Is There Outcome Reporting Heterogeneity in Trials That Aim to Assess the Effectiveness of Surgical Treatments for Stress Urinary Incontinence in Women?

Instruments Used for the Assessment of SUI Severity in Urogynecologic Surgical Trials: A Scoping Review

INTRODUCTION AND HYPOTHESIS

Various instruments are used to evaluate the severity of stress urinary incontinence (SUI) in clinical trials for SUI surgery. We conducted a scoping review with the primary aim of investigating the use of such instruments.

METHODS

A comprehensive search in PubMed/MEDLINE, Cochrane Library, ClinicalTrials.gov, and WHO ICTRP was carried out. Inclusion criteria were studies including patients undergoing surgical intervention for SUI with assessment of SUI severity performed pre- and post-operatively. Exclusion criteria were nonprospective studies, nonrandomized studies, studies not in the English language, and the absence of reporting the methods of SUI severity evaluation in the study.

RESULTS

In total, 8,886 articles were identified, yielding 100 papers for data extraction. The most frequent interventions were mid-urethral slings (85 studies), Burch colposuspension (10 studies), and the use of bulking agents (3 studies). The most frequently used instruments for objective evaluation of SUI were urodynamics (90 studies), nonvalidated cough stress test (83 studies), and 1-h pad test (28 studies). The most frequently used instruments for subjective evaluation were bladder diary (37 studies), Incontinence Impact Questionnaire-7 (26 studies), and Urinary Distress Inventory-6 (23 studies). There were three studies reporting results according to the severity of pre- and post-operative SUI.

CONCLUSIONS

There is significant heterogeneity regarding the instruments used to evaluate the severity of SUI in surgical trials for female incontinence. There is a paucity of data regarding results according to the pre-operative severity of SUI. Hence, commonly agreed standardized methods for the assessment of SUI severity are needed to improve comparability between clinical trials for SUI surgery.

Attending guidance advised: educational quality of surgical videos on YouTube

INTRODUCTION

YouTube is the most used platform for case preparation by surgical trainees. Despite its popular use, studies have noted limitations in surgical technique, safety, and vetting of these videos. This study identified the most viewed laparoscopic cholecystectomy (LC) videos on YouTube and analyzed the ability of attendings, residents, and medical students to identify critical portions of the procedure, technique, and limitations of the videos.

METHODS

An incognito search was conducted on YouTube using the term "laparoscopic cholecystectomy." Results were screened for length, publication date, and language. The top ten most viewed videos were presented to general surgery attendings, residents, and medical students at a single academic institution. Established rubrics were used for evaluation, including the Critical View of Safety (CVS) for LC, a modified Global Operative Assessment of Laparoscopic Skills (GOALS) score, a task-specific checklist, and visual analog scales for case difficulty and operator competence. Educational quality and likelihood of video recommendation for case preparation were evaluated using a Likert scale. Attending assessments were considered the gold standard.

RESULTS

Six attending surgeons achieved excellent internal consistency on CVS, educational quality, and likelihood of recommendation scales, with Cronbach alpha (⍺) of 0.93, 0.92, and 0.92, respectively. ⍺ was ≥ 0.7 in all the other scales measured. Attending evaluations revealed that only one of the ten videos attained all three established CVS criteria. Four videos demonstrated none of the CVS criteria. The mean educational quality (mEQ) was 4.63 on a 10-point scale. The mean likelihood of recommendation (mLoR) for case preparation was 2.3 on a 5-point scale. Senior resident assessments (Postgraduate Year (PGY)4 + , n = 12) aligned with attending surgeons, with no statistically significant differences in CVS attainment, mEQ, and mLoR. Junior residents (PGY1-3, n = 17) and medical students (MS3-4, n = 20) exhibited significant difference with attendings in CVS attainment, mEQ, and mLoR for more than half the videos. Both groups tended to overrate videos compared to attendings.

CONCLUSION

YouTube is the most popular unvetted resource used for case presentation by surgical trainees. Attending evaluations revealed that the most viewed LC videos on YouTube did not attain the CVS, and were deemed as inappropriate for case preparation, with low educational value. Senior resident video assessments closely aligned with attendings, while junior trainees were more likely to overstate video quality and value. Attending guidance and direction of trainees to high-quality, vetted resources for surgical case preparation is needed. This may also suggest a need for surgical societies with platforms for video sharing to prioritize the creation and dissemination of high-quality videos on easily accessible public platforms.