The purpose of the study was to investigate the quality and reliability of YouTube videos as a source of information in water treatments. We searched videos on YouTube (
www.youtube.com
) using the following keywords: “health resort medicine,” “spa treatment,” “spa therapy,” “hydrotherapy,” “thermal medicine,” “balneology,” and “balneotherapy” on June 17th, 2021. The global quality scale (GQS) was used to evaluate the quality of the videos. The assessment of reliability was evaluated using the modified DISCERN tool. Some other video parameters and sources of the videos were also recorded. One hundred twenty-one (121) videos were analyzed. The most common video source was advertisement (46.3%). GQS and modified DISCERN median scores were generally low. They were superior for “hydrotherapy” and “balneotherapy” and were also higher in videos uploaded by health-related persons or organizations (physicians, health-related professionals, and health-related websites). A statistically significant positive correlation was found between investigated parameters (like view ratio, number of likes, video power index, video length) and GQS. Only video length was correlated with modified DISCERN for investigated parameters. The median video power index scores were statistically higher for “spa therapy” and “spa treatment.” The YouTube content linked with water treatments has poor quality and reliability most of time. The hydrotherapy and balneotherapy keywords have the best quality and reliability.
We think that designers of water treatment videos should involve health professionals more often so that the content of their video will better explain the details of medical conditions or interventions.
The scientific experts should ensure a consensus in terminology to straighten the awareness of water treatments for patients and physicians.
Background
Low back pain is highly prevalent and a major source of disability worldwide. Spa therapy is frequently used to treat low back pain, but the associated level of evidence for efficacy is insufficient. To fill this knowledge gap, this protocol proposes an appropriately powered, prospective, evaluator-blinded, multi-centre, two-parallel-arm, randomised (1:1), controlled trial that will compare spa therapy in addition to usual care including home exercise (UCHE) versus UCHE alone for the treatment of chronic low back pain.
Methods
Eligible patients (anticipated sample size of 358) will have had low back pain for more than 3 months and scores for pain greater than 40 mm on a visual analogue scale (VAS). Following initial consent for UCHE and baseline evaluations, patients are randomised (1:1) to UCHE alone, or UCHE plus spa therapy (18 days of mud packs, underwater massages, showers and water exercises under medical supervision). Patients in the latter arm will be requested to sign an additional consent form as per Zelen randomisation. Follow-up visits will occur at approximately months 1, 6 and 12 and (along with baseline assessments) will cover changes over time in VAS pain scores, the impact of lower back pain on daily life (the Rolland and Morris Disability Questionnaire (RMDQ)), inappropriate fears and beliefs about lower back pain (the fear, avoidance, belief questionnaire (FABQ)), general quality of life (the Euroqol Group 5 dimension, 5 level questionnaire (EQ-5D-5 L)), Patient Acceptable Symptom State (PASS), consumption of analgesic drugs and nonsteroidal anti-inflammatory drugs (NSAIDs), and overall state of health. Health resource use and days of sick leave (and subsequently the associated costs) will also be recorded. The primary outcome is the presence/absence of a clinically relevant change (improvement of at least 30%) in the VAS score for pain at 6 months.
Discussion
Despite the fact that previous, rather dated recommendations encourage spa therapy for the treatment of low back pain, the current literary corpus is methodologically poor. This protocol has been designed to provide results spanning a thorough range of outcomes at the highest evidence level possible.
Trial registration
ClinicalTrials.gov: NCT03910023. Registered on 10 April 2019.
scite is a Brooklyn-based organization that helps researchers better discover and understand research articles through Smart Citations–citations that display the context of the citation and describe whether the article provides supporting or contrasting evidence. scite is used by students and researchers from around the world and is funded in part by the National Science Foundation and the National Institute on Drug Abuse of the National Institutes of Health.