quality.These reporting guidelines may be useful as a standard for reviewing videos submitted for publication or conference presentation.

Safety of supervised trainee-performed laparoscopic surgery for inflammatory bowel disease.

PURPOSE: There is a significant risk of surgical resection during the lifetime of an inflammatory bowel disease (IBD) patient: laparoscopic surgery has been increasingly applied to the management of IBD with short and long-term advantages. The aim of this study is to demonstrate that laparoscopic surgery for IBD, performed by a surgical trainee under the supervision of an experienced trainer, is feasible and safe. METHODS: All surgical procedures were sub-divided in six critical steps in order to define the procedure as supervised trainee performed (STP) when the trainer was present unscrubbed in the theatre or assisting and trainer performed (TNER) when the trainer performed two or more critical steps of the procedure. Included were all patients undergoing laparoscopic resection for IBD between January 2009 and December 2013. Thirty-day mortality and morbidity were the primary outcomes. Reoperations and rehospitalizations within 30 days of discharge were recorded prospectively and were the secondary outcomes together with conversion rate and length of hospital stay. RESULTS: One hundred fifty-one patients were included: 77 (50.99%) STP and 74 (49.01%) TNER. No deaths occurred, and 30-day morbidity was 27.15% with no differences between the groups. Operating time was longer in the STP (166.6 ± 53.31 vs 130.4 ± 49.15). Five patients (2 vs 3) required reoperation (3.31%), while 13 patients (8.6%) required readmission. CONCLUSIONS: Laparoscopic surgery for IBD performed by a supervised trainee is safe compared to trainers performed procedures despite a longer operating time. Randomized clinical trials are needed to confirm these preliminary results and to investigate long-term outcomes.

In-house colorectal laparoscopic preceptorship: a model for changing a unit's practice safely and efficiently.

PURPOSE: There has been steady increase in demand for laparoscopic colonic resection as benefits are manifold compared to open and include smaller incisions, less pain, quicker recovery and convalescence, reduced morbidity and reduced analgesic demands. We devised a preceptorship programme with the aim of all four coloproctologists in our unit becoming proficient colorectal laparoscopic surgeons over a period of 12 months. METHOD: The surgeon in the unit with significant experience of laparoscopic colorectal surgery acted as a preceptor to the remaining three. A prospective database was set up to allow analysis of the impact of the preceptorship on the units' elective practice and outcomes from January 2006. RESULTS: Results were analysed 106 cases to assess the success of this novel method and were more than encouraging. During this period, 57 laparoscopic resections were performed compared 49 open resections. The proportion of patients undergoing laparoscopic resection had risen from 20% to 80% (p = 0.000). This was associated with a significant drop in post-operative stay from 14 to 4 days (p = 0.000). Analysis of patient demographics, pathology and type of resection found there to be no significant difference between the open and laparoscopic groups. The conversion rate was acceptably low (10.5%) and there were no re-admissions. CONCLUSIONS: For hospitals with the facilities and an appropriately experienced preceptor, we offer this as a patient-safe, cost-neutral method of significantly increasing a units' laparoscopic practice over a relatively short period of time.