Evaluating YouTube Videos on Facelift Surgery for Facial Rejuvenation as a Resource for Patients

Abstract

Objectives: This study evaluated the content and patient educational quality of YouTube videos on facelift surgery for facial rejuvenation. This study investigated the relationship between education quality compared to video content, video metrics, and popularity. Methods: Two hundred videos were identified across 4 search terms: “facelift surgery,” “facelift surgery what to expect,” “facelift surgery patient education,” and “what is facelift surgery.” Unrelated videos, operating room recordings, medical professional lectures, non-English, non-audio, and testimonials were excluded from review. Video quality was assessed using the Global Quality Score (GQS) (range: 1-5), modified DISCERN score (range: 5-25), and JAMA Benchmark Criteria (range: 0-4). Secondary outcomes included upload source, video metrics (views, likes, dislikes, duration, days since upload, comments), and Video Power Indexto measure popularity. The first 10 comments on videos were characterized as positive, neutral, or negative. Results: One hundred forty-three videos were excluded (43 did not meet criteria, 100 duplicates), and 57 videos were included. Fifty-five videos (96.5%) were uploaded by private medical practices. Overall video quality was poor across all 3 scoring systems: GQS (2.92 ± 1.14), modified DISCERN (13.03 ± 3.64), and JAMA Benchmark Criteria (1.78 ± 0.52). Popularity positively correlated with JAMA Benchmark Criteria ( R = .49, P < .05) but did not correlate with other quality criteria. Conclusions: For patients undergoing facelift surgery, there are limited educational videos on YouTube with few videos detailing indications, alternatives, complications, and the postoperative course. YouTube is a growing resource for patient education and opportunities exist for medical institutions to produce higher-quality videos for prospective patients.

Olfactory Dysfunction and Tiktok: The Underutilization of a Potent Educational and Health Information Resource

“…Video actionability was adequate, with PEMAT-A measuring 60.77% (SD 3.95), whereas understandability was excellent, with PEMAT-U measuring 80.12% (SD 19.53) (Table 2). ICC was excellent with ICC of all educational measures > 0.80 [19]. video characteristics are shown in Figure 3.…”