The Utilisation, Application, and Quality of Videos of Clinical Interventions in Peer-Reviewed Literature: A Scoping Review.

BACKGROUND

Videos of clinical interventions (VoCIs) demonstrating surgical and interventional procedures have become a mainstay in clinical practice and peer-reviewed academic literature. Despite the widespread availability of VoCI in the literature, there remain no established guidelines regarding the reporting of VoCI. We undertook a scoping review to investigate the current utilisation, application, and quality in VoCI reporting.

SUMMARY

A comprehensive literature search of Medline, Embase, Emcare, and CINAHL databases was performed to retrieve articles presenting VoCI, from January 2020 to December 2023. A customised data extraction tool assessed video characteristics (e.g., case presentation, outcomes), utility (e.g., target audience, reproducibility of procedure), and quality (subjective and objective). A total of 624 VoCIs were included (mean length 06:06), with over 62 h of VoCI reviewed. The most common VoCI perspectives were endoscopic (n = 153; 25%) and laparoscopic (n = 140; 22%). The clinical background and outcomes were described in 480 (76.9%) and 403 cases (64.6%), respectively, with disclosures (n = 23; 3.8%) rarely presented. VoCI primarily targeted trainees (n = 547; 87.7%) with most videos providing technical guidance (n = 394; 63.1%). In total, 248 videos (40%) were rated as medium or low quality on subjective assessment.

KEY MESSAGES

There are significant heterogeneity and notably poor-quality control in VoCI reporting in peer-reviewed literature resulting in the omission of critical procedural steps and suboptimal visual quality. VoCI reporting guidelines are therefore urgently required to provide a set of minimum items that should be reported by clinicians when uploading VoCI.