Skip to main page content
Access keys NCBI Homepage MyNCBI Homepage Main Content Main Navigation
. 2014 Jul;6(7):291-4.
doi: 10.4103/1947-2714.136899.

Utilization of YouTube as a Tool to Assess Patient Perception Regarding Implanted Cardiac Devices

Affiliations
Free PMC article

Utilization of YouTube as a Tool to Assess Patient Perception Regarding Implanted Cardiac Devices

Kevin Hayes et al. N Am J Med Sci. .
Free PMC article

Abstract

Background: The outreach of YouTube may have a dramatic role in the widespread dissemination of knowledge on implantable cardioverter devices (ICD).

Aims: This study was designed to review and analyze the information available on YouTube pertaining to implantable cardiac devices such as implantable cardioverter defibrillators (ICDs) and pacemakers.

Materials and methods: YouTube was queried for the terms "ICD", "Implantable Cardioverter Defibrillator", and "Pacemaker". The videos were reviewed and categorized as according to content; number of views and "likes" or "dislikes" was recorded by two separate observers.

Results: Of the 55 videos reviewed, 18 of the videos were categorized as patient education, 12 were advertisements, 8 were intraoperative videos documenting the device implantation procedures, 7 of the videos were produced to document personal patient experiences, and 4 were categorized as documentation of a public event. 3 were intended to educate health care workers. The remaining 3 were intended to raise public awareness about sudden cardiac death. The videos portraying intraoperative procedures generated the most "likes" or "dislikes" per view.

Conclusion: While YouTube provides a logical platform for delivery of health information, the information on this platform is not regulated. Initiative by reputed authorities and posting accurate information in such platform can be a great aid in public education regarding device therapy.

Keywords: Health; Implantable cardioverter device; Internet; Youtube.

Conflict of interest statement

Conflict of Interest: None declared.

Figures

Figure 1
Figure 1
Video selection process
Figure 2
Figure 2
Video content by category
Figure 3
Figure 3
Video category by number of views
Figure 4
Figure 4
Number of likes or dislikes per number of view

Similar articles

See all similar articles

Cited by 1 article

References

    1. Pare G, Malek JN, Sicotte C, Lemire M. Internet as a source of health information and its perceived influence on personal empowerment. Int J Healthc Inform Syst Inf. 2009;4:1–8.
    1. Youtube: Wikimedia Foundation, Inc; 2011. Oct 4, [Accessed February 5, 2012]. http://e.wikipedia.org/wiki/YouTube .
    1. YouTube: Press Room Statistics; [Accessed August 5, 2012]. http://www.youtube.com/t/press_statistics .
    1. Pant S, Deshmukh A, Murugiah K, Kumar G, Sachdeva R, Mehta JL. Assessing the credibility of the “YouTube Approach” to health information on acute myocardial infarction. Clin Cardiol. 2012;35:281–5. - PMC - PubMed
    1. Carroll MV, Shensa A, Primack BA. A comparison of cigarette- and hookah-related videos on YouTube. Tob Control. 2013;22:319–23. - PMC - PubMed
Feedback