Surgical mesh information on YouTube(TM): Evaluating the usage and reliability of videos for patient education

Authors

  • Garson Chan 1) Department of Surgery, Division of Urology, College of Medicine, University of Saskatchewan, Canada; 2) College of Medicine, University of Saskatchewan, Canada; 3) Department of Urology, Austin Health, University of Melbourne, Australia https://orcid.org/0000-0002-2241-6635
  • Emma Yanko College of Medicine, University of Saskatchewan, Canada https://orcid.org/0000-0001-8655-4642
  • Liang Qu 1) Department of Urology, Austin Health, University of Melbourne, Australia; 2) Young Urology Researchers Organisation (YURO), Australia
  • Ariel Zilberlicht Division of Urogynecology and Reconstructive Pelvic Surgery, Department of Obstetrics and Gynecology, The Lady Davis Carmel Medical Center, Technion University, Rappaport Faculty of Medicine, Haifa, Israel
  • Deb Karmakar Mercy Health, Victoria, Australia
  • Athina Pirpiris Eastern Health, Victoria, Australia
  • Johan Gani 1) Department of Urology, Austin Health, University of Melbourne, Australia; 2) Department of Urology, Western Health, University of Melbourne, Australia

DOI:

https://doi.org/10.5489/cuaj.7706

Keywords:

video recording, surgical mesh, social media, patient education

Abstract

Introduction: Patients in search of answers to health-related questions often seek out information on the internet. The current study aimed to evaluate the quality of videos on the topic of mesh pertaining to its use in the treatment of stress urinary incontinence or pelvic organ prolapse.

Methods: A total of 100 videos on the topic of mesh on YouTubeTM were screened in this study. From that, a further 30 were selected for review. Five experts in the medical field reviewed each video anonymously, using two video assessment tools. Video characteristics were collected and evaluated. Videos were assessed based on a Global Assessment Score (GAS) and Patient Education Tool for Audiovisual Materials (PEMAT-A/V) scale for ease of patient access and comprehension. The overall correlation between raters and videos was also compared.

Results: The GAS and PEMAT-A/V ratings correlation across multiple raters demonstrated excellent inter-rater reliability. We found that the overall GAS score and recommendation was substandard, and the median PEMAT-A/V understandability score was 70% (poorly understandable). Most videos contained some form of marketing, and a scarce number had reliable sources of information. Evidence of neutrality was low.

Conclusions: Through the expert assessment of videos using quality assessment tools, this study demonstrated the overall variable quality of mesh videos on YouTubeTM and the need for further education regarding patient resources.

Downloads

Download data is not yet available.

Downloads

Published

2022-06-29

How to Cite

Chan, G., Yanko, E., Qu, L., Zilberlicht, A., Karmakar, D., Pirpiris, A., & Gani, J. (2022). Surgical mesh information on YouTube(TM): Evaluating the usage and reliability of videos for patient education. Canadian Urological Association Journal, 16(7), E399–402. https://doi.org/10.5489/cuaj.7706

Issue

Vol. 16 No. 7 (2022): CUAJ July

Section

Review

License

You, the Author(s), assign your copyright in and to the Article to the Canadian Urological Association. This means that you may not, without the prior written permission of the CUA:

  • Post the Article on any Web site
  • Translate or authorize a translation of the Article
  • Copy or otherwise reproduce the Article, in any format, beyond what is permitted under Canadian copyright law, or authorize others to do so
  • Copy or otherwise reproduce portions of the Article, including tables and figures, beyond what is permitted under Canadian copyright law, or authorize others to do so.

The CUA encourages use for non-commercial educational purposes and will not unreasonably deny any such permission request.

You retain your moral rights in and to the Article. This means that the CUA may not assert its copyright in such a way that would negatively reflect on your reputation or your right to be associated with the Article.

The CUA also requires you to warrant the following:

  • That you are the Author(s) and sole owner(s), that the Article is original and unpublished and that you have not previously assigned copyright or granted a licence to any other third party;
  • That all individuals who have made a substantive contribution to the article are acknowledged;
  • That the Article does not infringe any proprietary right of any third party and that you have received the permissions necessary to include the work of others in the Article; and
  • That the Article does not libel or violate the privacy rights of any third party.