Perioperative Caregiver Education Using Animated Videos for Pediatric Tonsillectomy: A Randomized Controlled Study
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Abstract Objective Information technologies may enhance our traditional perioperative teaching by providing more comprehensive information beyond the clinical visit. This quality improvement study aims to assess whether the implementation of an animated surgical video improves caregiver satisfaction for children undergoing adenotonsillectomy. Study Design Prospective, single‐blinded randomized‐controlled trial was conducted between March 1 and October 1, 2023. Setting Tertiary care academic pediatric hospital. Methods A consecutive series of patients and their primary caregivers were randomly allocated to either the control arm, in which they received traditional patient education, or the intervention arm, additionally gaining access to the multimedia platform summarizing the surgical pathway for an adenotonsillectomy. Outcomes included caregiver satisfaction using the Care Transitions Measures (CTM‐15) questionnaire, resource utilization, and qualitative feedback analysis. Results A total of 100 patients (50 in each arm) completed the postintervention questionnaires (mean age 5.2 ± 3.0 years, female:male: 9:10) after undergoing an adenoidectomy (N = 28), tonsillectomy (N = 3), or both (N = 69). CTM‐15 scores were high in both groups, with no observed difference between the intervention and control groups 85.82 12.91 versus 85.41 16.21, respectively, P = .89). Unplanned postoperative visits were comparable between groups, however, caregivers in the intervention arm were less likely to call a medical professional on more than 1 occasion postoperatively (16% vs 2%, P = .042). Most caregivers within the intervention arm agreed that the animated platform was interesting (94%) and useful (98%). Conclusion Animated surgical guides are an alluring complementary modality to standard clinician‐led teaching and may help reduce perioperative resource utilization.
Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.
How this classification was reachedexpand
Full frame distilled prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. Learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and 10,348 direct Gemma labels. Candidate is the union of thresholded teacher heads; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels or direct frontier model labels.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
Machine scores (provisional)
The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.
Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one teacher head, not a consensus.
How this classification was reached, model by model and score by score, is at the end of the page under "How this classification was reached".