Objective: To evaluate patient safety, educational value, and ethical issues surrounding "Live surgical broadcast" (LSB) and "As-live surgical broadcast" (ALB) using data obtained from urologic delegates attending two recent endourology meetings in the United Kingdom.
Subjects and methods: Two hundred twelve delegates at the UK section meeting of the Société Internationale d'Urologie (SIU) were invited to complete an online survey using SurveyMonkey(®) to compare their previous perceptions of LSB and ALB, and to compare their current experience of ALB to previous experience of LSB. One hundred three delegates at the British Association of Urological Surgeons (BAUS) Endourology meeting used live voting keypads to compare their experience of LSB and ALB simultaneously, as well as comparing their current experience of ALB to previous experience of LSB. Responses were recorded using a Likert scale.
Results: One hundred sixty-five responses were analyzed from the meetings. Most delegates were in specialist practice as a consultant or trainee (89.1%). LSB had been witnessed more than ALB (87.1% vs 66.6%, p=0.049). Based on previous experiences, the educational value of both formats was felt similar, but delegates felt there were significant patient safety benefits with ALB over LSB. Delegates were significantly less likely to recommend a friend or family, or volunteer themselves to be a patient in an LSB setting. On-the-day comparison of LSB and ALB shows a similar educational value to both formats, but with significantly less concern for the surgeon and patient's outcome with ALB.
Conclusion: ALB offers similar educational opportunities to delegates when compared with LSB, while appearing to offer significant welfare benefits to both surgeon and patient. Further studies are required to objectively quantify these subjective observations.