RESUMO
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.
Assuntos
Educação a Distância/normas , Laparoscopia/educação , Gravação em Vídeo/normas , Competência Clínica , Consenso , Currículo , Técnica Delphi , Humanos , InternetRESUMO
BACKGROUND: Abnormal uterine bleeding (AUB) affects women of all ages and is one of the most common reasons for referral to a gynaecological clinic. Operative hysteroscopic procedures allow for a see-and-treat approach to AUB, and these techniques have been shown to be feasible and acceptable in the outpatient setting. OBJECTIVE: To assess if there is an increase in pain scores for women who are undergoing an operative hysteroscopic procedure with Myosure LITE® (Hologic; mechanical hysteroscopic tissue removal system) compared to outpatient diagnostic hysteroscopy alone. STUDY DESIGN: A prospective cohort study was performed. All participants attending the outpatient hysteroscopy clinic at Mercy Hospital for Women completed a pre-and post-procedure questionnaire. This included a visual analogue scale (VAS) for any pre-existing pain, anticipated pain, and actual pain experienced during procedure. Factors influencing overall satisfaction and willingness to attend again were also assessed. Data was entered into RedCap® for analysis. A difference in VAS of 10 mm or more was considered clinically significant. An alpha of p < 0.05 was assigned for statistical significance. RESULTS: Between February 2020 and November 2022, 208 women underwent outpatient diagnostic hysteroscopy followed by an operative hysteroscopy with MyoSure®. To allow for standardisation of analgesia, only participants who had a cervical block before their Myosure® procedure were included for analysis (n = 111). There was statistical evidence (t(111) = 2.36, p = 0.02) of a lower mean VAS pain score for operative Myosure (36.5 mm, 95 % CI: 31.1-41.8 mm) compared to outpatient diagnostic hysteroscopy (44.1 mm, 95 % CI: 39.0-49.2 mm). The mean difference in VAS pain score was estimated as 7.7 mm (95 % CI: 1.2-14.1 mm) lower for Myosure compared to hysteroscopy. Given the threshold for clinical significance was considered as 10 mm difference in VAS, the variance in pain scores is under the likely clinically significant range. There was no significant difference in pain scores for diagnostic hysteroscopy with or without paracervical block (mean difference = 1.42; 95 % CI: -6.35 to 9.20). There was no association between pre-existing pain, and actual pain for hysteroscopy, or Myosure (p = 0.997 and p = 0.065 respectively). The anticipated pain score was weakly associated with actual pain during the operative Myosure procedure (p = 0.02), and with outpatient diagnostic hysteroscopy (p = 0.019). CONCLUSION: Outpatient hysteroscopy procedures are generally well tolerated. The pain experience with operative Myosure was less than that reported during the diagnostic hysteroscopy by the same patient although this is unlikely of clinical significance. Importantly, Myosure was not more painful than the initial diagnostic procedure, and most patients were satisfied with the outcome and would choose to have the procedure again in an outpatient setting. This is in keeping with other studies which have shown a high degree of patient tolerance and satisfaction with this approach.