J T Cassidy1, E Fitzgerald2, E S Cassidy3, M Cleary2, D P Byrne4, B M Devitt5, J F Baker6. 1. Department of Orthopaedics, University Hospital Limerick, Limerick, Ireland. tristancassidy@gmail.com. 2. Department of Orthopaedics, University Hospital Waterford, Ardkeen, Waterford, Ireland. 3. Faculty of Medicine, University College Dublin, Belfield, Dublin 4, Ireland. 4. Sports Surgery Clinic, Santry, Dublin, Ireland. 5. OrthoSport Victoria, Richmond, VIC, Australia. 6. Waikato Hospital, Hamilton, New Zealand.
Abstract
PURPOSE: YouTube is a global medium used predominantly by young adults (aged 18-49 years). This study examined the quality of YouTube information regarding ACL injury and reconstruction. METHODS: YouTube was searched on the 13th of June 2015 for "ACL" and "anterior cruciate ligament" with/without associated terms of "injury", "reconstruction", and "surgery". Videos were evaluated by two independent reviewers [EF (Reviewer 1), (Reviewer 2)] using two recognized information scoring systems (Modified DISCERN (MD) 0-5 and JAMA Benchmark 0-4) and an adaptation of a score designed for written ACL information [ACL Specific Score (ASS) 0-25]. The ASS categorized scores as very good (21-25), good (16-20), moderate (11-15), poor (6-10), and very poor (0-5). Number of views/likes/dislikes, animation, and continent of origin and source (e.g., corporate/educational) were recorded. Correlation of video characteristics with number of views was examined using the analysis of variance (ANOVA) model. Agreement between reviewers was assessed by Interclass Correlation Co-efficient (ICC). RESULTS: Following a filtering process of the 964,770 identified videos, 39 videos were retained. The mean MD score was 2.3 (standard deviation (SD) ±0.9) for Reviewer 1 and 2.2 (SD ±0.9) for Reviewer 2 (ICC = 0.7). The mean JAMA score was 2.5(SD ±0.7) for Reviewer 1 and 2.3 (SD ±0.7) for Reviewer 2 (ICC = 0.8). The mean ASS was 6.3 (SD ±3.5) for Reviewer 1 and 4.6 (SD ±2.9) for Reviewer 2 (ICC = 0.9). Five videos achieved moderate score (13%), while 15 (38%) and 19 (49%) scored as poor and very poor, respectively. There was no correlation between number of views and video quality/video source for any scoring system. CONCLUSION: The majority of videos viewed on YouTube regarding ACL injury and treatment are of low quality.
PURPOSE: YouTube is a global medium used predominantly by young adults (aged 18-49 years). This study examined the quality of YouTube information regarding ACL injury and reconstruction. METHODS: YouTube was searched on the 13th of June 2015 for "ACL" and "anterior cruciate ligament" with/without associated terms of "injury", "reconstruction", and "surgery". Videos were evaluated by two independent reviewers [EF (Reviewer 1), (Reviewer 2)] using two recognized information scoring systems (Modified DISCERN (MD) 0-5 and JAMA Benchmark 0-4) and an adaptation of a score designed for written ACL information [ACL Specific Score (ASS) 0-25]. The ASS categorized scores as very good (21-25), good (16-20), moderate (11-15), poor (6-10), and very poor (0-5). Number of views/likes/dislikes, animation, and continent of origin and source (e.g., corporate/educational) were recorded. Correlation of video characteristics with number of views was examined using the analysis of variance (ANOVA) model. Agreement between reviewers was assessed by Interclass Correlation Co-efficient (ICC). RESULTS: Following a filtering process of the 964,770 identified videos, 39 videos were retained. The mean MD score was 2.3 (standard deviation (SD) ±0.9) for Reviewer 1 and 2.2 (SD ±0.9) for Reviewer 2 (ICC = 0.7). The mean JAMA score was 2.5(SD ±0.7) for Reviewer 1 and 2.3 (SD ±0.7) for Reviewer 2 (ICC = 0.8). The mean ASS was 6.3 (SD ±3.5) for Reviewer 1 and 4.6 (SD ±2.9) for Reviewer 2 (ICC = 0.9). Five videos achieved moderate score (13%), while 15 (38%) and 19 (49%) scored as poor and very poor, respectively. There was no correlation between number of views and video quality/video source for any scoring system. CONCLUSION: The majority of videos viewed on YouTube regarding ACL injury and treatment are of low quality.
Authors: Gregory J Nason; Joseph F Baker; Damien P Byrne; Jacques Noel; David Moore; Patrick J Kiely Journal: Spine (Phila Pa 1976) Date: 2012-10-01 Impact factor: 3.468
Authors: Matthew G MacLeod; Daniel J Hoppe; Nicole Simunovic; Mohit Bhandari; Marc J Philippon; Olufemi R Ayeni Journal: Arthroscopy Date: 2014-08-20 Impact factor: 4.772
Authors: Thomas L Sanders; Hilal Maradit Kremers; Andrew J Bryan; Dirk R Larson; Diane L Dahm; Bruce A Levy; Michael J Stuart; Aaron J Krych Journal: Am J Sports Med Date: 2016-02-26 Impact factor: 6.202
Authors: Kapil Chalil Madathil; A Joy Rivera-Rodriguez; Joel S Greenstein; Anand K Gramopadhye Journal: Health Informatics J Date: 2014-03-25 Impact factor: 2.681
Authors: Garret Garofolo-Gonzalez; Cesar R Iturriaga; Jordan B Pasternack; Adam Bitterman; Gregory P Guyton Journal: Foot Ankle Orthop Date: 2021-01-25
Authors: Kyle N Kunze; Matthew R Cohn; Connor Wakefield; Fadi Hamati; Robert F LaPrade; Brian Forsythe; Adam B Yanke; Jorge Chahla Journal: Arthrosc Sports Med Rehabil Date: 2019-11-27