Accuracy and Quality of Educational Videos for Elbow Physical Examination: A Search from the Earliest Year until October 2018

Document Type : RESEARCH PAPER


1 1 Department of Orthopaedic Surgery, Amsterdam UMC, Location AMC, Amsterdam, The Netherlands 2 Department of Orthopaedic Surgery, Zuyderland MC, Sittard-Geleen, The Netherlands

2 1 Department of Orthopaedic Surgery, Amsterdam UMC, Location AMC, Amsterdam, The Netherlands 3 Harvard Medical School at Massachusetts General Hospital, Sports Medicine Center, Boston, Massachusetts, USA

3 4 Shoulder and Elbow Unit, Department of Orthopaedic Surgery, OLVG, Amsterdam, The Netherlands

4 5 Department of Orthopaedic Surgery, Amphia Hospital, Breda, The Netherlands

5 1 Department of Orthopaedic Surgery, Amsterdam UMC, Location AMC, Amsterdam, The Netherlands 5 Department of Orthopaedic Surgery, Amphia Hospital, Breda, The Netherlands


Background: Medical students and residents rely increasingly on web-based education. Online videos provide unique
opportunities to share knowledge. The objective of this study was to investigate the accuracy and quality of instructional
videos on the physical examination of the elbow and identify factors influencing educational usefulness.
Methods: On October 7, 2018, a search on YouTube, VuMedi, Orthobullets, and G9MD was performed. Videos were
rated for accuracy and quality by two independent authors using a modified version of a validated scoring system for
the nervous and cardiopulmonary system. Inter-rater reliability was analysed.
Results: The 126 included videos were uploaded between June 2007 and February 2018. Twenty-three videos were
indicated as useful for educational purposes. Accuracy, quality and overall scores were significantly higher for videos
from specialized platforms (VuMedi, Orthobullets, G6MD) compared to YouTube. Video accuracy and quality varied
widely and were not correlated. Number of days online, views, and likes showed no or weak correlation with accuracy
and quality. For the overall score, our assessment tool showed excellent inter-rater reliability.
Conclusion: There is considerable variation in accuracy and quality of currently available online videos on the physical
examination of the elbow. We identified 23 educationally useful videos and provided an assessment method for the
quality of educational videos. In educational settings, this method may help students to assess video reliability and aid
educators in the development of high-quality instructional online content.
Level of evidence: III


1. Keene AB, Shiloh AL, Dudaie R, Eisen LA, Savel RH.
Online testing from Google Docs to enhance teaching
of core topics in critical care: a pilot study. Med Teach.
2. Kingsley K, Galbraith GM, Herring M, Stowers E, Stewart
T, Kingsley KV. Why not just Google it? An assessment
of information literacy skills in a biomedical science
curriculum. BMC Med Educ. 2011;11:17.
3. Boulos MN, Maramba I, Wheeler S. Wikis, blogs and
podcasts: a new generation of Web-based tools for
virtual collaborative clinical practice and education.
BMC Med Educ. 2006;6:41.
4. Smith W, Rafeek R, Marchan S, Paryag A. The use
of video-clips as a teaching aide. Eur J Dent Educ.
5. Casado MI, Castano G, Arraez-Aybar LA. Audiovisual
material as educational innovation strategy to reduce
anxiety response in students of human anatomy. Adv
Health Sci Educ Theory Pract. 2012;17(3):431-40.
6. Srivastava G, Roddy M, Langsam D, Agrawal D. An
educational video improves technique in performance
of pediatric lumbar punctures. Pediatr Emerg Care.
7. Aronson ID, Plass JL, Bania TC. Optimizing
educational video through comparative trials in
clinical environments. Educ Technol Res Dev. 2012;
8. Martens MJ, Duvivier RJ, van Dalen J, Verwijnen GM,
Scherpbier AJ, van der Vleuten CP. Student views on
the effective teaching of physical examination skills: a
qualitative study. Med Educ. 2009;43(2):184-91.
9. Fincher RM, Simpson DE, Mennin SP, Rosenfeld
GC, Rothman A, McGrew MC, et al. Scholarship in
teaching: an imperative for the 21st century. Acad
Med. 2000;75(9):887-94.
10. Urch E, Taylor SA, Cody E, Fabricant PD, Burket JC,
O’Brien SJ, et al. The Quality of Open-Access Video-
Based Orthopaedic Instructional Content for the
Shoulder Physical Exam is Inconsistent. HSS J.
11. Lee H, Choi A, Jang Y, Lee JI. YouTube as a learning
tool for four shoulder tests. Prim Health Care Res Dev.
12. Azer SA, Aleshaiwi SM, Algrain HA, Alkhelaif RA.
Nervous system examination on YouTube. BMC Med
Educ. 2012;12:126.
13. Azer SA, Algrain HA, AlKhelaif RA, AlEshaiwi SM.
Evaluation of the educational value of YouTube videos
about physical examination of the cardiovascular
and respiratory systems. J Med Internet Res. 2013;
14. Borgersen NJ, Henriksen MJ, Konge L, Sorensen
TL, Thomsen AS, Subhi Y. Direct ophthalmoscopy
on YouTube: analysis of instructional YouTube
videos’ content and approach to visualization. Clin
Ophthalmol. 2016;10:1535-41.
15. Azer SA. Can “YouTube” help students in learning
surface anatomy? Surg Radiol Anat. 2012;34(5):465-8.
16. Azer SA. Understanding pharmacokinetics: are
YouTube videos a useful learning resource? Eur Rev
Med Pharmacol Sci. 2014;18(13):1957-67.
17. Akgun T, Karabay CY, Kocabay G, Kalayci A, Oduncu V,
Guler A, et al. Learning electrocardiogram on YouTube:
how useful is it? J Electrocardiol. 2014;47(1):113-7.
18. Burton A. YouTube-ing your way to neurological
knowledge. Lancet Neurol. 2008;7(12):1086-7.
19. Raikos A, Waidyasekara P. How useful is YouTube
in learning heart anatomy? Anat Sci Educ. 2014;
20. Sharoff L. Integrating YouTube into the nursing
curriculum. Online J Issues Nurs. 2011;16(3):6.
21. Cardoso AF, Moreli L, Braga FT, Vasques CI, Santos CB,
Carvalho EC. Effect of a video on developing skills in
undergraduate nursing students for the management
of totally implantable central venous access ports.
Nurse Educ Today. 2012;32(6):709-13.
22. Celentano V, Smart N, McGrath J, Cahill RA, Spinelli
A, Obermair A, et al. LAP-VEGaS Practice Guidelines
for Reporting of Educational Videos in Laparoscopic
Surgery: A Joint Trainers and Trainees Consensus
Statement. Ann Surg. 2018;268(6):920-6.
23. Zwerus EL, Somford MP, Maissan F, Heisen J, Eygendaal
D, van den Bekerom MP. Physical examination of the
elbow, what is the evidence? A systematic literature
review. Br J Sports Med. 2017.
24. Mukaka MM. Statistics corner: A guide to appropriate
use of correlation coefficient in medical research.
Malawi Med J. 2012;24(3):69-71.
25. Cicchetti DV. Multiple comparison methods:
establishing guidelines for their valid application in
neuropsychological research. J Clin Exp Neuropsychol.
Volume 9, Issue 1
January 2021
Pages 93-101
  • Receive Date: 25 March 2020
  • Revise Date: 04 May 2020
  • Accept Date: 07 May 2020
  • First Publish Date: 01 January 2021