• 1. 

    Mann RA & Coughlin MJ: Hallux valgus—etiology, anatomy, treatment and surgical considerations. Clin Orthop Relat Res 157: 31, 1981.

  • 2. 

    Hecht PJ & Lin TJ: Hallux valgus. Med Clin North Am 98: 227, 2014.

  • 3. 

    Easley ME & Trnka HJ: Current concepts review: hallux valgus part II: operative treatment. Foot Ankle Int 28: 748, 2007.

  • 4. 

    Omnicore: YouTube by the numbers: stats, demographics & fun facts. Available at: https://www.omnicoreagency.com/youtube-statistics/. Accessed December 15, 2019.

    • Search Google Scholar
    • Export Citation
  • 5. 

    Koller U , Waldstein W & Schatz KD et al.: YouTube provides irrelevant information for the diagnosis and treatment of hip arthritis. Int Orthop 40: 1995, 2016.

  • 6. 

    Madathil KC , Rivera-Rodriguez AJ & Greenstein JS et al.: Healthcare information on YouTube: a systematic review. Health Informatics J 21: 173, 2015.

  • 7. 

    Tartaglione JP , Rosenbaum AJ & Abousayed M et al.: Evaluating the quality, accuracy, and readability of online resources pertaining to hallux valgus. Foot Ankle Spec 9: 17, 2016.

    • Crossref
    • PubMed
    • Search Google Scholar
    • Export Citation
  • 8. 

    MacLeod MG , Hoppe DJ & Simunovic N et al.: YouTube as an information source for femoroacetabular impingement: a systematic review of video content. Arthroscopy 31: 136, 2015.

    • Crossref
    • PubMed
    • Search Google Scholar
    • Export Citation
  • 9. 

    Wong M , Desai B & Bautista M et al.: YouTube is a poor source of patient information for knee arthroplasty and knee osteoarthritis. Arthroplast Today 5: 78, 2018.

    • PubMed
    • Search Google Scholar
    • Export Citation
  • 10. 

    Cassidy JT , Fitzgerald E & Cassidy ES et al.: YouTube provides poor information regarding anterior cruciate ligament injury and reconstruction. Knee Surg Sports Traumatol Arthrosc 26: 840, 2018.

    • Crossref
    • PubMed
    • Search Google Scholar
    • Export Citation
  • 11. 

    Cassidy JT & Baker JF: Orthopaedic patient information on the World Wide Web: an essential review. J Bone Joint Surg Am 98: 325, 2016.

  • 12. 

    Chong YM , Fraval A & Chandrananth J et al.: Assessment of the quality of Web-based information on bunions. Foot Ankle Int 34: 1134, 2013.

  • 13. 

    Gokcen HB & Gumussuyu G: A quality analysis of disc herniation videos on YouTube. World Neurosurg 124: e799, 2019.

  • 14. 

    Erdem MN & Karaca S: Evaluating the accuracy and quality of the information in kyphosis videos shared on YouTube. Spine (Phila Pa 1976) 43: E1334, 2018.

    • Crossref
    • Search Google Scholar
    • Export Citation
  • 15. 

    O'Neill SC , Baker JF & Fitzgerald C et al.: Cauda equina syndrome: assessing the readability and quality of patient information on the Internet. Spine (Phila Pa 1976) 39: E645, 2014.

    • Crossref
    • Search Google Scholar
    • Export Citation
  • 16. 

    Nason GJ , Baker JF & Byrne DP et al.: Scoliosis-specific information on the Internet: has the “information highway” led to better information provision? Spine (Phila Pa 1976) 37: E1364, 2012.

    • Crossref
    • Search Google Scholar
    • Export Citation
  • 17. 

    Staunton PF , Baker JF & Green J et al.: Online curves: a quality analysis of scoliosis videos on YouTube. Spine (Phila Pa 1976) 40: 1857, 2015.

  • 18. 

    Desai T , Shariff A & Dhingra V et al.: Is content really king? An objective analysis of the public's response to medical videos on YouTube. PLoS One 8: e82469, 2013;

    • Crossref
    • Search Google Scholar
    • Export Citation
  • 19. 

    Jones M & Wiberg A: Evaluating Youtube as a source of patient information on Dupuytren's disease. World J Plast Surg 6: 396, 2017.

  • 20. 

    Ovenden CD & Brooks FM: Anterior cervical discectomy and fusion YouTube videos as a source of patient education. Asian Spine J 12: 987, 2018.

Quality Analysis of Hallux Valgus Videos on YouTube

Enes Sari
Search for other papers by Enes Sari in
Current site
Google Scholar
PubMed
Close
 MD
and
Levent Fazli Umur
Search for other papers by Levent Fazli Umur in
Current site
Google Scholar
PubMed
Close
 MD
Restricted access

Background

The aim of this study was to evaluate the information quality of YouTube videos on hallux valgus.

Methods

A YouTube search was performed using the phrase “hallux valgus” to determine the first 300 videos related to hallux valgus. A total of 54 videos met our inclusion criteria and were evaluated for information quality by using DISCERN, Journal of the American Medical Association (JAMA), and hallux valgus information assessment (HAVIA) scores. Number of views, time since the upload date, view rate, number of comments, number of likes, number of dislikes, and video power index values were calculated to determine video popularity. Information regarding video length (in seconds), video source, and video content was also noted. The relation between information quality and these factors were statistically evaluated.

Results

The mean DISCERN score was 30.35 ± 11.56 (poor quality) (range, 14–64), the mean JAMA score was 2.28 ± 0.96 (range, 1–4), and the mean HAVIA score was 3.63 ± 2.42 (moderate quality) (range, 0.5–8.5). Although videos uploaded by physicians had higher mean DISCERN, JAMA, and HAVIA scores than videos uploaded by nonphysicians, the difference was not statistically significant. In addition, view rates and video power index values were higher for videos uploaded by health channels, but the difference did not reach statistical significance. A statistically significant positive correlation was found between video length and DISCERN (r = 0.294; P = .028), and HAVIA scores (r = 0.326; P = .015).

Conclusions

This study demonstrated that the quality of information available on YouTube videos about hallux valgus was low and insufficient. Videos containing accurate information from reliable sources are needed to educate patients on hallux valgus, especially with regard to less frequently mentioned topics such as postoperative complications and healing period.

Orthopedics and Traumatology, Near East University Hospital, Mersin, Turkey.

Orthopedics and Traumatology, Kadikoy Acibadem Hospital, Istanbul, Turkey.

Corresponding author: Enes Sari, MD, Orthopedics and Traumatology, Near East University Hospital, Yakin Dogu Buvari Lefkosa/KKTC, Mersin 10, Turkey 99010. (E-mail: esari.md@gmail.com)

Conflict of Interest: None reported.