ISSN: 1309 - 3843 E-ISSN: 1307 - 7384
FİZİKSEL TIP VE REHABİLİTASYON
BİLİMLERİ DERGİSİ
www.jpmrs.com
Kayıtlı İndexler


ORIJINAL ARAŞTIRMA

Polimiyaljiya Romatika Hakkında Bilgi Kaynağı Olarak YouTube
YouTube as a Source of Information on Polymyalgia Rheumatica
Received Date : 23 Sep 2022
Accepted Date : 12 Feb 2023
Available Online : 15 Feb 2023
Doi: 10.31609/jpmrs.2022-93509 - Makale Dili: TR
J PMR Sci. 2023;26(2):174-81
ÖZET
Amaç: Polimiyaljiya romatika (PMR), omuz ve kalça kuşağında ağrı ile karakterize romatizmal bir hastalıktır. Mevcut çalışmamızın amacı, PMR ile ilgili YouTube’da en çok izlenen videoların güvenirlik ve kalitesini araştırmaktır. Gereç ve Yöntemler: Videoları aramak amacıyla “polimiyalgia romatica” anahtar kelimesi kullanıldı. Arama sonuçlarına göre en çok izlenen 100 video analiz edildi. Videoların videometrik parametreleri izlenme sayısı, yüklemeden bu zamana geçen süre, beğeni sayısı, beğenmeme sayısı, yorum sayısı, günlük izlenme sayısı, günlük beğeni sayısı kullanılarak kaydedildi. Video popülaritesi video güç indeksi [video power index (VPI)] kullanılarak ölçüldü. Video kaynağına göre sağlık profesyonelleri ve sağlık profesyoneli olmayanlar şeklinde 2 grup oluşturuldu. Ayrıca global kalite skoru (GKS) kullanılarak videolar düşük-, orta- ve yüksek- kalite grupları oluşturuldu. Videoların güvenirliği Journal of the American Medical Association (JAMA) kriterleri ve modifiye DISCERN (mDISCERN) ölçeği, faydalılık durumu usefulness skoru kullanılarak değerlendirildi. Bulgular: Dışlama kriterine uyan videolar çıkarıldıktan sonra kalan 49 video analiz edildi. Videolar kaynağına göre sağlık profesyonelleri %67,3 (n=33) iken, sağlık profesyoneli olmayanların oranı %26,5 (n=13) idi. Gruplar arasında güvenirlik ve kalite açısından sağlık profesyonelleri tarafından oluşturulan videolar istatistiksel açıdan daha kaliteli ve güvenilirdi (p=0,001). Videoların %65,2’si (n=32) yüksek kaliteli, %8,2’si (n=4) orta kaliteli, %26,5’i (n=13) düşük kaliteli idi. Video kalitesinin artışıyla mDISCERN, JAMA ve “usefulness” skorları anlamlı olarak arttığı saptandı. Ortalama beğeni, beğenmeme ve günlük beğeni sayıları ise sadece düşük ve yüksek kaliteli videolar arasında anlamlı idi (p=0,002, p=0,001 ve p=0,007 sırasıyla). Sonuç: PMR ile ilgili YouTube videolarının çoğu kaliteli ve güvenilirdir. Ancak doktorlar hastalarını düşük kaliteli videoları izleyerek yanlış bilgiler edinebileceğinin farkında olmalıdır. Bu nedenle sağlık profesyonelleri, YouTube gibi çevrim içi kaynaklara daha fazla video yüklemelidir.
ABSTRACT
Objective: Polymyalgia rheumatica is a rheumatic disease characterized by pain in the shoulder and hip girdle. The aim of the present study was to investigate the reliability and quality of the most viewed videos on YouTube about polymyalgia rheumatica. Material and Methods: The keyword “polymyalgia rheumatica” was used to search for videos. The 100 most viewed videos were analyzed based on the search results. The videometric parameters of the videos were recorded using the number of views, time since upload, number of likes, number of dislikes, number of comments, number of daily views, and number of daily likes. Video popularity was measured using the video power index. Two groups were formed according to the video source: health professionals and non-health professionals. In addition, low-, medium-, and high-quality groups were formed using the global quality score. The reliability of the videos was assessed using the Journal of the American Medical Association (JAMA) criteria and the modified DISCERN (mDISCERN) scale, and the usefulness of the videos was assessed using the usefulness score. Results: After excluding videos that met the exclusion criteria, the remaining 49 videos were analyzed. Based on the source of the videos, 67.3% (n=33) were health professionals and 26.5% (n=13) were non-health professionals. In terms of reliability and quality between the groups, videos uploaded by healthcare professionals were statistically higher quality and reliable (p=0.001). 65.2% (n=32) of the videos were high quality, 8.2% (n=4) were medium quality, and 26.5% (n=13) were low quality. mDISCERN, JAMA and usefulness scores increased significantly with increasing video quality. The mean number of likes, dislikes and daily likes were statistically significant only between low and high-quality videos (p=0.002, p=0.001, p=0.007 respectively). Conclusion: The majority of YouTube videos on polymyalgia rheumatica are of good quality and trustworthy, but doctors should be aware that their patients may be misinformed by watching low-quality videos, so health professionals should upload more videos to online resources such as YouTube.
REFERENCES
  1. Buttgereit F, Dejaco C, Matteson EL, et al. Polymyalgia rheumatica and giant cell arteritis: A systematic review. JAMA. 2016;315:2442-58. [Crossref]  [PubMed] 
  2. Lawrence RC, Felson DT, Helmick CG, et al; National Arthritis Data Workgroup. Estimates of the prevalence of arthritis and other rheumatic conditions in the United States. Part II. Arthritis Rheum. 2008;58:26-35. [Crossref]  [PubMed]  [PMC] 
  3. Michet CJ, Matteson EL. Polymyalgia rheumatica. BMJ. 2008;336:765-9. [Crossref]  [PubMed]  [PMC] 
  4. Gonzalez-Gay MA, Vazquez-Rodriguez TR, Lopez-Diaz MJ, et al. Epidemiology of giant cell arteritis and polymyalgia rheumatica. Arthritis Rheum. 2009;61:1454-61. [Crossref]  [PubMed] 
  5. Kermani TA, Warrington KJ. Polymyalgia rheumatica. Lancet. 2013;381:63-72. Erratum in: Lancet. 2013;381:28. [Crossref]  [PubMed] 
  6. Fox S. Online health search 2006. Washington, DC: Pew Internet & American Life Project; 2006. [Link] 
  7. Singh AG, Singh S, Singh PP. YouTube for information on rheumatoid arthritis--a wakeup call? J Rheumatol. 2012;39:899-903. [Crossref]  [PubMed] 
  8. Kocyigit BF, Akyol A. YouTube as a source of information on COVID-19 vaccination in rheumatic diseases. Rheumatol Int. 2021;41:2109-15. [Crossref]  [PubMed]  [PMC] 
  9. Onder ME, Zengin O. YouTube as a source of information on gout: a quality analysis. Rheumatol Int. 2021;41:1321-8. [Crossref]  [PubMed]  [PMC] 
  10. Karakoyun A, Yildirim A. YouTube videos as a source of information concerning Behçet's disease: a reliability and quality analysis. Rheumatol Int. 2021;41:2117-23. [Crossref]  [PubMed] 
  11. Pons-Fuster E, Ruiz Roca J, Tvarijonaviciute A, et al. YouTube information about diabetes and oral healthcare. Odontology. 2020;108:84-90. [Crossref]  [PubMed] 
  12. Tolu S, Yurdakul OV, Basaran B, et al. English-language videos on YouTube as a source of information on self-administer subcutaneous anti-tumour necrosis factor agent injections. Rheumatol Int. 2018;38:1285-92. [Crossref]  [PubMed] 
  13. Altunel O, Oruç MŞ, Irgat S, ve ark. [Evaluation of YouTube videos about eyelid diseases as a source of ınformation]. MN Oftalmoloji. 2022;29:1-5. [Link] 
  14. Erdem MN, Karaca S. Evaluating the accuracy and quality of the information in kyphosis videos shared on YouTube. Spine (Phila Pa 1976). 2018;43:E1334-E9. [Crossref]  [PubMed] 
  15. Bernard A, Langille M, Hughes S, et al. A systematic review of patient inflammatory bowel disease information resources on the World Wide Web. Am J Gastroenterol. 2007;102:2070-7. [Crossref]  [PubMed] 
  16. Kocyigit BF, Akaltun MS, Sahin AR. YouTube as a source of information on COVID-19 and rheumatic disease link. Clin Rheumatol. 2020;39:2049-54. [Crossref]  [PubMed]  [PMC] 
  17. Charnock D, Shepperd S, Needham G, et al. DISCERN: an instrument for judging the quality of written consumer health information on treatment choices. J Epidemiol Community Health. 1999;53:105-11. [Crossref]  [PubMed]  [PMC] 
  18. Silberg WM, Lundberg GD, Musacchio RA. Assessing, controlling, and assuring the quality of medical information on the Internet: Caveant lector et viewor--Let the reader and viewer beware. JAMA. 1997;277:1244-5. [Crossref]  [PubMed] 
  19. Lee JS, Seo HS, Hong TH. YouTube as a source of patient information on gallstone disease. World J Gastroenterol. 2014;20:4066-70. [Crossref]  [PubMed]  [PMC] 
  20. Hay MC, Cadigan RJ, Khanna D, et al. Prepared patients: internet information seeking by new rheumatology patients. Arthritis Rheum. 2008;59:575-82. [Crossref]  [PubMed] 
  21. Elangovan S, Kwan YH, Fong W. The usefulness and validity of English-language videos on YouTube as an educational resource for spondyloarthritis. Clin Rheumatol. 2021;40:1567-73. [Crossref]  [PubMed] 
  22. Delli K, Livas C, Vissink A, et al. Is YouTube useful as a source of information for Sjögren's syndrome? Oral Dis. 2016;22:196-201. [Crossref]  [PubMed] 
  23. Ozsoy-Unubol T, Alanbay-Yagci E. YouTube as a source of information on fibromyalgia. Int J Rheum Dis. 2021;24:197-202. [Crossref]  [PubMed] 
  24. Warren CJ, Wisener J, Ward B, et al. YouTube as a patient education resource for male hypogonadism and testosterone therapy. Sex Med. 2021;9:100324. [Crossref]  [PubMed]  [PMC] 
  25. Zengin O, Onder ME. Educational quality of YouTube videos on musculoskeletal ultrasound. Clin Rheumatol. 2021;40:4243-51. [Crossref]  [PubMed]  [PMC] 
  26. Sahin AN, Sahin AS, Schwenter F, et al. YouTube videos as a source of information on colorectal cancer: what do our patients learn? J Cancer Educ. 2019;34:1160-6. [Crossref]  [PubMed]  [PMC] 
  27. Ng CH, Lim GRS, Fong W. Quality of English-language videos on YouTube as a source of information on systemic lupus erythematosus. Int J Rheum Dis. 2020;23:1636-44. [Crossref]  [PubMed] 
  28. Oztermeli A, Karahan N. Evaluation of YouTube video content about developmental dysplasia of the hip. Cureus. 2020;12:e9557. [Crossref]  [PubMed]  [PMC] 
  29. Celik H, Polat O, Ozcan C, et al. Assessment of the quality and reliability of the information on rotator cuff repair on YouTube. Orthop Traumatol Surg Res. 2020;106:31-4. [Crossref]  [PubMed] 
  30. Kuru T, Erken HY. Evaluation of the quality and reliability of YouTube videos on rotator cuff tears. Cureus. 2020;12:e6852. [Crossref]  [PubMed]  [PMC] 
  31. Murugiah K, Vallakati A, Rajput K, et al. YouTube as a source of information on cardiopulmonary resuscitation. Resuscitation. 2011;82:332-4. [Crossref]  [PubMed] 
  32. Rice RE. Influences, usage, and outcomes of Internet health information searching: multivariate results from the Pew surveys. Int J Med Inform. 2006;75:8-28. [Crossref]  [PubMed]