Abstract
Purpose
To systematically assess the quality of videos on the surgical treatment of urinary stones available on YouTube using validated instruments.
Methods
A systematic search for videos on YouTube addressing treatment options of urinary stones was performed in October 2019. Assessed parameters included basic data (e.g. number of views), the grade of misinformation reporting of conflicts of interest. Quality of content was analyzed using the validated DISCERN questionnaire. Data were analyzed using descriptive statistics.
Results
A total of 100 videos with a median of 26,234 views (1020–1,720,521) were included in the analysis. Of these, only 26 videos were rated to contain no misinformation and only nine disclosed potential conflicts of interest. Overall, the median quality of the videos was low (2 out of 5 points for DISCERN question 16). Videos uploaded by healthcare professionals and medical societies/organizations offered significantly higher levels of quality. In particular, the videos provided by the EAU achieved the highest rating with a median score of 3.0.
Conclusions
The majority of videos concerning the surgical treatment of urinary stones have a low quality of content, are potentially subject to commercial bias and do not report on conflicts of interest. Videos provided by medical societies, such as the EAU, provide a higher level of quality. This highlights the importance of active recommendation of evidence-based patient education materials.
This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.
Similar content being viewed by others
References
Fox S (2014) Pew Research Center. 2014. The social life of health information. https://www.pewresearch.org/fact-tank/2014/01/15/the-social-life-of-health-information/. Accessed June 2019
YouTube for Press (2019) https://www.youtube.com/about/press/. Accessed 24 Nov 2019
Hansen C, Interrante JD, Ailes EC, Frey MT, Broussard CS, Godoshian VJ, Lewis C, Polen KN, Garcia AP, Gilboa SM (2016) Assessment of YouTube videos as a source of information on medication use in pregnancy. Pharmacoepidemiol Drug Saf 25(1):35–44. https://doi.org/10.1002/pds.3911
Sood A, Sarangi S, Pandey A, Murugiah K (2011) YouTube as a source of information on kidney stone disease. Urology 77(3):558–562. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.urology.2010.07.536
Steinberg PL, Wason S, Stern JM, Deters L, Kowal B, Seigne J (2010) YouTube as source of prostate cancer information. Urology 75(3):619–622. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.urology.2008.07.059
Rassweiler J, Rassweiler MC, Kenngott H, Frede T, Michel MS, Alken P, Clayman R (2013) The past, present and future of minimally invasive therapy in urology: a review and speculative outlook. Minim Invasive Ther Allied Technol 22(4):200–209. https://doi.org/10.3109/13645706.2013.816323
Geraghty RM, Jones P, Somani BK (2017) Worldwide trends of urinary stone disease treatment over the last two decades: a systematic review. J Endourol Endourol Soc 31(6):547–556. https://doi.org/10.1089/end.2016.0895
Humphreys MR (2013) The emerging role of robotics and laparoscopy in stone disease. Urol Clin N Am 40(1):115–128. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ucl.2012.09.005
Assimos D, Krambeck A, Miller NL, Monga M, Murad MH, Nelson CP, Pace KT, Pais VM Jr, Pearle MS, Preminger GM, Razvi H, Shah O, Matlaga BR (2016) Surgical management of stones: American Urological Association/endourological society guideline, Part I. J Urol 196(4):1153–1160. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.juro.2016.05.090
European Association of Urology. Non-Oncology Guidelines. Urolithiasis: https://uroweb.org/guideline/urolithiasis/. Accessed Nov 2018
Zumstein V, Betschart P, Abt D, Schmid HP, Panje CM, Putora PM (2018) Surgical management of urolithiasis—a systematic analysis of available guidelines. BMC Urol 18(1):25. https://doi.org/10.1186/s12894-018-0332-9
Betschart P, Zumstein V, Jichlinski P, Herrmann TRW, Knoll T, Engeler DS, Mullhaupt G, Schmid HP, Abt D (2019) Spoilt for choice: a survey of current practices of surgical urinary stone treatment and adherence to evidence-based guidelines among swiss urologists. Urol Int 103(3):357–363. https://doi.org/10.1159/000502806
American Urological Association (2018) Surgical Managmenet of Stone: AUA/Endourology Society Guideline. https://www.auanet.org/guidelines/stone-disease-surgical-(2016). Accessed Nov 2018
Deutsche Gesellschaft für Urologie. S2k-Leitlinie zur Diagnostik, Therapie und Metaphylaxe der Urolithiasis. https://www.awmf.org/uploads/tx_szleitlinien/043-025l_S2k_Diagnostik_Therapie_Metaphylaxe_Urolithiasis_2019-07_1.pdf. Accessed Oct 2019
Charnock D, Shepperd S, Needham G, Gann R (1999) DISCERN: an instrument for judging the quality of written consumer health information on treatment choices. J Epidemiol Community Health 53(2):105–111. https://doi.org/10.1136/jech.53.2.105
Elwyn G, Frosch D, Thomson R, Joseph-Williams N, Lloyd A, Kinnersley P, Cording E, Tomson D, Dodd C, Rollnick S, Edwards A, Barry M (2012) Shared decision making: a model for clinical practice. J Gen Intern Med 27(10):1361–1367. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11606-012-2077-6
Page AE (2015) Safety in surgery: the role of shared decision-making. Patient Saf Surg 9:24. https://doi.org/10.1186/s13037-015-0068-3
Drozd B, Couvillon E, Suarez A (2018) Medical YouTube videos and methods of evaluation: literature review. JMIR Med Educ 4(1):e3. https://doi.org/10.2196/mededu.8527
Tanwar R, Khattar N, Sood R, Makkar A (2015) Benign prostatic hyperplasia related content on YouTube: unregulated and concerning. Recenti Prog Med 106(7):337–341. https://doi.org/10.1701/1940.21092
Ho M, Stothers L, Lazare D, Tsang B, Macnab A (2015) Evaluation of educational content of YouTube videos relating to neurogenic bladder and intermittent catheterization. Can Urol Assoc J 9(9–10):320–354. https://doi.org/10.5489/cuaj.2955
Serinken M, Eken C, Erdemir F, Elicabuk H, Baser A (2016) The reliability of national videos related to the kidney stones on YouTube. Turk J Urol 42(1):7–11. https://doi.org/10.5152/tud.2016.29567
https://patients.uroweb.org/i-am-a-urology-patient/. Accessed June 2019
Funding
No direct or indirect commercial incentive associated with publishing this article.
Author information
Authors and Affiliations
Contributions
MP: Protocol/project development, data collection and management, data analysis, manuscript writing. DA: data collection and management, data analysis, manuscript writing. GM: data collection and management. JL: data collection and management. TK: protocol/project development, manuscript writing. H-PS: protocol/project development, manuscript writing. VZ: protocol/project development, manuscript writing. PB supervision, protocol/project development, data collection and management, data analysis, manuscript writing.
Corresponding author
Ethics declarations
Conflict of interest
The authors declare that they have no conflict of interest.
Ethical approval
All procedures performed involving human participants were in accordance with the ethical standards of the institutional and national research committee and with the 1964 Helsinki declaration and its later amendments or comparable ethical standards.
Informed consent
No human participants were included in the study, therefore, no informed consent was needed.
Additional information
Publisher's Note
Springer Nature remains neutral with regard to jurisdictional claims in published maps and institutional affiliations.
Electronic supplementary material
Below is the link to the electronic supplementary material.
Rights and permissions
About this article
Cite this article
Pratsinis, M., Abt, D., Müllhaupt, G. et al. Systematic assessment of information about surgical urinary stone treatment on YouTube. World J Urol 39, 935–942 (2021). https://doi.org/10.1007/s00345-020-03236-6
Received:
Accepted:
Published:
Issue Date:
DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s00345-020-03236-6