Advertisement

YouTube as a source of patient information for ankylosing spondylitis exercises

  • Burhan Fatih KocyigitEmail author
  • Vedat Nacitarhan
  • Tuba Tulay Koca
  • Ejder Berk
Original Article
  • 79 Downloads

Abstract

Introduction/objectives

Ankylosing spondylitis (AS) is a rheumatic disorder characterized by structural impairments and postural deformities which restrict daily life activities. Nonpharmacologic methods, particularly exercise therapies, play a key role in the treatment. Obtaining online health-related information has become increasingly popular. We aimed to assess the quality of the most viewed YouTube videos on AS exercises.

Method

We searched for the key words “ankylosing spondylitis exercise,” “ankylosing spondylitis rehabilitation,” “ankylosing spondylitis physical therapy,” and “ankylosing spondylitis physiotherapy” on YouTube on October 10th, 2018. The educational quality of YouTube videos was evaluated according to the Global Quality Scale, and three groups were formed: high quality, intermediate, and low quality. Video parameters were compared between the groups.

Results

Of the 56 videos evaluated, 48.2% (n = 27) were of high quality, 17.9% (n = 10) were of intermediate quality, and 33.9% (n = 19) were of low quality. When video parameters compared among the groups, no significant differences were found in the number of views per day, likes per day, and comments per day (p > 0.05). Significant differences were found in the number of dislikes per day and DISCERN scores between the groups (p = 0.02, p < 0.001, respectively).

Conclusions

YouTube can be considered as an important source of high-quality videos. Nearly half of the videos were of high quality. Physicians should inform patients about the importance of video resources during the use of YouTube and should guide patients to the accurate sources of information.

Keywords

Ankylosing spondylitis Exercise Physical therapy Physiotherapy Rehabilitation YouTube 

Notes

Compliance with ethical standards

This study does not include any human participants or animals. Videos that were available to everyone were evaluated for this study. Therefore, ethics committee approval was not required.

Disclosures

None.

References

  1. 1.
    Smith JA (2015) Update on ankylosing spondylitis: current concepts in pathogenesis. Curr Allergy Asthma Rep 15(1):489.  https://doi.org/10.1007/s11882-014-0489-6
  2. 2.
    Demontis A, Trainito S, Del Felice A, Masiero S (2016) Favorable effect of rehabilitation on balance in ankylosing spondylitis: a quasi-randomized controlled clinical trial. Rheumatol Int 36(3):333–339.  https://doi.org/10.1007/s00296-015-3399-6
  3. 3.
    Zão A, Cantista P (2017) The role of land and aquatic exercise in ankylosing spondylitis: a systematic review. Rheumatol Int 37(12):1979–1990.  https://doi.org/10.1007/s00296-017-3829-8
  4. 4.
    O’Dwyer T, O’Shea F, Wilson F (2014) Exercise therapy for spondyloarthritis: a systematic review. Rheumatol Int 34(7):887–902.  https://doi.org/10.1007/s00296-014-2965-7
  5. 5.
    Amante DJ, Hogan TP, Pagoto SL, English TM, Lapane KL (2015) Access to care and use of the Internet to search for health information: results from the US National Health Interview Survey. J Med Internet Res 17(4):e106.  https://doi.org/10.2196/jmir.4126
  6. 6.
    Lewis SP, Heath NL, Sornberger MJ, Arbuthnott AE (2012) Helpful or harmful? An examination of viewers’ responses to nonsuicidal self-injury videos on YouTube. J Adolescent Health 51(4):380–385.  https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jadohealth.2012.01.013
  7. 7.
    Dubey D, Amritphale A, Sawhney A, Dubey D, Srivastav N (2014) Analysis of YouTube as a source of information for West Nile virüs infection. Clin Med Res 12(3–4):129–132.  https://doi.org/10.3121/cmr.2013.1194
  8. 8.
    Madathil KC, Rivera-Rodriguez AJ, Greenstein JS, Gramopadhye AK (2015) Healthcare information on YouTube: a systematic review. Health Informatics J 21(3):173–194.  https://doi.org/10.1177/1460458213512220
  9. 9.
    Rittberg R, Dissanayake T, Katz SJ (2016) A qualitative analysis of methotrexate self-injection education videos on YouTube. Clin Rheumatol 35(5):1329–1333.  https://doi.org/10.1007/s10067-015-2910-5
  10. 10.
    Bernard A, Langille M, Hughes S, Rose C, Leddin D, Veldhuyzen van Zanten S (2007) A systematic review of patient inflammatory bowel disease information resources on the World Wide Web. Am J Gastroenterol 102(9):2070–2077Google Scholar
  11. 11.
    Charnock D, Shepperd S, Needham G, Gann R (1999) DISCERN: an instrument for judging the quality of written consumer healthinformation on treatment choices. J Epidemiol Community Health 53(2):105–111CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  12. 12.
    Tolu S, Yurdakul OV, Basaran B, Rezvani A (2018) English-language videos on YouTube as a source of information on self-administer subcutaneous anti-tumour necrosis factor agent injections. Rheumatol Int.  https://doi.org/10.1007/s00296-018-4047-8
  13. 13.
    Leong AY, Sanghera R, Jhajj J, Desai N, Jammu BS, Makowsky MJ (2018) Is YouTube useful as a source of health information for adults with type 2 diabetes? A South Asian perspective. Can J Diabetes 42(4):395–403.  https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jcjd.2017.10.056
  14. 14.
    Nason GJ, Kelly P, Kelly ME, Burke MJ, Aslam A, Giri SK, Flood HD (2015) YouTube as an educational tool regarding male urethral catheterization. Scand J Urol 49(2):189–192.  https://doi.org/10.3109/21681805.2014.975837
  15. 15.
    Starman JS, Gettys FK, Capo JA, Fleischli JE, Norton HJ, Karunakar MA (2010) Quality and content of internet-based information for ten common orthopaedic sports medicine diagnoses. J Bone Joint Surg Am 92(7):1612–1618. https://doi.org.  https://doi.org/10.2106/JBJS.I.00821 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  16. 16.
    Fox S, Rainie L (2002) E-patients and the online health care revolution. Physician Exec 28(6):14–17Google Scholar
  17. 17.
    Keelan J, Pavri-Garcia V, Tomlinson G, Wilson K (2007) YouTube as a source of information on immunization: a content analysis. JAMA 298(21):2482–2484.  https://doi.org/10.1001/jama.298.21.2482
  18. 18.
    Singh AG, Singh S, Singh PP (2012) YouTube for information on rheumatoid arthritis—a wakeup call? J Rheumatol 39(5):899–903.  https://doi.org/10.3899/jrheum.11111
  19. 19.
    Garg N, Venkatraman A, Pandey A, Kumar N (2015) YouTube as a source of information on dialysis: a content analysis. Nephrology (Carlton) 20(5):315–320.  https://doi.org/10.1111/nep.12397
  20. 20.
    Erdem H, Sisik A (2018) The reliability of bariatric surgery videos in YouTube platform. Obes Surg 28(3):712–716.  https://doi.org/10.1007/s11695-017-2911-3
  21. 21.
    Şahin A, Şahin M, Türkcü FM (2018) YouTube as a source of information in retinopathy of prematurity. Ir J Med Sci.  https://doi.org/10.1007/s11845-018-1902-2
  22. 22.
    Sajadi KP, Goldman HB (2011) Social networks lack useful content for incontinence. Urology 78(4):764–767.  https://doi.org/10.1016/j.urology.2011.04.074
  23. 23.
    Lee JS, Seo HS, Hon TH (2014) YouTube as a source of patient information on gallstone disease. World J Gastroenterol 20(14):4066–4070.  https://doi.org/10.3748/wjg.v20.i14.4066
  24. 24.
    Sampson M, Cumber J, Li C, Pound CM, Fuller A, Harrison D (2013) A systematic review of methods for studying consumer health YouTube videos, with implications for systematic reviews. PeerJ 1:e147.  https://doi.org/10.7717/peerj.147

Copyright information

© International League of Associations for Rheumatology (ILAR) 2019

Authors and Affiliations

  • Burhan Fatih Kocyigit
    • 1
    Email author
  • Vedat Nacitarhan
    • 1
  • Tuba Tulay Koca
    • 1
  • Ejder Berk
    • 1
  1. 1.Faculty of Medicine, Department of Physical Medicine and RehabilitationKahramanmaraş Sütçü İmam UniversityKahramanmaraşTurkey

Personalised recommendations