YouTube as a Source of Information About Premature Ejaculation Treatment. Issue 11 (12th September 2019)

• Record Type: Journal Article
• Authors: Gul, Murat; Diri, Mehmet Akif
• Is Part Of: Journal of sexual medicine. Volume 16:Issue 11(2019)
• Page Start: 1734
• Page End: 1740
• Publication Date: 2019-09-12
• Subjects: Premature Ejaculation -- YouTube -- Internet -- Treatment -- Cure; Sexual disorders -- Periodicals; Sex -- Periodicals; Sexual health -- Periodicals; 616.69005
• DOI: 10.1016/j.jsxm.2019.08.008
• Languages: English
• ISSNs: 1743-6095

Abstract

Abstract: Introduction: An increasing number of patients are seeking premature ejaculation (PE) therapy online. Although health care information on the Internet about PE is abundant, the quality of information about its treatment on YouTube, the most visited online video streaming service, is unknown. Aim: The aim of this study was to assess the role of videos pertaining to the treatment of PE through YouTube. Methods: A cross-sectional study was performed through YouTube using the keywords "cure premature ejaculation, " "end premature ejaculation, " "stop premature ejaculation, " or "premature ejaculation treatment." The videos were sorted as reliable or nonreliable by 2 urologists as they may contain scientifically proven information or not. Nonrelevant, non-English, and silent videos were excluded. Video demographics were analyzed by the quality and source of the video. Main Outcome Measures: A 5-point global quality scale, a 5-point modified reliability (DISCERN) tool, kappa statistic, the intraclass correlation coefficient, and descriptive statistics in the form of proportions and percentages were used. Results: Of the 800 videos, 668 were excluded because they were duplicates ( n = 389), irrelevant ( n = 49), not in English ( n = 284), or had no audio ( n = 51). Of the 132 videos, 93 (70%) were described as reliable and 39 (30%) as nonreliable. The kappa statistic for interobserver agreement was 0.832. In the reliable information group, the reliability (2.55 ± 1.03) and quality scores of the contents (2.74 ± 1.06) were statistically higher than those in the nonreliable information group (0.23 ± 0.53 and 1.15 ± 0.48, respectively; P < .05). The majority of the nonreliable information group comprised medical advertisement/for-profit companies (51%) and individuals (41%). There was no significant difference between the reliable and nonreliable information groups in terms of average views ( P = .873) and viewed videos per day ( P = .538). Clinical Implications: Evaluating videos about the management of PE holds promise for understanding what men are exposed to. Strength & Limitations: The study simultaneously investigated the quality and accuracy of YouTube videos by several aspects using validated instruments. As for limitations, there is no consensus in the literature regarding how to assess health care-related online videos, and the results were not derived from patients' perceptions. Conclusion: The study highlights data about the treatment of PE on YouTube. Videos with reliable information outnumbered those with nonreliable information. This is the first study to demonstrate that YouTube is an important source of data on PE management. Physicians and health care providers should contribute reliable content, and YouTube should remove deceptive videos before patients watch them