Impact of Online Surgical Videos on Urological Practice from Screen to Surgery: A Comparative Analysis of Video Selection Criteria and Practice Modification among Urologists.
Serdar Turan, Kazim Can Oba, Mazhar Ortac, Ahmet Halil Sevinc, Kazım Ceviz, Cem Tugrul Gezmis, Senol Tonyali
{"title":"Impact of Online Surgical Videos on Urological Practice from Screen to Surgery: A Comparative Analysis of Video Selection Criteria and Practice Modification among Urologists.","authors":"Serdar Turan, Kazim Can Oba, Mazhar Ortac, Ahmet Halil Sevinc, Kazım Ceviz, Cem Tugrul Gezmis, Senol Tonyali","doi":"10.1159/000551315","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><strong>Introduction: </strong>Surgical video-based learning has rapidly shifted to unregulated open-access platforms. This study evaluates the consumption habits, clinical impact, and content selection criteria of urologists across different career stages to understand the risks of this transition.</p><p><strong>Material and methods: </strong>A cross-sectional survey was conducted among 133 urologists stratified as residents, specialists, and academic urologists. Platform preferences, practice modifications, and selection criteria were assessed using Likert scales. Differences between groups were analyzed using chi-square and Kruskal-Wallis tests with post hoc pairwise comparisons.</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>Open-access platforms (YouTube) were the primary source for 84.0% of the cohort, with no significant difference between groups (p: 0.351). A total of 37.4% reported modifying their surgical technique based on online videos. This rate did not differ significantly between residents (34.9%), specialists (48.0%), and academic urologists (35.0%) (p: 0.477). In adjusted analysis, career stage was not independently associated with technique modification, whereas higher weekly operative workload was associated with a greater likelihood of reporting modification. However, a significant divergence emerged in selection criteria: residents prioritized \"surgeon's reputation\" significantly less than specialists (p: 0.012) and academic urologists (p: 0.007). Additionally, the clarity of patient consent in online videos was rated universally low.</p><p><strong>Conclusion: </strong>The \"YouTube era\" appears to have a tangible influence on clinical practice across different seniority levels. However, potential differences in credibility assessment may exist as residents may rely more heavily on unregulated content without systematically evaluating author expertise. These findings highlight the potential value of incorporating digital literacy and source evaluation skills into residency curricula to support more informed engagement with online surgical content.</p>","PeriodicalId":23414,"journal":{"name":"Urologia Internationalis","volume":" ","pages":"1-8"},"PeriodicalIF":1.2000,"publicationDate":"2026-03-09","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Urologia Internationalis","FirstCategoryId":"3","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1159/000551315","RegionNum":4,"RegionCategory":"医学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q3","JCRName":"UROLOGY & NEPHROLOGY","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0
Abstract
Introduction: Surgical video-based learning has rapidly shifted to unregulated open-access platforms. This study evaluates the consumption habits, clinical impact, and content selection criteria of urologists across different career stages to understand the risks of this transition.
Material and methods: A cross-sectional survey was conducted among 133 urologists stratified as residents, specialists, and academic urologists. Platform preferences, practice modifications, and selection criteria were assessed using Likert scales. Differences between groups were analyzed using chi-square and Kruskal-Wallis tests with post hoc pairwise comparisons.
Results: Open-access platforms (YouTube) were the primary source for 84.0% of the cohort, with no significant difference between groups (p: 0.351). A total of 37.4% reported modifying their surgical technique based on online videos. This rate did not differ significantly between residents (34.9%), specialists (48.0%), and academic urologists (35.0%) (p: 0.477). In adjusted analysis, career stage was not independently associated with technique modification, whereas higher weekly operative workload was associated with a greater likelihood of reporting modification. However, a significant divergence emerged in selection criteria: residents prioritized "surgeon's reputation" significantly less than specialists (p: 0.012) and academic urologists (p: 0.007). Additionally, the clarity of patient consent in online videos was rated universally low.
Conclusion: The "YouTube era" appears to have a tangible influence on clinical practice across different seniority levels. However, potential differences in credibility assessment may exist as residents may rely more heavily on unregulated content without systematically evaluating author expertise. These findings highlight the potential value of incorporating digital literacy and source evaluation skills into residency curricula to support more informed engagement with online surgical content.
期刊介绍：
Concise but fully substantiated international reports of clinically oriented research into science and current management of urogenital disorders form the nucleus of original as well as basic research papers. These are supplemented by up-to-date reviews by international experts on the state-of-the-art of key topics of clinical urological practice. Essential topics receiving regular coverage include the introduction of new techniques and instrumentation as well as the evaluation of new functional tests and diagnostic methods. Special attention is given to advances in surgical techniques and clinical oncology. The regular publication of selected case reports represents the great variation in urological disease and illustrates treatment solutions in singular cases.
求助内容：
应助结果提醒方式：
京公网安备 11010802042870号
