MP05-11 PELVIC ORGAN PROLAPSE ON YOUTUBE: EVALUATION OF CONSUMER INFORMATION

Abstract

You have accessJournal of UrologyUrodynamics/Lower Urinary Tract Dysfunction/Female Pelvic Medicine: Pelvic Prolapse (MP05)1 Apr 2020MP05-11 PELVIC ORGAN PROLAPSE ON YOUTUBE: EVALUATION OF CONSUMER INFORMATION Amber Herbert*, Amy Nemirovsky, MS Deborah Hess, M.D. Dawn Walter, Nitya Abraham, M.D. Stacy Loeb, andM.D., MSc Rena MalikM.D. Amber Herbert*Amber Herbert* More articles by this author , Amy NemirovskyAmy Nemirovsky More articles by this author , Deborah HessDeborah Hess More articles by this author , Dawn WalterDawn Walter More articles by this author , Nitya AbrahamNitya Abraham More articles by this author , Stacy LoebStacy Loeb More articles by this author , and Rena MalikRena Malik More articles by this author View All Author Informationhttps://doi.org/10.1097/JU.0000000000000819.011AboutPDF ToolsAdd to favoritesDownload CitationsTrack CitationsPermissionsReprints ShareFacebookLinked InTwitterEmail Abstract INTRODUCTION AND OBJECTIVE: The social media platform YouTube is a significant source of healthcare information for users with over 4,000 videos on pelvic organ prolapse (POP). Comprising 1.5 billion users, YouTube is currently being used in medicine to promote content dissemination and patient/physician education. The aim of this study was to evaluate the quality, understandability, and actionability or the ability for consumers to act after viewing, of POP videos on YouTube. METHODS: Videos were evaluated on YouTube using the search term, “Pelvic Organ Prolapse.” The first 135 YouTube videos were analyzed by trained reviewers. Videos were excluded if they lacked narration in English, exceeded 10.00 minutes in length, demonstrated a surgical operation, or contained both no text and no audio. Videos were assessed using two validated grading system: DISCERN quality criteria and the Patient Education Materials Assessment Tool (PEMAT). RESULTS: In total, 100 videos met the inclusion criteria with a total of 6,307,202 views. Surgical repair was the most common treatment option discussed (57%); however few videos that covered surgical repair also reported surgical complications (Table 1). More than 50% of the videos were given low PEMAT scores (a score below 75%) for understandability and actionability (Table 2). Thirty-one percent of videos have the potential to spread misinformative or biased information to unknowing users (Table 2). CONCLUSIONS: With millions of views on YouTube, many POP videos lack high quality information which is essential for decision-making. There is little oversight of the quality of information that is uploaded on YouTube, which can hinder users who are increasingly dependent upon websites like, YouTube, to make appropriate medical judgements. YouTube videos can leave many patients unable to understand the topic, thus affecting their ability to seek proper medical care. Efforts should be made to ensure the dissemination of both comprehensive and accurate healthcare options to the millions of users on YouTube and other social media websites. Source of Funding: Stacy Loeb, M.D., MSc is supported by the Edward Blank and Sharon Cosloy-Blank Family Foundation. © 2020 by American Urological Association Education and Research, Inc.FiguresReferencesRelatedDetails Volume 203Issue Supplement 4April 2020Page: e45-e45 Advertisement Copyright & Permissions© 2020 by American Urological Association Education and Research, Inc.MetricsAuthor Information Amber Herbert* More articles by this author Amy Nemirovsky More articles by this author Deborah Hess More articles by this author Dawn Walter More articles by this author Nitya Abraham More articles by this author Stacy Loeb More articles by this author Rena Malik More articles by this author Expand All Advertisement PDF downloadLoading ...