YouTube as a Patient Education Tool: Assessing the Quality and Engagement of Dental Implant Videos
Abstract
Aim: With >1.5 million implants placed annually and patients increasingly relying on YouTube, this study evaluated the quality, reliability, and engagement of English-language videos on implant therapy. Materials and Methods: On 15 July 2025, two YouTube searches (“dental implant,” “tooth replacement”) were run with default relevance. The first 100 results per query were screened (English; 2–15 min; uploaded ≤5 years; ≥5,000 views). After excluding duplicates, lectures, promotions, and offtopic videos, 80 remained. Two reviewers extracted metadata (views, likes, comments, upload date, duration), uploader type, and content features (preop assessment, surgical steps, complications, prosthetics, maintenance, cost, diagrams/animations, references). Quality was rated using DISCERN (0–75), Global Quality Scale (GQS, 1–5), and JAMA Benchmarks; inter-rater agreement used Cohen’s κ. Engagement included view ratio (views/day), like ratio, and Video Power Index (VPI). Results: Videos averaged 38,450 ± 21,300 views, 1,250 ± 840 likes, 85 ± 60 comments, and 7.8 ± 3.2 minutes. Uploaders were mainly dentists/clinics (52.5%); narration by professionals in 67.5%. Coverage was uneven: surgical steps (60%), complications (40%), references (6.3%). Mean DISCERN 46.2 ± 13.7; GQS 3.1 ± 0.9. Dentist-narrated videos scored higher on DISCERN than others (49.8 ± 12.5 vs. 37.4 ± 13.9; p < 0.001). Discussing complications was linked to higher VPI (45.8 ± 20.3 vs. 32.5 ± 17.2; p = 0.012). Animations associated with more likes and higher view ratios (p < 0.05). DISCERN modestly negatively correlated with view ratio (ρ = –0.228; p = 0.041). Inter-rater reliability was substantial. Conclusion: English-language implant videos show moderate, variable quality. Clinician-led narration and discussion of complications, supported by visual aids, are associated with higher quality and stronger engagement. Professional involvement and standardized guidance could improve patient education.
Keywords
YouTube, dental implants, video quality, DISCERN, patient education
References
- Abukaraky A, Hamdan AA, Ameera MN, et al. Quality of YouTube™ videos on dental implants. Med Oral Patol Oral Cir Bucal. 2018;23:e463-e468.
- Özkan E, Acar AH. YouTube™ as a Source of Information for Patients Regarding Dental Implant Failure: A Content Analysis. J Craniofac Surg. 2022;33:2100-2103.
- Gaikwad A, Rachh P, Raut K. Critical evaluation of YouTube videos regarding the all-on-4 dental implant treatment concept: A content-quality analysis. J Prosthet Dent. 2024:S0022-3913(23)00821-1.
- Yildirim G, Kocaelli HA. Assessment of the content and quality of YouTube videos related zygomatic implants: A content-quality analysis. Clin Implant Dent Relat Res. 2023;25:605-612.
- Ali Baig S, Malhotra K, Banerjee AJ, et al. Assessment of the quality, content, and reliability of YouTube® videos on diabetes mellitus and polycystic ovary syndrome: a systematic review with cross-sectional analysis comparing peer-reviewed videos. Endocr Connect. 2024;13:e240059.
- Osman W, Mohamed F, Elhassan M, Shoufan A. Is YouTube a reliable source of health-related information? A systematic review. BMC Med Educ. 2022;22:382.
- Javidan A, Nelms MW, Li A, et al. Evaluating YouTube as a Source of Education for Patients Undergoing Surgery: A Systematic Review. Ann Surg. 2023;278:e712-e718.
- Madathil KC, Rivera-Rodriguez AJ, Greenstein JS, et al. Healthcare information on YouTube: A systematic review. Health Informatics J. 2015;21:173-194.
- Thomas C, Westwood J, Butt GF. Qualitative assessment of YouTube videos as a source of patient information for cochlear implant surgery. J Laryngol Otol. 2021;135:671-674.
- Via Ioschpe AD, Roy N, James J, et al. Scrolling for Answers About Breast Implant Illness: Application of Validated Tools to Assess the Quality of Content on YouTube and TikTok. Plast Surg (Oakv). 2024;33:364-372.