4.4 Article

YouTube as a source of patient information for ankylosing spondylitis exercises

Journal

CLINICAL RHEUMATOLOGY
Volume 38, Issue 6, Pages 1747-1751

Publisher

SPRINGER LONDON LTD
DOI: 10.1007/s10067-018-04413-0

Keywords

Ankylosing spondylitis; Exercise; Physical therapy; Physiotherapy; Rehabilitation; YouTube

Categories

Ask authors/readers for more resources

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.

Authors

I am an author on this paper
Click your name to claim this paper and add it to your profile.

Reviews

Primary Rating

4.4
Not enough ratings

Secondary Ratings

Novelty
-
Significance
-
Scientific rigor
-
Rate this paper

Recommended

No Data Available
No Data Available