Are Youtube Videos About Ultrasound-Guided Breast Biopsy Useful and Reliable?

Year 2023, Volume: 20 Issue: 2, 377 - 383, 31.08.2023

Osman Konukoğlu , Veysel Kaya , Mehmet Tahtabaşı

https://doi.org/10.35440/hutfd.1292098

Abstract

Background: The aim of this study is to evaluate the usefulness and quality of YouTube videos on ultrasound-guided breast biopsy (UGBB) for patients.
Materials and Methods: A video search was undertaken on YouTube on Aug 14, 2020 using the keywords, ‘breast biopsy’, ‘ultrasound-guided core biopsy’, ‘breast ultrasound’, and ‘breast biopsy ultrasound’. Top 100 videos were selected using each keyword (total 400 videos). After applying the exclusion criteria, 51 videos were evaluated by two researchers based on the patient information form of the American Cancer Society and American College of Radiology. According to these criteria, the videos were divided into four categories as very useful, useful, slightly useful, and not useful. Video parameters were compared between the groups by the Kruskal–Wallis test.
Results: Of the 51 videos analyzed, 13.7% (n=7) were very useful, and 41.2% (n=21) were useful. Of the very useful videos, 85.7% (n=6) had been uploaded by physicians/hospitals. The DISCERN reliability score was significantly higher in very useful videos (median: 4, range: 2-5, p < 0.001). The length and number of likes and comments were significantly higher for the videos uploaded by civilian individuals (p=0.005, p=0.046, and p=0.013, respectively). Not useful and very useful videos were significantly longer (p = 0.01)
Conclusion: Although the primary sources of high-quality and very useful YouTube videos about UGBB were physicians/hospital, a significant portion of low-quality videos had also been uploaded by this group. Thus, medical professionals should take care to upload well-informed videos.

Keywords

Breast biopsy, core needle, ultrasound-guided, patient information, YouTube

Ultrason Rehberliğinde Yapılan Meme Biopsi Hakkında Youtube Videoları Yararlı ve Güvenilir Mi?

Abstract

Amaç: Bu çalışmanın amacı ultrason rehberliğinde yapılan meme biopsi ile ilgili YouTube videolarının hastalar için yararlılığını ve kalitesini değerlendirmektir.
Materyal ve Metod: ‘‘Breast biopsy’’, ‘‘ultrasound-guided core biopsy’’, ‘‘breast ultrasound’’ ve ‘‘breast biopsy ultrasound’’ anahtar kelimeleri kullanılarak 14 Ağustos 2020’de YouTube’da video araması yapıldı. Arama sonuçlarındaki 400 video Amerikan Kanser Derneği ve Amerikan Radyoloji Derneği’nin hasta bilgilendirme formu rehber alınarak iki bağımsız araştırmacı tarafından değerlendirildi. Bu kriterlere göre videolar çok faydalı, faydalı, az faydalı ve faydasız olmak üzere 4’e ayrıldı.
Bulgular: Analiz edilen toplam 51 videonun %13.7 (n=7)’si çok faydalı ve %41.2 (n=21)’si faydalı idi. Çok faydalı videoların %85.7 (n=6)’si doktor/hastane tarafından yüklenmişti. Güvenililirliği gösteren DISCERN skoru çok faydalı videolarda anlamlı olarak yüksekti (median: 4, aralık: 2-5, p < 0.001). Siviller tarafından yüklenen videoların uzun-luğu, beğeni ve yorum sayısı anlamlı olarak daha yüksekti (sırasıyla; p = 0.005, p = 0.046 ve p = 0.013).
Sonuç: Ultrason rehberliğinde meme biyopsi ile ilgili çok faydalı YouTube videolarının primer kaynağı dok-tor/hastane olsa da, az faydalı ve faydasız videoların önemli bir kısmının da bu grup tarafından yüklendiği tespit edildi. Bundan dolayı medikal profesyonellerin daha özenli ve donanımlı eğitim videoları yüklemeleri gerekmekte-dir.

Keywords

Meme biyopsi, Kalın iğne, Ultrason, hasta bilgilendirme, YouTube

References

• 1. Madathil KC, Rivera-Rodriguez AJ, Greenstein JS, Gra-mopadhye AK. Healthcare information on YouTube: A sys-tematic review. Health Informatics J. 2015;21(3):173–94.
• 2. Guo R, Lu G, Qin B, Fei B. Ultrasound Imaging Technologies for Breast Cancer Detection and Management: A Review. Ultrasound Med Biol. 2018 Jan;44(1):37–70.
• 3. Apesteguía L, Pina LJ. Ultrasound-guided core-needle bi-opsy of breast lesions. Insights Imaging. 2011;2(4):493–500.
• 4. NICE. Advanced breast cancer: diagnosis and treatment (CG81) - Lat updated: August 2017. Vol. 62, Guidance and guidelines. 2009. Available from: http://www.nice.org.uk/guidance/CG81
• 5. Abboudi H, Mikhail M, Ghazal-Aswad M, Michael M, Pope A. YouTube TM as a source of patient information for urete-roscopy. J Clin Urol. 2016 Jul 8;9(4):248–51.
• 6. Akyol A, Karahan İ. Is YouTube a quality source of informa-tion on sarcopenia ? 2020;(0123456789):1–5.
• 7. Magill H, Welsh S, Mackey J, Williamson N, Maruthainar N. YouTubeTM as a source of patient information about knee replacement surgery. Bull R Coll Surg Engl. 2015;97(6):264–7.
• 8. Jain N, Abboudi H, Kalic A, Gill F, Al-Hasani H. YouTube as a source of patient information for transrectal ultrasound-guided biopsy of the prostate. Clin Radiol. 2019;74(1):79.e11-79.e14.
• 9. Rittberg R, Dissanayake T, Katz SJ. A qualitative analysis of methotrexate self-injection education videos on YouTube. Clin Rheumatol. 2015;35(5):1329–1333.
• 10. American Cancer Society. For women facing a breast bi-opsy. 2016 [cited 2016 Jun 3]. Available from: http://www.cancer.org/treatment/understandingyourdiagno-sis/examsandtestdescriptions/forwomenfacingabreastbiopsy/.
• 11. College A. ACR practice parameter for the performance of stereotactic-guided breast interventional procedures. 2016;1076(Revised 2008):1–11.
• 12. Bernard A, Langille M, Hughes S, Rose C, Leddin D, Veldhuy-zen van Zanten S. A Systematic Review of Patient Inflam-matory Bowel Disease Information Resources on the World Wide Web. Am J Gastroenterol. 2007 Sep;102(9):2070–7.
• 13. Charnock D, Shepperd S, Needham G, Gann R. DISCERN : an instrument for judging the quality of written consumer he-alth information on treatment choices. 1999;53(2):105–11.
• 14. Kocyigit BF, Akaltun MS. Does YouTube provide high quality information? Assessment of secukinumab videos. Rheuma-tol Int. 2019 Jul 8;39(7):1263–8.
• 15. Lee JS, Seo HS, Hong TH. YouTube as a source of patient information on gallstone disease. World J Gastroenterol. 2014;20(14):4066–70.
• 16. Biggs TC, Bird JH, Harries PG, Salib RJ. YouTube as a source of information on rhinosinusitis: the good, the bad and the ugly. J Laryngol Otol. 2013 Aug 18;127(8):749–54.
• 17. Kocyigit BF, Nacitarhan V, Koca TT, Berk E. YouTube as a source of patient information for ankylosing spondylitis exercises. Clin Rheumatol. 2019;38(6):1747–51.
• 18. Tolu S, Yurdakul OV, Basaran B, Rezvani A. English-language videos on YouTube as a source of information on self-administer subcutaneous anti-tumour necrosis factor agent injections. Rheumatol Int. 2018 Jul 14;38(7):1285–92.
• 19. Garg N, Venkatraman A, Pandey A, Kumar N. YouTube as a source of information on dialysis: A content analysis. Neph-rology. 2015 May;20(5):315–20.
• 20. Singh SK, Liu S, Capasso R, Kern RC, Gouveia CJ. YouTube as a source of information for obstructive sleep apnea. Am J Otolaryngol. 2018 Jul;39(4):378–82.
• 21. Şahin A, Şahin M, Türkcü FM. YouTube as a source of infor-mation in retinopathy of prematurity. Irish J Med Sci (1971 -). 2019 May 20;188(2):613–7.
• 22. Joe BN, Esserman LJ, Anees B Chagpar, Chen W. Breast biopsy. [cited 2019 May 16]. p. 1–25. Available from: https://www.uptodate.com/contents/breast-biopsy
• 23. Breast biopsy. [cited 2020 May 14]. Available from: https://www.mayoclinic.org/tests-procedures/breast-biopsy/about/pac-20384812