Browse > Article
http://dx.doi.org/10.31616/asj.2018.12.6.987

Anterior Cervical Discectomy and Fusion YouTube Videos as a Source of Patient Education  

Ovenden, Christopher Dillon (School of Medicine, The University of Adelaide)
Brooks, Francis Michael (Department of Spine Surgery, Trauma and Orthopaedics Centre, Royal Devon and Exeter Hospital)
Publication Information
Asian Spine Journal / v.12, no.6, 2018 , pp. 987-991 More about this Journal
Abstract
Study Design: Cross sectional study. Purpose: To assess the quality of anterior cervical discectomy and fusion (ACDF) videos available on YouTube and identify factors associated with video quality. Overview of Literature: Patients commonly use the internet as a source of information regarding their surgeries. However, there is currently limited information regarding the quality of online videos about ACDF. Methods: A search was performed on YouTube using the phrase 'anterior cervical discectomy and fusion.' The Journal of the American Medical Association (JAMA), DISCERN, and Health on the Net (HON) systems were used to rate the first 50 videos obtained. Information about each video was collected, including number of views, duration since the video was posted, percentage positivity (defined as number of likes the video received, divided by the total number of likes or dislikes of that video), number of comments, and the author of the video. Relationships between video quality and these factors were investigated. Results: The average number of views for each video was 96,239. The most common videos were those published by surgeons and those containing patient testimonies. Overall, the video quality was poor, with mean scores of 1.78/5 using the DISCERN criteria, 1.63/4 using the JAMA criteria, and 1.96/8 using the HON criteria. Surgeon authors' videos scored higher than patient testimony videos when reviewed using the HON or JAMA systems. However, no other factors were found to be associated with video quality. Conclusions: The quality of ACDF videos on YouTube is low, with the majority of videos produced by unreliable sources. Therefore, these YouTube videos should not be recommended as patient education tools for ACDF.
Keywords
Cervical spine; Anterior cervical discectomy and fusion; Patient education as topic; YouTube;
Citations & Related Records
연도 인용수 순위
  • Reference
1 Madathil KC, Rivera-Rodriguez AJ, Greenstein JS, Gramopadhye AK. Healthcare information on YouTube: a systematic review. Health Informatics J 2015;21:173-94.   DOI
2 Lagan BM, Sinclair M, Kernohan WG. Internet use in pregnancy informs women's decision making: a web-based survey. Birth 2010;37:106-15.   DOI
3 Tartaglione JP, Rosenbaum AJ, Abousayed M, Hushmendy SF, DiPreta JA. Evaluating the quality, accuracy, and readability of online resources pertaining to hallux valgus. Foot Ankle Spec 2016;9:17-23.   DOI
4 Desai T, Shariff A, Dhingra V, Minhas D, Eure M, Kats M. Is content really king?: an objective analysis of the public's response to medical videos on You-Tube. PLoS One 2013;8:e82469.   DOI
5 Ullrich PF Jr, Vaccaro AR. Patient education on the internet: opportunities and pitfalls. Spine (Phila Pa 1976) 2002;27:E185-8.   DOI
6 Winker MA, Flanagin A, Chi-Lum B, et al. Guidelines for medical and health information sites on the internet: principles governing AMA web sites. American Medical Association. JAMA 2000;283:1600-6.   DOI
7 Eysenbach G, Kohler Ch. What is the prevalence of health-related searches on the World Wide Web? Qualitative and quantitative analysis of search engine queries on the internet. AMIA Annu Symp Proc 2003:225-9.
8 Diaz JA, Griffith RA, Ng JJ, Reinert SE, Friedmann PD, Moulton AW. Patients' use of the Internet for medical information. J Gen Intern Med 2002;17:180-5.   DOI
9 Baker JF, Devitt BM, Kiely PD, et al. Prevalence of Internet use amongst an elective spinal surgery outpatient population. Eur Spine J 2010;19:1776-9.   DOI
10 Bao H, Zhu F, Wang F, et al. Scoliosis related information on the internet in China: can patients benefit from this information? PLoS One 2015;10:e0118289.   DOI
11 Ho M, Stothers L, Lazare D, Tsang B, Macnab A. Evaluation of educational content of YouTube videos relating to neurogenic bladder and intermittent catheterization. Can Urol Assoc J 2015;9:320-54.   DOI
12 YouTube. Statistics [Internet]. San Bruno (CA): You-Tube [cited 2016 Mar 25]. Available from: http://www.youtube.com/yt/press/statistics.html.
13 Health On the Net Foundation. HONcode [Internet]. Geneva: Health On the Net Foundation [cited 2016 Apr 27]. Available from: https://www.hon.ch/HONcode/Pro/Visitor/visitor.html.
14 Fischer J, Geurts J, Valderrabano V, Hugle T. Educational quality of YouTube videos on knee arthrocentesis. J Clin Rheumatol 2013;19:373-6.   DOI
15 Mukewar S, Mani P, Wu X, Lopez R, Shen B. You-Tube and inflammatory bowel disease. J Crohns Colitis 2013;7:392-402.   DOI
16 Syed-Abdul S, Fernandez-Luque L, Jian WS, et al. Misleading health-related information promoted through video-based social media: anorexia on You-Tube. J Med Internet Res 2013;15:e30.   DOI
17 Brooks FM, Lawrence H, Jones A, McCarthy MJ. $YouTube^{(TM)}$ as a source of patient information for lumbar discectomy. Ann R Coll Surg Engl 2014;96:144-6.
18 Staunton PF, Baker JF, Green J, Devitt A. Online curves: a quality analysis of scoliosis videos on You-Tube. Spine (Phila Pa 1976) 2015;40:1857-61.   DOI
19 Silberg WM, Lundberg GD, Musacchio RA. Assessing, controlling, and assuring the quality of medical information on the Internet: caveant lector et viewor: let the reader and viewer beware. JAMA 1997;277:1244-5.   DOI
20 Discern Online. The Discern instrument [Internet]. San Mateo (CA): Discern Group Inc. [cited 2016 Apr 12]. Available from: http://www.discern.org.uk/discern_instrument.php.