Abstract

Evaluation of the Quality of Sterile Compounding Videos Available on the YouTube Video-sharing Website

Author(s): Sluggett Janet K, Johnson Michelle J, Zamani Mazdak, Kastango Eric S, Bodnar Mark, Cantor Peter, Hobbs Jodie G, Reynolds Karen J, Sluggett Andrew J

Issue: May/Jun 2019 - Volume 23, Number 3

Page(s): 238-244

Download in electronic PDF format for $75
  • Evaluation of the Quality of Sterile Compounding Videos Available on the YouTube Video-sharing Website Page 1
  • Evaluation of the Quality of Sterile Compounding Videos Available on the YouTube Video-sharing Website Page 2
  • Evaluation of the Quality of Sterile Compounding Videos Available on the YouTube Video-sharing Website Page 3
  • Evaluation of the Quality of Sterile Compounding Videos Available on the YouTube Video-sharing Website Page 4
  • Evaluation of the Quality of Sterile Compounding Videos Available on the YouTube Video-sharing Website Page 5
  • Evaluation of the Quality of Sterile Compounding Videos Available on the YouTube Video-sharing Website Page 6
  • Evaluation of the Quality of Sterile Compounding Videos Available on the YouTube Video-sharing Website Page 7

Abstract

The objective of this study was to evaluate the quality of instructional sterile compounding videos posted on a popular video-sharing website (YouTube). YouTube was systematically searched using relevant terms (aseptic compounding, sterile compounding) to identify all videos demonstrating aseptic manipulations of compounded sterile preparations in a cleanroom. Promotional videos, news stories, interviews, and videos with manipulations performed outside a cleanroom, without audio or spoken in a language other than English, were excluded. Three experts independently reviewed each video and assessed the quality of key sterile compounding processes, information delivery, and overall suitability for workforce training using a standardized assessment tool. Kendall’s coefficient of concordance (W) was calculated to assess agreement. Included were 66 videos with a median of 839 (IQR 62–3935) views. There was moderate to substantial agreement among assessors when determining the quality of each step of the compounding process (W 0.48 to 0.72; all P<0.002). Only one in five videos demonstrated an acceptable standard of gloving and garbing, while product inspection and waste disposal processes were more likely to be appropriately demonstrated. Most videos had acceptable sound/image quality and English pronunciation, but not all videos had a comprehensive narration. Six videos (9%) were recommended for training compounding personnel by two assessors and a further 17 (26%) videos were recommended by one assessor. No videos were recommended by all three assessors. The conclusions of this study are: 1) there is considerable variation in the quality of instructional sterile compounding videos available on the YouTube website; 2) few videos are suitable for training compounding personnel.

Related Keywords

Related Categories

Printer-Friendly Version

Related Articles from IJPC

Issue/Page
View/Buy
Title/Author
(Click for Abstract / Details / Purchase)
May/Jun 2019
Pg. 238-244
May/Jun 2004
Pg. 181-185
Sep/Oct 2019
Pg. 387-391
Nov/Dec 2019
Pg. 467-471
Mar/Apr 2004
Pg. 89-94
Author(s): Rahe Hank
Jan/Feb 2014
Pg. 6-12
Jul/Aug 2016
Pg. 307-314
Author(s): Akers Michael J
Jan/Feb 2022
Pg. 10-17
Jan/Feb 2022
Pg. 41-49
Author(s): Allen Loyd V Jr
Mar/Apr 2017
Pg. 133-142
Author(s): Akers Michael J
May/Jun 2017
Pg. 193-203
Author(s): Mixon William, Roth Abby
May/Jun 2022
Pg. 219-228
Author(s): Allen Loyd V Jr
Nov/Dec 2022
Pg. 497-504
Author(s): Summers Amy
Jul/Aug 2015
Pg. 268-278
Mar/Apr 2019
Pg. 123-130
Author(s): Allen Loyd V Jr
Sep/Oct 2019
Pg. 399-402
Author(s): Allen Loyd V Jr
May/Jun 2017
Pg. 182-190
Author(s): Ligugnana Roberto
Jul/Aug 2004
Pg. 269-274
Nov/Dec 2021
Pg. 491-496
Author(s): Allen Loyd V Jr
Mar/Apr 2023
Pg. 114-121
Author(s): Summers Amy