IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/gam/jijerp/v20y2023i5p4626-d1088650.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

TLIF Online Videos for Patient Education—Evaluation of Comprehensiveness, Quality, and Reliability

Author

Listed:
  • Stephan Heisinger

    (Department of Orthopedics and Trauma Surgery, Medical University of Vienna, 1090 Vienna, Austria)

  • Dominikus Huber

    (Division of Oncology, Department of Medicine I, Medical University of Vienna, 1090 Vienna, Austria)

  • Michael P. Matzner

    (Department of Orthopedics and Trauma Surgery, Medical University of Vienna, 1090 Vienna, Austria)

  • Helmut Hiertz

    (Division of Neurosurgery, Medical Health Centre Bad Vigaun, 5424 Bad Vigaun, Austria)

  • Lukas Peter Lampe

    (Department of Orthopaedics and Trauma Surgery, St. Josef-Hospital, Ruhr-University Bochum, 44791 Bochum, Germany)

  • Jakob Zagata

    (Department of Neurosurgery, Klinik Landstraße, 1030 Vienna, Austria)

  • Stefan Aspalter

    (Department of Neurosurgery, Kepler University Hospital, 4020 Linz, Austria)

  • Christian Radl

    (Department of Neurosurgery, Kepler University Hospital, 4020 Linz, Austria)

  • Wolfgang Senker

    (Department of Neurosurgery, Kepler University Hospital, 4020 Linz, Austria)

  • Georg Mair

    (Department of Orthopedics and Traumatology, Hanusch Hospital of OEGK, 1140 Vienna, Austria)

  • Josef G. Grohs

    (Department of Orthopedics and Trauma Surgery, Medical University of Vienna, 1090 Vienna, Austria)

Abstract

Over the last few decades, the number of lumbar interbody fusion surgeries performed has been constantly increasing, with transforaminal lumbar interbody fusion (TLIF) being one of the most common surgical techniques. Due to easy accessibility, patients frequently use YouTube to obtain information on health-related issues. Consequently, online video platforms may be a valuable tool for patient education. The aim of this study was to assess the quality, reliability, and comprehensiveness of online videos on TLIF. We screened 180 videos on YouTube, yielding a total of 30 videos that met the inclusion criteria. These videos were evaluated using Global Quality Scale, DISCERN reliability tool, and JAMA Benchmark Score, and assessed in regard to their comprehensiveness and coverage of relevant aspects. At the time of rating, the videos had between 9188 and 1,530,408 views and between 0 and 3344 likes. The median rater assessment for all videos was “moderate quality”. GQS and subjective grades showed a moderate to strong statistically significant association with views and likes. Considering this association of GQS and subjective grade with views and likes, these criteria could be used by laypersons to identify good-quality content. Nevertheless, there is an urgent need for peer-reviewed content that covers all of the relevant aspects.

Suggested Citation

  • Stephan Heisinger & Dominikus Huber & Michael P. Matzner & Helmut Hiertz & Lukas Peter Lampe & Jakob Zagata & Stefan Aspalter & Christian Radl & Wolfgang Senker & Georg Mair & Josef G. Grohs, 2023. "TLIF Online Videos for Patient Education—Evaluation of Comprehensiveness, Quality, and Reliability," IJERPH, MDPI, vol. 20(5), pages 1-11, March.
    • Handle: RePEc:gam:jijerp:v:20:y:2023:i:5:p:4626-:d:1088650
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: https://www.mdpi.com/1660-4601/20/5/4626/pdf
    Download Restriction: no
    File URL: https://www.mdpi.com/1660-4601/20/5/4626/
    Download Restriction: no
    ---><---

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. Stephan Heisinger & Dominikus Huber & Michael Paul Matzner & Timothy Hasenoehrl & Stefano Palma & Julia Sternik & Carmen Trost & Michael Treiber & Richard Crevenna & Josef Georg Grohs, 2021. "Online Videos as a Source of Physiotherapy Exercise Tutorials for Patients with Lumbar Disc Herniation—A Quality Assessment," IJERPH, MDPI, vol. 18(11), pages 1-11, May.
    Full references (including those not matched with items on IDEAS)

    Most related items

    These are the items that most often cite the same works as this one and are cited by the same works as this one.

      Corrections

      All material on this site has been provided by the respective publishers and authors. You can help correct errors and omissions. When requesting a correction, please mention this item's handle: RePEc:gam:jijerp:v:20:y:2023:i:5:p:4626-:d:1088650. See general information about how to correct material in RePEc.

      If you have authored this item and are not yet registered with RePEc, we encourage you to do it here. This allows to link your profile to this item. It also allows you to accept potential citations to this item that we are uncertain about.

      If CitEc recognized a bibliographic reference but did not link an item in RePEc to it, you can help with this form .

      If you know of missing items citing this one, you can help us creating those links by adding the relevant references in the same way as above, for each refering item. If you are a registered author of this item, you may also want to check the "citations" tab in your RePEc Author Service profile, as there may be some citations waiting for confirmation.

      For technical questions regarding this item, or to correct its authors, title, abstract, bibliographic or download information, contact: MDPI Indexing Manager (email available below). General contact details of provider: https://www.mdpi.com .

      Please note that corrections may take a couple of weeks to filter through the various RePEc services.

      IDEAS is a RePEc service. RePEc uses bibliographic data supplied by the respective publishers.