Guideline-Nonconformant Investigational Treatments for Erectile Dysfunction: What are Patients Learning?

Abstract

ObjectiveTo evaluate the validity of YouTube content on shockwave, platelet-rich plasma, and stem cell therapies for erectile dysfunction (ED). The consumerization of men's health is particularly notable among regenerative ED treatments, and the popularity of these treatments has been amplified by social media sites such as YouTube. MethodsWe searched YouTube utilizing the following terms: “shockwave therapy-,” “platelet-rich plasma- and “stem cell therapy-“ “-for erectile dysfunction.” The first 50 resulting videos per query were screened (inclusion criteria: relevant title/content, English language, >100 views) and judged by 2 independent graders using the validated DISCERN instrument for consumer health information. Regression analysis assessed association of video characteristics with DISCERN score. ResultsSeventy-one unique videos met criteria. More content featured non-physicians (37%) or non-urologist physicians (35%) than urologists (28%). Mean DISCERN score was low at 42.8 of 80. DISCERN score significantly differed by video category and characteristics. Educational and urologist-featuring videos were associated with higher score. News reports were associated with lower score. Only 3 videos mentioned investigational/experimental status of the therapies. Only 2 cited society guidelines. ConclusionMost YouTube videos on regenerative ED therapies are unreliable and from non-urologists. The misrepresentation of proven efficacy may be encouraging patients to seek these still investigational treatments at high fiscal costs to the patient. Videos with urologists were more likely to be higher quality and guideline based. The urological and academic communities should continue to leverage the power of social media to provide evidence-backed consumer health information in this space.