| Literature DB >> 32266347 |
Kyle N Kunze1, Matthew R Cohn1, Connor Wakefield1, Fadi Hamati1, Robert F LaPrade2, Brian Forsythe1, Adam B Yanke1, Jorge Chahla1.
Abstract
PURPOSE: The purpose of this study was to evaluate the reliability and educational content of YouTube videos concerning injuries to the posterior cruciate ligament (PCL) of the knee.Entities:
Year: 2019 PMID: 32266347 PMCID: PMC7120836 DOI: 10.1016/j.asmr.2019.09.003
Source DB: PubMed Journal: Arthrosc Sports Med Rehabil ISSN: 2666-061X
The Journal of the American Medical Association Benchmark Criteria
| Criteria | Description |
|---|---|
| Authorship | Author and contributor credentials and their affiliations should be provided. |
| Attribution | Clearly lists all copyright information and states references and sources for content. |
| Currency | Initial date of posted content and subsequent updates to content should be provided. |
| Disclosure | Conflicts of interest, funding, sponsorship, advertising, support, and video ownership should be fully disclosed. |
The Global Quality Score Criteria,
| Grading | Description of Quality |
|---|---|
| 1 | Poor quality; is unlikely of be to use for patient education. |
| 2 | Poor quality; is of limited use to patients because only some information is present. |
| 3 | Suboptimal quality and flow; is somewhat useful to patients; important topics are missing, some information is present. |
| 4 | Good quality and flow; useful to patients because most important topics are covered. |
| 5 | Excellent quality and flow; is highly useful to patients. |
Posterior Cruciate Ligament-Specific Score and Specific Educational Content
| Patient presentation |
| Describes symptoms |
| Describes patient population |
| Information about PCL |
| Describes anatomy/function of PCL |
| Discusses regenerative potential of PCL |
| Discusses acute vs chronic tears |
| Diagnosis and evaluation |
| Mentions physical examination and findings |
| Discusses ability for stress x-rays to evaluate PCL tears |
| Discusses use of MRI as gold standard |
| Describes surgical candidates (young adults or those with symptoms impacting function/quality of life, excludes patients with significant osteoarthritis) |
| Describes surgical noncandidates (older adults with few symptoms) |
| Treatment |
| Mentions conservative treatment |
| Mentions diagnostic arthroscopy and other pathologies that may be addressed concomitantly |
| Describes single-bundle reconstruction |
| Describes double-bundle reconstruction |
| Postoperative course |
| Describes complications and outcomes |
| Mentions physical/weight-bearing restrictions |
| Mentions physical therapy |
| Outlines return-to-function timeline |
PCL, posterior cruciate ligament.
Video Characteristics of the YouTube Videos Included
| Characteristic | Mean | Standard Deviation | Minimum | Maximum |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Video duration | 281.5 | 258.4 | 41.0 | 1115.4 |
| Views | 50,477.9 | 150369.8 | 121.0 | 1,026,666 |
| Days since upload | 1385.3 | 1057.0 | 134.0 | 4,164.0 |
| View ratio | 27.8 | 42.8 | 0.14 | 246.6 |
| Comments | 14.2 | 34.9 | 0.0 | 201.0 |
| Likes | 135.6 | 233.8 | 0.0 | 1,300.0 |
| Dislikes | 7.9 | 11.8 | 0.0 | 54.0 |
| Like ratio | 91.0 | 10.1 | 50.0 | 100.0 |
| Video power index | 1,240.4 | 948.7 | 93.8 | 3708.0 |
Fig 1Donut chart depicting the relative frequency of video content for PCL-related YouTube videos. Each pattern represents a unique video content category as labeled adjacent to the chart. Percentages are derived from the first 50 identified videos in the current study.
Fig 2Donut chart depicting the relative frequency of video upload sources for PCL-related YouTube videos. Each pattern represents a unique video upload source category as labeled adjacent to the chart. Percentages are derived from the first 50 identified videos in the current study.
Mean Quality and Reliability Scores per Video Content and Video Source Variables
| JAMA | GQS | PCLS | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Mean (SD) | Mean (SD) | Mean (SD) | |
| Video content | |||
| Exercise training | 1.3 (0.5) | 2.5 (0.6) | 2.8 (1.7) |
| Disease-specific | 2.1 (1.2) | 2.6 (1.1) | 3.3 (2.9) |
| Patient experience | 0.0 (0.0) | 1.5 (0.7) | 1.0 (0.4) |
| Surgical technique | 2.6 (1.3) | 1.7 (1.3) | 2.4 (2.1) |
| Nonsurgical | 1.6 (0.2) | 1.5 (0.6) | 3.0 (1.1) |
| Advertisement | 1.0 (0.7) | 2.0 (0.3) | 2.1 (0.6) |
| Video source | |||
| Academic | 1.0 (0.4) | 1.0 (0.1) | 0.7 (0.6) |
| Physician | 2.6 (0.9) | 2.1 (1.2) | 3.0 (2.8) |
| Nonphysician | 1.8 (1.4) | 2.3 (0.9) | 3.1 (2.6) |
| Trainer | 1.9 (1.6) | 3.0 (1.2) | 2.4 (1.9) |
| Medical | 2.8 (1.0) | 2.9 (1.2) | 3.7 (2.6) |
| Patient | 0.0 (0.0) | 2.0 (0.4) | 2.0 (0.3) |
| Commercial | 1.2 (0.4) | 1.8 (0.8) | 2.4 (1.7) |
GQS, Global Quality Score; JAMA, Journal of the American Medical Association; PCLS, Posterior Cruciate Ligament Score; SD, standard deviation of the mean.
P value for video content between-group effects: JAMA = 0.098, GQS = 0.22, PCLS = 0.82.
P value for video source between-group effects: JAMA = 0.037, GQS = 0.11, PCLS = 0.75.