Evaluation Of Videos Published On Youtube Regarding Fluid Resuscitation

Year 2025, Volume: 6 Issue: 2, 107 - 111, 28.07.2025

Ali Halıcı , Behçet Demir , Uğur Kahveci

Abstract

Introduction: Fluid resuscitation includes a wide variety of products, usually classified as crystalloids or colloids. Although crystalloids and colloids are frequently used in fluid resuscitation, the ideal fluid for resuscitation remains controversial. In this study, we aimed to evaluate the reliability of the information given by physician channels and physicians about fluid resuscitation on YouTube.

Methods: To identify appropriate videos, a standard YouTube search was performed on 01.09.2024 using the terms “fluid resuscitation”, “fluid resuscitation in trauma patient” and “fluid resuscitation in burn patient”. Multiple scoring systems were used to evaluate the videos, including DISCERN, a validated tool for analyzing the quality of health information in consumer-targeted videos, the Journal of the American Medical Association (JAMA) and the Global Quality Score (GQS). All statistical tests were performed using SPSS version 27 (IBM®, Chicago, USA). Mean±standard deviation was used for descriptive statistics and numerical data with normal distribution. Median (minimum-maximum) was used for abnormally distributed data. Nominal data were expressed as numbers and percentages.

Results: After excluding 77 videos (32 videos were not in English, 31 videos were not physician-generated, 14 videos were longer than 1.5 hours), 73 videos were evaluated in our study. The mean values (mean±sd) of the GQS, 5-point modified DISCERN and JAMA scores of the videos were 3.55±1.06, 3.41±1.17 and 2.62±0.93, respectively. In the GQS grouping, 17.8% of the videos analyzed were of poor quality, 27.4% were of moderate quality and 54.7% were of high quality.

Conclusions: Our study shows that physician-generated fluid resuscitation videos on YouTube are generally of acceptable quality. Future studies could obtain more comprehensive results by evaluating content in different languages.

Keywords

YouTube videos , web-based health information. , fluid resuscitation

Youtube'da Sıvı Resüsitasyonu ile İlgili Yayınlanan Videoların Değerlendirilmesi

Abstract

Giriş: Sıvı resüsitasyonu, genellikle kristaloidler veya kolloidler olarak sınıflandırılan çok çeşitli ürünleri içerir. Kristaloidler ve kolloidler sıvı resüsitasyonunda sıklıkla kullanılsa da, resüsitasyon için ideal sıvı tartışmalıdır. Bu çalışmada, YouTube'da hekim kanalları ve hekimler tarafından yayınlanan sıvı resüsitasyonu ile ilgili videolarda verilen bilgilerin güvenilirliğini değerlendirmeyi amaçladık.

Yöntemler: Uygun videoları belirlemek amacıyla 01.09.2024 tarihinde “sıvı resüsitasyonu”, “travma hastasında sıvı resüsitasyonu” ve “yanık hastasında sıvı resüsitasyonu” terimleri kullanılarak standart bir YouTube araması gerçekleştirildi. Videoların değerlendirilmesinde, tüketici odaklı sağlık bilgilerini analiz etmek için doğrulanmış bir araç olan DISCERN, Amerikan Tabipler Birliği Dergisi (JAMA) ve Global Kalite Skoru (GQS) gibi çeşitli puanlama sistemleri kullanıldı. Tüm istatistiksel testler SPSS versiyon 27 (IBM®, Chicago, ABD) kullanılarak gerçekleştirildi. Tanımlayıcı istatistikler ve normal dağılım gösteren sayısal veriler için ortalama±standart sapma kullanıldı. Normal dağılmayan veriler için medyan (minimum-maksimum) kullanıldı. Nominal veriler sayı ve yüzde olarak ifade edildi.

Bulgular: 77 video (32’si İngilizce değil, 31’i hekim tarafından oluşturulmamış, 14’ü 1,5 saatten uzun) dışlandıktan sonra, toplam 73 video çalışmamıza dahil edildi. Videoların GQS, 5 puanlık modifiye DISCERN ve JAMA puanlarının ortalama değerleri sırasıyla 3,55±1,06; 3,41±1,17 ve 2,62±0,93 olarak bulundu. GQS gruplamasına göre incelenen videoların %17,8’i düşük kaliteli, %27,4’ü orta kaliteli ve %54,7’si yüksek kaliteli olarak değerlendirildi.

Sonuç: Çalışmamız, YouTube'da hekimler tarafından oluşturulan sıvı resüsitasyonu videolarının genel olarak kabul edilebilir kalitede olduğunu göstermektedir. Gelecekte yapılacak çalışmalar, farklı dillerdeki içerikleri de değerlendirerek daha kapsamlı sonuçlara ulaşabilir.

Keywords

sıvı resüsitasyonu , youtube videoları , web tabanloı sağlık bilgileri

References

• American Thoracic Society. Evidence-based colloid use in the critically ill: American Thoracic Society Consensus Statement. Am J Respir Crit Care Med. 2004;170(11):1247-59.
• Brunkhorst FM, Engel C, Bloos F, et al. Intensive insulin therapy and pentastarch resuscitation in severe sepsis. N Engl J Med. 2008;358(2):125-39.
• Oliveira RP, Velasco I, Soriano FG, Friedman G. Clinical review: Hypertonic saline resuscitation in sepsis. Crit Care. 2002;6(5):418-423.
• Zarychanski R, Abou-Setta AM, Turgeon AF, et al. Association of hydroxyethyl starch administration with mortality and acute kidney injury in critically ill patients requiring volume resuscitation: a systematic review and meta-analysis [published correction appears in JAMA. 2013;309(12):1229]. JAMA. 2013;309(7):678-88.
• Choi PT, Yip G, Quinonez LG, Cook DJ. Crystalloids vs. colloids in fluid resuscitation: a systematic review. Crit Care Med. 1999;27(1):200-10.
• Lewis SR, Pritchard MW, Evans DJ, et al. Colloids versus crystalloids for fluid resuscitation in critically ill people. Cochrane Database Syst Rev. 2018;8(8):CD000567.
• Perel P, Roberts I. Colloids versus crystalloids for fluid resuscitation in critically ill patients. Cochrane Database Syst Rev. 2012;(6):CD000567.
• Uzundal H, Soydaş T, Ünal S, Ercan Uzundal D. Quality and Reliability Analysis of Videos About Thulium Laser Enucleation of the Prostate on YouTube. Urology. 2024;192:105-10.
• Mohsin, M., Youtube stats every marketer should know in 2020 [Infographic]. Available at: https://www. oberlo. com/blog/youtube-statistics (accessed on March 28, 2023).
• 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(1):382.
• Ozsoy-Unubol T, Alanbay-Yagci E. YouTube as a source of information on fibromyalgia. Int J Rheum Dis. 2021;24(2):197-202.
• Loeb S, Reines K, Abu-Salha Y, et al. Quality of Bladder Cancer Information on YouTube. Eur Urol. 2021;79(1):56-9.
• Kunze KN, Krivicich LM, Verma NN, Chahla J. Quality of Online Video Resources Concerning Patient Education for the Meniscus: A YouTube-Based Quality-Control Study. Arthroscopy. 2020;36(1):233-8.
• Yilmaz Ferhatoglu S, Kudsioglu T. Evaluation of the reliability, utility, and quality of the information in cardiopulmonary resuscitation videos shared on Open access video sharing platform YouTube. Australas Emerg Care. 2020;23(3):211-6.
• Kartal A, Kebudi A. Evaluation of the Reliability, Utility, and Quality of Information Used in Total Extraperitoneal Procedure for Inguinal Hernia Repair Videos Shared on WebSurg. Cureus. 2019;11(9):e5566.
• Qi J, Trang T, Doong J, Kang S, Chien AL. Misinformation is prevalent in psoriasis-related YouTube videos. Dermatol Online J. 2016;22(11):13030/qt7qc9z2m5.
• Charnock D, Shepperd S, Needham G, Gann R. DISCERN: an instrument for judging the quality of written consumer health information on treatment choices. J Epidemiol Community Health. 1999;53(2):105-11.
• Singh AG, Singh S, Singh PP. YouTube for information on rheumatoid arthritis--a wakeup call?. J Rheumatol. 2012;39(5):899-903.
• Helming AG, Adler DS, Keltner C, Igelman AD, Woodworth GE. The Content Quality of YouTube Videos for Professional Medical Education: A Systematic Review. Acad Med. 2021;96(10):1484-93.
• Bernard A, Langille M, Hughes S, Rose C, Leddin D, Veldhuyzen van Zanten S. A systematic review of patient inflammatory bowel disease information resources on the World Wide Web. Am J Gastroenterol. 2007;102(9):2070-7.
• Adorisio O, Silveri M, Torino G. Evaluation of educational value of YouTube videos addressing robotic pyeloplasty in children. J Pediatr Urol. 2021;17(3):390.e1-390.e4.
• Richardson MA, Park W, Bernstein DN, Mesfin A. Analysis of the Quality, Reliability, and Educational Content of YouTube Videos Concerning Spine Tumors. Int J Spine Surg. 2022;16(2):278-82.
• Silberg WM, Lundberg GD, Musacchio RA. Assessing, controlling, and assuring the quality of medical information on the Internet: Caveant lector et viewor--Let the reader and viewer beware. JAMA. 1997;277(15):1244-5.
• Yurdaisik I. Analysis of the Most Viewed First 50 Videos on YouTube about Breast Cancer. Biomed Res Int. 2020;2020:2750148.
• Kuru T, Erken HY. Evaluation of the Quality and Reliability of YouTube Videos on Rotator Cuff Tears. Cureus. 2020;12(2):e6852.
• Pandey A, Patni N, Singh M, Sood A, Singh G. YouTube as a source of information on the H1N1 influenza pandemic. Am J Prev Med. 2010;38(3):e1-3.