F H Zaidi1, C A Jones. 1. Eye, Ear and Mouth Unit, Maidstone and Tunbide Wells NHS Trust, Maidstone Hospital, Kent, England, UK. fhz12@hotmail.com
Abstract
AIMS: Oculoplastic surgery has received little attention compared with other subspecialties in terms of how the internet influences patient expectations. Blepharoplasty resembles a model for oculoplastic operations. We aimed to assess the quality of information accessed by patients on blepharoplasty using the internet as a resource. METHODS: After surveying doctors and lay persons, the word 'blepharoplasty' and related terms were studied using an advanced keyword search. This scanned average monthly search volume over a recent 12-month period. The three most popular search terms that were found were entered into the Google search engine. Criteria published in the Journal of the American Medical Associationfor qualifying information from the internet were used in the analysis, yielding a possible score from 0 to a maximum of 4. RESULTS: Of the 150 websites that were studied, these criteria were fully applied to 101 websites. Only 2.5% of sites scored favourably on all four criteria; 6.5% scored three points; 10% scored two points; 41% scored one point; 40% of sites scored zero for objective quality. Superior scores were achieved by online encyclopaedias ('medipedias'), peer-reviewed journals, online abstracts, and book chapters. The websites of professional bodies scored poorly. The lowest scored were private clinics and National Health Service (NHS) hospital websites. CONCLUSIONS: Using the internet, the quality of information obtained for oculoplastic surgery seems far inferior to other subspecialties within ophthalmology as well as non-ophthalmic specialties. These findings are specifically relevant to surgeons carrying out blepharoplasty and of general relevance to ophthalmic plastic surgeons.
AIMS: Oculoplastic surgery has received little attention compared with other subspecialties in terms of how the internet influences patient expectations. Blepharoplasty resembles a model for oculoplastic operations. We aimed to assess the quality of information accessed by patients on blepharoplasty using the internet as a resource. METHODS: After surveying doctors and lay persons, the word 'blepharoplasty' and related terms were studied using an advanced keyword search. This scanned average monthly search volume over a recent 12-month period. The three most popular search terms that were found were entered into the Google search engine. Criteria published in the Journal of the American Medical Associationfor qualifying information from the internet were used in the analysis, yielding a possible score from 0 to a maximum of 4. RESULTS: Of the 150 websites that were studied, these criteria were fully applied to 101 websites. Only 2.5% of sites scored favourably on all four criteria; 6.5% scored three points; 10% scored two points; 41% scored one point; 40% of sites scored zero for objective quality. Superior scores were achieved by online encyclopaedias ('medipedias'), peer-reviewed journals, online abstracts, and book chapters. The websites of professional bodies scored poorly. The lowest scored were private clinics and National Health Service (NHS) hospital websites. CONCLUSIONS: Using the internet, the quality of information obtained for oculoplastic surgery seems far inferior to other subspecialties within ophthalmology as well as non-ophthalmic specialties. These findings are specifically relevant to surgeons carrying out blepharoplasty and of general relevance to ophthalmic plastic surgeons.