Validity and Usefulness of YouTube Videos Related to Endoscopic Transsphenoidal Surgery for Patient Information

Abstract

Objectives This article evaluates the completeness and accuracy of YouTube videos related to endoscopic transsphenoidal surgery (ETS) as a source for patient information. Design YouTube was searched using relevant terms pertaining to ETS. Videos were evaluated independently by two physician reviewers experienced in ETS. Video demographics including uploader source along with validity scores based on predetermined checklists were captured. Setting Internet. Participants Not applicable. Main Outcome Measures A novel ETS scoring checklist, the modified DISCERN criteria, and Journal of the American Medical Association (JAMA) benchmark score were used to measure completeness and accuracy of videos. video power index (VPI) was calculated to reflect popularity. Intraclass correlation coefficient was calculated for rater agreement. Results Seventy-nine videos were included in final scoring and analysis. The ETS score, DISCERN, JAMA, and mean VPI across all included videos were 5.0 ± 2.7, 2.4 ± 0.83, 2.19 ± 0.62, and 8.92 ± 18.1, respectively. Based on the ETS score checklist, 31 (39%) of the videos were rated as poor, 30 (38%) were moderately useful, 17 (22%) were useful, and 1 (1%) was exceptional. There was a significant positive correlation between the ETS, DISCERN, and JAMA scores (p < 0.001), but no correlation with VPI and the validity scores. There were no significant differences comparing validity scores based on the uploader source. Conclusion YouTube videos related to ETS have limited usefulness and poor overall validity for patient information. Clinicians should direct patients to other validated sources of information and aim to improve the comprehensiveness of ETS-related videos.

See many, do one, teach many more: Assessing quality and reliability of publicly available endoscopic videos in rhinology

“…5 A study evaluating YouTube videos related to endoscopic transsphenoidal surgery showed that videos with higher VPI and videos with higher view counts were not significantly associated with higher scores for DISCERN criteria or JAMA score. 24 They determined patients may be obtain-ing information from lower quality and less reliable videos rather than high-quality videos with relatively lower VPI. Therefore, users seeking out surgical video resources must be wary of videos deemed popular by conventional metrics because they may not contain the highest-quality or most reliable information.…”

“…Additionally, as noted by Levin et al, lay people may confuse high view counts for videos of high quality. 24 One of the few significant metric differences between videos uploaded by academicaffiliated users and independent users is the amount of time the video has been available for public access. When initially evaluated, videos uploaded by independent users were on YouTube for 2521.42 ± 1297.95 days compared with 1174.88 ± 943.12 days (p < 0.001).…”

Readability of the American, Canadian, and British Otolaryngology–Head and Neck Surgery Societies’ Patient Materials

“…A study that set out to estimate the prevalence of poor reading skills in the OHNS outpatient population in the United Kingdom found that 28% of their patients had poor reading skills and were unable to comprehend medical leaflets 42 . Moreover, studies on the utilization of Internet videos and websites for OHNS procedures have concluded they are of poor quality and difficult for patients to comprehend, making national society websites the ideal source for trusted patient education material 43–46 . This requires OHNS societies to provide accurate information, written at a comprehensible level, as these are viewed as trusted sources of information for patient education 29 …”

“…42 Moreover, studies on the utilization of Internet videos and websites for OHNS procedures have concluded they are of poor quality and difficult for patients to comprehend, making national society websites the ideal source for trusted patient education material. [43][44][45][46] This requires OHNS societies to provide accurate information, written at a comprehensible level, as these are viewed as trusted sources of information for patient education. 29 Our study concluded that neither AAO-HNS, CSOHNS, nor ENT UK had online patient materials written at a sixthgrade reading level as recommended by the AMA.…”

Evaluating the Usefulness of YouTube as a Source of Patient Information for Neurosurgical Care in Africa: A Study Protocol

“…The inclusion criteria were adapted and modified from previous studies [12,13]. Videos made in English, French, Arabic, Swahili and Hausa will be included.…”