YouTube as a Source of Information About the Posterior Cruciate Ligament: A Content-Quality and Reliability Analysis

Kyle N Kunze; Matthew R Cohn; Connor Wakefield; Fadi Hamati; Robert F LaPrade; Brian Forsythe; Adam B Yanke; Jorge Chahla

doi:10.1016/j.asmr.2019.09.003

YouTube as a Source of Information About the Posterior Cruciate Ligament: A Content-Quality and Reliability Analysis

Arthrosc Sports Med Rehabil. 2019 Nov 27;1(2):e109-e114. doi: 10.1016/j.asmr.2019.09.003. eCollection 2019 Dec.

Authors

Kyle N Kunze¹, Matthew R Cohn¹, Connor Wakefield¹, Fadi Hamati¹, Robert F LaPrade², Brian Forsythe¹, Adam B Yanke¹, Jorge Chahla¹

Affiliations

¹ Department of Orthopaedic Surgery, Division of Sports Medicine, Rush University Medical Center, Chicago, Illinois.
² The Steadman Clinic, Vail, Colorado, U.S.A.

Abstract

Purpose: The purpose of this study was to evaluate the reliability and educational content of YouTube videos concerning injuries to the posterior cruciate ligament (PCL) of the knee.

Methods: The first 50 videos specific to the PCL identified through the YouTube query posterior cruciate ligament were evaluated by a method of video selection demonstrated to be feasible in prior YouTube studies. Videos were classified by content and upload source. Video reliability was assessed using the Journal of the American Medical Association (JAMA) benchmark criteria (score range 0-5). Video educational content was assessed using the Global Quality Score (GQS) (range 0-4) and the PCL Score (PCLS) (score range 0-18). Analysis of variance was used to determine differences in video reliability and educational content quality based on video content and upload source. Multivariate linear regressions were used to identify predictors of video reliability and educational content quality.

Results: The mean number of views per video was 50,477.9 ± 15,036. Collectively, the 50 videos were viewed 14,141,285 times. Video content was classified primarily as information about disease (62.0%). The most common upload sources were physicians (24.0%) and nonphysician health care providers (26.0%). Significant between-group interactions were found between video source and the JAMA score, with physicians and medical sources having significantly higher mean JAMA scores (P = 0.037). Videos uploaded by physicians were an independent positive predictor of greater JAMA scores (β:1.27; P = 0.008). Videos uploaded by a medical source (β:2.06; P = 0.038) were an independent positive predictor of a greater GQS. There were no independent associations between video content category or upload source and the PCLS.

Conclusions: Videos concerning the PCL were frequently viewed on YouTube, but the educational quality and reliability of these videos were low.

Clinical relevance: Physicians and health care providers treating PCL pathology should take the initiative to counsel patients about which outside resources are reliable to better inform patients about their treatment decisions. With regard to YouTube videos specifically, providers should caution their patients that this source of information may be unreliable.