YouTube as an information source for instrument separation in root canal treatment

Abstract

Objectives: The reliability and educational quality of videos on YouTube for patients seeking information regarding instrument separation in root canal treatment were evaluated. Materials and Methods: YouTube was searched for videos on instrument separation in root canal treatment. Video content was scored based on reliability in terms of 3 categories (etiology, procedure, and prognosis) and based on video flow, quality, and educational usefulness using the Global Quality Score (GQS). Descriptive statistics were obtained and the data were analyzed using analysis of variance and the Kruskal-Wallis test. Results: The highest mean completeness scores were obtained for videos published by dentists or specialists (1.48 ± 1.06). There was no statistically significant difference among sources of upload in terms of content completeness. The highest mean GQS was found for videos published by dentists or specialists (1.82 ± 0.96), although there was no statistically significant correlation between GQS and the source of upload. Conclusions: Videos on YouTube have incomplete and low-quality content for patients who are concerned about instrument separation during endodontic treatment, or who experience this complication during endodontic treatment.

Analyzing Content and Quality of YouTube™ Videos on Removal of Amalgam Fillings

“…However, since the videos in our study are operational videos, it is normal for professional uploaders to be in the majority. There are similar studies with the same parallel results (13,24,25). In this study, the video with the highest interaction index belongs to a non-professional uploader.…”

“…When the results of the recently published studies evaluating Youtube™ videos on dentistry are examined, it is seen that the "Viewing Rate" and "Interaction Index" variables are in a wide range. Although there are studies with similar results to the "Interaction Index" rate of the study (24,25), it was determined that the closest one to our study was a study on cleft lip and palate (24). There is no correlation between "Viewing Rate" and "Interaction Index" in our study.…”

“…This situation revealed the necessity of analyzing the videos in the related field. There are many studies evaluating Youtube™ videos on topics related to dentistry and general health (1,2,(7)(8)(9)(12)(13)(14)(22)(23)(24)(25). Our study is the first to analyze YouTube™ videos on removing dental amalgam fillings.…”

Evaluation of YouTube videos for patients’ education on periradicular surgery

“…Hence, YouTube is not a suitable single source to obtain comprehensive information about periradicular surgery. Inadequate scores of YouTube videos discussing other dental-related topics were also previously reported [15,[18][19][20][21]24]. It is known that YouTube videos are not peer-reviewed nor based on scientific evidence [13,14] which adds a question mark over the reliability and quality of the information being presented.…”

“…Past experiments have studied the YouTube videos contents for various oral-health-related topics [15,[17][18][19][20][21][22][23][24][25]. In the present study, the video content was evaluated based on the AAE guidelines regarding periradicular surgery.…”