BACKGROUND: Transradial access for neurointerventional procedures was adopted and modified from cardiovascular intervention and is increasingly established as a safe and effective alternative to transfemoral catheterization. As social media influences public opinion on medical treatment, this study analyzes Twitter conversations to elucidate social media's depiction of transradial access as a neurointerventional tool. MATERIALS AND METHODS: Twitter hashtags #RadialFirst and #RadialForNeuro were evaluated using a mixed-method analysis of quantitative social media metrics and qualitative thematic analysis. RESULTS: Between January 2015 and April 2020, 104,146 tweets from 141 countries employed the hashtag #RadialFirst (2015 (1); 2016 (0); 2017 (22,804); 2018 (33,074); 2019 (38,352); 2020 (9,915 January-April)). These generated 226,909,374 impressions and were retweeted 80,120 times by 13,707 users. Media was present in 62.5% of tweets (e.g. wrist image, angiographic runs) but only 14.5% had a reference article. Physicians authored 70.8% of tweets; interventional cardiologists accounted for 83% of top 100 influencers. #RadialForNeuro is more nascent (6 posts in 2019; 323 posts January-April 2020), with 392,662 impressions, and 254 retweets by 177 users; physicians authored 35.6%. Compared to #RadialFirst, #RadialforNeuro tweets were more likely to include media (76%), less likely to include citations (9.7%), and more likely to discuss complications and troubleshooting techniques. CONCLUSION: Twitter activity regarding transradial access permits information dissemination and discussion on approach benefits and challenges. However, many posts arise from non-physician sources and lack links to peer-reviewed publication. The public should be mindful that tweets may reflect opinions, rather than experience or scientific evidence.
BACKGROUND: Transradial access for neurointerventional procedures was adopted and modified from cardiovascular intervention and is increasingly established as a safe and effective alternative to transfemoral catheterization. As social media influences public opinion on medical treatment, this study analyzes Twitter conversations to elucidate social media's depiction of transradial access as a neurointerventional tool. MATERIALS AND METHODS: Twitter hashtags #RadialFirst and #RadialForNeuro were evaluated using a mixed-method analysis of quantitative social media metrics and qualitative thematic analysis. RESULTS: Between January 2015 and April 2020, 104,146 tweets from 141 countries employed the hashtag #RadialFirst (2015 (1); 2016 (0); 2017 (22,804); 2018 (33,074); 2019 (38,352); 2020 (9,915 January-April)). These generated 226,909,374 impressions and were retweeted 80,120 times by 13,707 users. Media was present in 62.5% of tweets (e.g. wrist image, angiographic runs) but only 14.5% had a reference article. Physicians authored 70.8% of tweets; interventional cardiologists accounted for 83% of top 100 influencers. #RadialForNeuro is more nascent (6 posts in 2019; 323 posts January-April 2020), with 392,662 impressions, and 254 retweets by 177 users; physicians authored 35.6%. Compared to #RadialFirst, #RadialforNeuro tweets were more likely to include media (76%), less likely to include citations (9.7%), and more likely to discuss complications and troubleshooting techniques. CONCLUSION: Twitter activity regarding transradial access permits information dissemination and discussion on approach benefits and challenges. However, many posts arise from non-physician sources and lack links to peer-reviewed publication. The public should be mindful that tweets may reflect opinions, rather than experience or scientific evidence.
Authors: Adam Andrew Dmytriw; Thomas Joseph Sorenson; Jonathan M Morris; Patrick J Nicholson; Christopher Alan Hilditch; Christopher S Graffeo; Waleed Brinjikji Journal: J Neurointerv Surg Date: 2018-09-15 Impact factor: 5.836
Authors: Joshua W Osbun; Bhuvic Patel; Michael R Levitt; Alexander T Yahanda; Amar Shah; Kathleen M Dlouhy; Joshua P Thatcher; Michael R Chicoine; Louis J Kim; Gregory J Zipfel Journal: J Neurointerv Surg Date: 2019-09-04 Impact factor: 5.836
Authors: Jeremy G Stone; Benjamin M Zussman; Daniel A Tonetti; Merritt Brown; Shashvat M Desai; Bradley A Gross; Ashutosh Jadhav; Tudor G Jovin; Brian Jankowitz Journal: J Neurointerv Surg Date: 2020-01-22 Impact factor: 5.836
Authors: Stephanie H Chen; Marie-Christine Brunet; Samir Sur; Dileep R Yavagal; Robert M Starke; Eric C Peterson Journal: J Neurointerv Surg Date: 2019-10-05 Impact factor: 5.836
Authors: Matteo Cinelli; Gianmarco De Francisci Morales; Alessandro Galeazzi; Walter Quattrociocchi; Michele Starnini Journal: Proc Natl Acad Sci U S A Date: 2021-03-02 Impact factor: 11.205