Quality And Reliability Of YouTube Videos As A Source Of Information About Felon

Abstract

Introduction: YouTube is easily preferred because it offers people free and readily accessible information. The aim of this study was to determine the reliability, popularity and quality of YouTube videos as a patient‑education resource on felon (finger pulp abscess). Materials and Methods: On 28 December 2024 the keywords “Felon Finger” and/or “Finger Felon” were entered into the YouTube search engine. Of roughly 51 000 results, the first 50 were evaluated. Videos were analysed according to source and content using the Video Power Index (VPI), Quality Criteria for Consumer Health Information (DISCERN), Journal of the American Medical Association (JAMA) benchmark criteria, Global Quality Score (GQS) and Felon Specific Score (FSS). All scores were assigned independently by three observer surgeons and analysed using their mean values. Results: Comparisons of VPI, JAMA, DISCERN, GQS, and FSS by video source and content revealed significant differences for JAMA, GQS, and FSS according to source, but no significant difference for VPI. Medical‑source videos had significantly lower JAMA scores than those by physicians and non‑physician healthcare workers (p < 0.05), but higher GQS and FSS values (p < 0.05). No significant effects of video duration, view count, view‑rate, or like‑rate were detected. YouTube videos concerning felon were found not to possess adequate reliability or quality for patients. Conclusion: Internet use for health information is increasing. Most videos about felon on YouTube® are produced by non-physicians, but their quality and reliability are lower than those from physicians. Key words: Felon, YouTube, online search, internet information

Keywords

• Felon
• YouTube
• online search
• internet information

Felon Hakkında Bilgi Kaynağı Olarak YouTube Videolarının Güvenilirliği ve Kalitesi

Öz

YouTube, insanlara ücretsiz ve kolay ulaşılabilir bilgi sunması açısından kolay tercih ediliyor. Bu çalışmanın amacı, felon için hasta eğitim kaynağı olarak YouTube videolarının güvenilirliğini, popülerliğini ve kalitesini belirlemektir. Yöntemler 28 Aralık 2024'de YouTube arama motoruna "Felon Finger" ve/veya "Finger Felon" anahtar kelimeleri yazılarak yapıldı. Bizim araştırmamızda, 51.000 sonuçtan ilk 50’si değerlendirmeye alındı. Videolar kaynağına göre ve içeriğine göre olarak iki grupta incelendi. VPI (Video Power Indeks-Video Güç Endeksi), DISCERN (Quality Criteria for Consumer Health Information), JAMA(Journal of the American Medical Association- Amerikan Tabipler Birliği Dergisi), GQS (Global Quality Score- Küresel Kalite Puanı), FSS(Felon Specific Score) ölçüm araçları kullanıldı. Tüm puanlamalar üç gözlemci cerrah tarafından ayrı ayrı puanlanıp ortalama değerleri ile istatistiksel analiz hesaplandı. YouTube'daki Felon ile ilgili videoların hastalar için yeterli güvenilirliğe veya kaliteye sahip olmadığı bulunmuştur. Sonuç Sağlık bilgileri için internet kullanımı giderek artmaktadır. Felon cerrahisi ile ilgili YouTube® videolarının kaynağının çoğu hekim olmayan sağlık profesyonelleridir. Fakat bu video içeriklerinin kalitesi ve güvenilirliği kaynağı hekim olan bir videonun ortalama bir kalite ve güvenilirlik düzeyinden daha düşüktür.

Anahtar Kelimeler

• Felon
• YouTube
• çevrimiçi arama
• internet bilgisi

Kaynakça

1. 1.Patel DB, Emmanuel NB, Stevanovic MV, et al. Hand infections: anatomy, types and spread of infection, imaging findings, and treatment options. Radiographics. 2014;34(7):1968–86. [Crossref]
2. 2.Barger J, Garg R, Wang F, Chen N. Fingertip infections. Hand Clin. 2020;36(3):313–21. [Crossref]
3. 3.Jebson PJ. Infections of the fingertip. Paronychias and felons. Hand Clin. 1998;14(4):547–55, viii. [Crossref]
4. 4.Koshy JC, Bell B. Hand infections. J Hand Surg Am. 2019;44(1):46–54. [Crossref]
5. 5.Watson PA, Jebson PJ. The natural history of the neglected felon. Iowa Orthop J. 1996;16:164–6.
6. 6.Subramaniam S, Bober J, Chao J, Zehtabchi S. Point-of-care ultrasound for diagnosis of abscess in skin and soft tissue infections. Acad Emerg Med. 2016;23(11):1298–306. [Crossref]
7. 7.Adhikari S, Blaivas M. Sonography first for subcutaneous abscess and cellulitis evaluation. J Ultrasound Med. 2012;31(10):1509–12. [Crossref]
8. 8.Tosti R, Ilyas AM. Empiric antibiotics for acute infections of the hand. J Hand Surg Am. 2010;35(1):125–8. [Crossref]

9. 9.Langer MF, Grünert JG. [Diagnostic and therapeutic problems in paronychia and felons]. Handchir Mikrochir Plast Chir. 2021;53(3):259–66.
10. 10.Dikhtyar A, Stack LB. Felon caused by foreign body. Vis J Emerg Med. 2021;24:101059. [Crossref]
11. 11.Erdem O, Erdemir VA, Alpdoğan EE, et al. Assessment of YouTube videos about nail health and conditions in Turkish. Turkderm. 2025;59(2):45–53. [Crossref]
12. 12.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. [Crossref]
13. 13.Singh AG, Singh S, Singh PP. YouTube for information on rheumatoid arthritis -- a wakeup call? J Rheumatol. 2012;39(5):899–903. [Crossref]
14. 14.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. [Crossref]
15. 15.Özbek EA, Armangil M, Karaca MO, Merter A, Dursun M, Kocaoğlu H. Evaluation of the reliability and quality of information in carpal tunnel syndrome shared on YouTube. J Wrist Surg. 2022;11(4):295–301. [Crossref]
16. 16.Erdem MN, Karaca S. Evaluating the accuracy and quality of the information in kyphosis videos shared on YouTube. Spine (Phila Pa 1976). 2018;43(22):E1334–9. [Crossref]
17. 17.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. [Crossref]
18. 18.Zhuang T, Kortlever JTP, Shapiro LM, Baker L, Harris AHS, Kamal RN. The influence of cost information on treatment choice: a mixed-methods study. J Hand Surg Am. 2020;45(10):899–908.e4. [Crossref]
19. 19.Cassidy JT, Baker JF. Orthopaedic patient information on the World Wide Web: an essential review. J Bone Joint Surg Am. 2016;98(4):325–38. [Crossref]
20. 20.Ishack S, Lipner SR. Evaluating the impact and educational value of YouTube videos on nail biopsy procedures. Cutis. 2020;105(3):148–9;E1.
21. 21.Gong HS, Park JW, Shin YH, Kim K, Cho KJ, Baek GH. Use of a decision aid did not decrease decisional conflict in patients with carpal tunnel syndrome. BMC Musculoskelet Disord. 2017;18(1):118. [Crossref]
22. 22.Erdem MN, Karaca S. Evaluating the accuracy and quality of the information in kyphosis videos shared on YouTube. Spine (Phila Pa 1976). 2018;43(22):E1334–9. [Crossref]