From quality to clarity: evaluating the effectiveness of online ınformation related to septic arthritis.
Joint infection
Online information
Septic arthritis
Websites
Journal
Journal of orthopaedic surgery and research
ISSN: 1749-799X
Titre abrégé: J Orthop Surg Res
Pays: England
ID NLM: 101265112
Informations de publication
Date de publication:
15 Sep 2023
15 Sep 2023
Historique:
received:
13
05
2023
accepted:
10
09
2023
medline:
18
9
2023
pubmed:
16
9
2023
entrez:
15
9
2023
Statut:
epublish
Résumé
The aim of this study was to assess the content, readability, and quality of online resources on septic arthritis, a crucial orthopedic condition necessitating immediate diagnosis and treatment to avert serious complications, with a particular focus on the relevance to individuals from the general public. Two search terms ("septic arthritis" and "joint infection") were input into three different search engines on the Internet (Google, Yahoo, and Bing) and 60 websites were evaluated, with the top 20 results in each search engine. The websites underwent categorization based on their type, and their content and quality were assessed utilizing the DISCERN score, the Journal of the American Medical Association (JAMA) benchmark, the Global Quality Score (GQS), and the Information Value Score (IVS). The readability of the text was assessed through the utilization of the Flesch Kincaid Grade Level (FKGL) and the Flesch Reading Ease Score (FKRS). The presence or absence of the Health on Net (HON) code was evaluated on each website. The DISCERN, JAMA, GQS, FKGL, and IVS scores of the academic category were found to be substantially greater when compared with the physician, medical, and commercial categories. But at the same time, academic sites had high readability scores. Websites with HON code had significantly higher average FKGL, FCRS, DISCERN, JAMA, GQS, and IVS scores than those without. The quality of websites giving information on septic arthritis was variable and not optimal. Although the content of the academic group was of higher quality, it could be difficult to understand. One of the key responsibilities of healthcare professionals should be to provide high quality and comprehensible information concerning joint infections on reputable academic platforms, thereby facilitating patients in attaining a fundamental level of health literacy.
Sections du résumé
BACKGROUND
BACKGROUND
The aim of this study was to assess the content, readability, and quality of online resources on septic arthritis, a crucial orthopedic condition necessitating immediate diagnosis and treatment to avert serious complications, with a particular focus on the relevance to individuals from the general public.
METHODS
METHODS
Two search terms ("septic arthritis" and "joint infection") were input into three different search engines on the Internet (Google, Yahoo, and Bing) and 60 websites were evaluated, with the top 20 results in each search engine. The websites underwent categorization based on their type, and their content and quality were assessed utilizing the DISCERN score, the Journal of the American Medical Association (JAMA) benchmark, the Global Quality Score (GQS), and the Information Value Score (IVS). The readability of the text was assessed through the utilization of the Flesch Kincaid Grade Level (FKGL) and the Flesch Reading Ease Score (FKRS). The presence or absence of the Health on Net (HON) code was evaluated on each website.
RESULTS
RESULTS
The DISCERN, JAMA, GQS, FKGL, and IVS scores of the academic category were found to be substantially greater when compared with the physician, medical, and commercial categories. But at the same time, academic sites had high readability scores. Websites with HON code had significantly higher average FKGL, FCRS, DISCERN, JAMA, GQS, and IVS scores than those without.
CONCLUSION
CONCLUSIONS
The quality of websites giving information on septic arthritis was variable and not optimal. Although the content of the academic group was of higher quality, it could be difficult to understand. One of the key responsibilities of healthcare professionals should be to provide high quality and comprehensible information concerning joint infections on reputable academic platforms, thereby facilitating patients in attaining a fundamental level of health literacy.
Identifiants
pubmed: 37715176
doi: 10.1186/s13018-023-04181-x
pii: 10.1186/s13018-023-04181-x
pmc: PMC10503092
doi:
Types de publication
Journal Article
Langues
eng
Sous-ensembles de citation
IM
Pagination
689Informations de copyright
© 2023. BioMed Central Ltd., part of Springer Nature.
Références
Ross JJ. Septic arthritis of native joints. Infect Dis Clin North Am. 2017;31(2):203–18. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.idc.2017.01.001 .
doi: 10.1016/j.idc.2017.01.001
pubmed: 28366221
Kerbel YE, Lieber AM, Kirchner GJ, Stump NN, Prodromo JP, Petrucelli PM, et al. In-hospital complications following arthrotomy versus arthroscopy for septic knee arthritis: a cohort-matched comparison. J Knee Surg. 2021;34(1):74–9. https://doi.org/10.1055/s-0039-1693450 .
doi: 10.1055/s-0039-1693450
pubmed: 31288270
Earwood JS, Walker TR, Sue GJC. Septic arthritis: diagnosis and treatment. Am Fam Physician. 2021;104(6):589–97.
pubmed: 34913662
Clerc O, Prod’hom G, Greub G, Zanetti G, Senn L. Adult native septic arthritis: a review of 10 years of experience and lessons for empirical antibiotic therapy. J Antimicrob Chemother. 2011;66(5):1168–73. https://doi.org/10.1093/jac/dkr047 .
doi: 10.1093/jac/dkr047
pubmed: 21393124
Kaandorp CJ, Dinant HJ, van de Laar MA, Moens HJ, Prins AP, Dijkmans BA. Incidence and sources of native and prosthetic joint infection: a community based prospective survey. Ann Rheum Dis. 1997;56(8):470–5. https://doi.org/10.1136/ard.56.8.470 .
doi: 10.1136/ard.56.8.470
pubmed: 9306869
pmcid: 1752430
Elsissy JG, Liu JN, Wilton PJ, Nwachuku I, Gowd AK, Amin NH. Bacterial septic arthritis of the adult native knee joint: a review. JBJS Rev. 2020;8(1):e0059. https://doi.org/10.2106/JBJS.RVW.19.00059 .
doi: 10.2106/JBJS.RVW.19.00059
pubmed: 31899698
Mathews CJ, Weston VC, Jones A, Field M, Coakley G. Bacterial septic arthritis in adults. Lancet. 2010;375(9717):846–55. https://doi.org/10.1016/S0140-6736(09)61595-6 .
doi: 10.1016/S0140-6736(09)61595-6
pubmed: 20206778
Trotter MI, Morgan DW. Patients’ use of the Internet for health related matters: a study of Internet usage in 2000 and 2006. Health Inform J. 2008;14(3):175–81. https://doi.org/10.1177/1081180X08092828 .
doi: 10.1177/1081180X08092828
Gupte CM, Hassan AN, McDermott ID, Thomas RD. The internet–friend or foe? A questionnaire study of orthopaedic out-patients. Ann R Coll Surg Engl. 2002;84(3):187–92.
pubmed: 12092873
pmcid: 2503834
Morr S, Shanti N, Carrer A, Kubeck J, Gerling MC. Quality of information concerning cervical disc herniation on the Internet. Spine J. 2010;10(4):350–4. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.spinee.2010.02.009 .
doi: 10.1016/j.spinee.2010.02.009
pubmed: 20362253
Stellefson M, Hanik B, Chaney B, Chaney D, Tennant B, Chavarria EA. eHealth literacy among college students: a systematic review with implications for eHealth education. J Med Internet Res. 2011;13(4):e102. https://doi.org/10.2196/jmir.1703 .
doi: 10.2196/jmir.1703
pubmed: 22155629
pmcid: 3278088
McMullan M. Patients using the Internet to obtain health information: how this affects the patient-health professional relationship. Patient Educ Couns. 2006;63(1–2):24–8. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.pec.2005.10.006 .
doi: 10.1016/j.pec.2005.10.006
pubmed: 16406474
Agar A, Sahin A. Kyphosis-related information on the Internet Is the quality, content and readability sufficient for the patients? Glob Spine J. 2022;12(3):476–82. https://doi.org/10.1177/21925682211015955 .
doi: 10.1177/21925682211015955
The Top 11 Search Engines, Ranked by Popularity. 2023. https://blog.hubspot.com/marketing/top-search-engines .
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. https://doi.org/10.1136/jech.53.2.105 .
doi: 10.1136/jech.53.2.105
pubmed: 10396471
pmcid: 1756830
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.
doi: 10.1001/jama.1997.03540390074039
pubmed: 9103351
Bernard A, Langille M, Hughes S, Rose C, Leddin D, van Zanten SV. A systematic review of patient inflammatory bowel disease information resources on the World Wide Web. Am J Gastroenterol. 2007;102(9):2070–7. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1572-0241.2007.01325.x .
doi: 10.1111/j.1572-0241.2007.01325.x
pubmed: 17511753
Kaya E, Görmez S. Quality and readability of online information on plantar fasciitis and calcaneal spur. Rheumatol Int. 2022;42(11):1965–72. https://doi.org/10.1007/s00296-022-05165-6 .
doi: 10.1007/s00296-022-05165-6
pubmed: 35763090
Noback PC, Trofa DP, Dziesinski LK, Trupia EP, Galle S, Rosenwasser MP. Kienböck disease: quality, accuracy, and readability of online information. Hand (N Y). 2020;15(4):563–72. https://doi.org/10.1177/1558944718813631 .
doi: 10.1177/1558944718813631
pubmed: 30556422
HON code of conduct for medical and health Web sites. Am J Health Syst Pharm. 2000;57(13):1283. https://doi.org/10.1093/ajhp/57.13.1283a
Plusch K, Carfagno J, Givner D, Fletcher D, Aita D, Gallant GG, et al. An evaluation of the source and content of Dupuytren’s disease information available on the internet. Cureus. 2021;13(11):e19356. https://doi.org/10.7759/cureus.19356 .
doi: 10.7759/cureus.19356
pubmed: 34909317
pmcid: 8653955
Tang K, Azhar U, Babar M, Ahmed A, Oh A, Day W, et al. Assessing the quality of Youtube videos on adhesive capsulitis. Cureus. 2022;14(7):e27406. https://doi.org/10.7759/cureus.27406 .
doi: 10.7759/cureus.27406
pubmed: 36046306
pmcid: 9419844
Nwosu CR, Cox BM. The impact of the Internet on the doctor-patient relationship. Health Inform J. 2000;6(3):156–61.
doi: 10.1177/146045820000600308
Garcia GH, Taylor SA, Dy CJ, Christ A, Patel RM, Dines JS. Online resources for shoulder instability: what are patients reading? J Bone Joint Surg Am. 2014;96(20):e177. https://doi.org/10.2106/JBJS.M.01228 .
doi: 10.2106/JBJS.M.01228
pubmed: 25320207
Majid N, Lee S, Plummer V. The effectiveness of orthopedic patient education in improving patient outcomes: a systematic review protocol. JBI Database Syst em Rev Implement Rep. 2015;13(1):122–33. https://doi.org/10.11124/jbisrir-2015-1950 .
doi: 10.11124/jbisrir-2015-1950
Hartnett DA, Philips AP, Daniels AH, Blankenhorn BD. Readability and quality of online information on total ankle arthroplasty. Foot (Edinb). 2023;54:101985. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.foot.2023.101985 .
doi: 10.1016/j.foot.2023.101985
pubmed: 36827889
Murphy B, Irwin S, Condon F, Kennedy C. Readability and quality of online information for patients pertaining to revision knee arthroplasty: an objective analysis. Surgeon. 2022;20(6):e366–70. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.surge.2021.12.009 .
doi: 10.1016/j.surge.2021.12.009
pubmed: 35034835
Ghodasra JH, Wang D, Jayakar RG, Jensen AR, Yamaguchi KT, Hegde VV, et al. The assessment of quality, accuracy, and readability of online educational resources for platelet-rich plasma. Arthroscopy. 2018;34(1):272–8. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.arthro.2017.06.023 .
doi: 10.1016/j.arthro.2017.06.023
pubmed: 28784239
Shazil Jamal M, Hurley ET, Davey MS, Asad H, Gaafar M, Mullett H. Evaluation of the quality of information online for arthroscopic Bankart repair. Ann R Coll Surg Engl. 2022. https://doi.org/10.1308/rcsann.2022.0024 .
doi: 10.1308/rcsann.2022.0024
pubmed: 35639042
Key S, Yalın M, Erten M. Growing taller without hormones? Dr. Consult Google—an evaluation of online information related to limb lengthening. Healthcare (Basel). 2023;11(2):172. https://doi.org/10.3390/healthcare11020172 .
doi: 10.3390/healthcare11020172
pubmed: 36673540
Özduran E, Hanci V. Evaluating the readability, quality and reliability of online information on Behçet’s disease. Reumatismo. 2022. https://doi.org/10.4081/reumatismo.2022.1495 .
doi: 10.4081/reumatismo.2022.1495
pubmed: 36101989
White MD, Latour K, Giordano M, Taylor T, Agarwal N. Reliability and quality of online patient education videos for lateral lumbar interbody fusion. J Neurosurg Spine. 2020. https://doi.org/10.3171/2020.4.SPINE191539 .
doi: 10.3171/2020.4.SPINE191539
pubmed: 32590348
Winship B, Grisell M, Yang CB, Chen RX, Bauer AS. The quality of pediatric orthopaedic information on the internet. J Pediatr Orthop. 2014;34(4):474–7. https://doi.org/10.1097/BPO.0000000000000125 .
doi: 10.1097/BPO.0000000000000125
pubmed: 24276228
pmcid: 5016082
Nassiri M, Bruce-Brand RA, O’Neill F, Chenouri S, Curtin P. Perthes disease: the quality and reliability of information on the Internet. J Pediatr Orthop. 2015;35(5):530–5. https://doi.org/10.1097/BPO.0000000000000312 .
doi: 10.1097/BPO.0000000000000312
pubmed: 25254387
Shah AK, Yi PH, Stein A. Readability of orthopaedic oncology-related patient education materials available on the internet. J Am Acad Orthop Surg. 2015;23(12):783–8. https://doi.org/10.5435/JAAOS-D-15-00324 .
doi: 10.5435/JAAOS-D-15-00324
pubmed: 26519430
Polishchuk DL, Hashem J, Sabharwal S. Readability of online patient education materials on adult reconstruction Web sites. J Arthroplasty. 2012;27(5):716–9. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.arth.2011.08.020 .
doi: 10.1016/j.arth.2011.08.020
pubmed: 22000573
Badarudeen S, Sabharwal S. Assessing readability of patient education materials: current role in orthopaedics. Clin Orthop Relat Res. 2010;468(10):2572–80. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11999-010-1380-y .
doi: 10.1007/s11999-010-1380-y
pubmed: 20496023
pmcid: 3049622
Badarudeen S, Sabharwal S. Readability of patient education materials from the American Academy of Orthopaedic Surgeons and Pediatric Orthopaedic Society of North America web sites. J Bone Joint Surg Am. 2008;90(1):199–204. https://doi.org/10.2106/JBJS.G.00347 .
doi: 10.2106/JBJS.G.00347
pubmed: 18171975
Elhassan Y, Sheridan G, Nassiri M, Osman M, Kiely P, Noel J. Discectomy-related information on the internet: Does the quality follow the surge? Spine Phila Pa (1976). 2015;40(2):121–5. https://doi.org/10.1097/BRS.0000000000000689 .
doi: 10.1097/BRS.0000000000000689
pubmed: 25575087
Nason GJ, Baker JF, Byrne DP, Noel J, Moore D, Kiely PJ. Scoliosis-specific information on the internet: has the “information highway” led to better information provision? Spine Phila Pa (1976). 2012;37(21):E1364–9. https://doi.org/10.1097/BRS.0b013e31826619b5 .
doi: 10.1097/BRS.0b013e31826619b5
pubmed: 22772569
Bruce-Brand RA, Baker JF, Byrne DP, Hogan NA, McCarthy T. Assessment of the quality and content of information on anterior cruciate ligament reconstruction on the internet. Arthroscopy. 2013;29(6):1095–100. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.arthro.2013.02.007 .
doi: 10.1016/j.arthro.2013.02.007
pubmed: 23582738
Kružliaková N, Porter K, Ray PA, Hedrick V, Brock DJ, Zoellner J. Understanding and advancing organizational health literacy within a public health setting. HLRP Health Literacy Res Pract. 2021;5(1):e35–48. https://doi.org/10.3928/24748307-20210114-01 .
doi: 10.3928/24748307-20210114-01
Krempec J, Hall J, Biermann JS. Internet use by patients in orthopaedic surgery. Iowa Orthop J. 2003;23:80.
pubmed: 14575255
pmcid: 1888386
Brouwer WP, Hollenbach M. Search engine optimization for scientific publications: How one can find your needle in the haystack. U Eur Gastroenterol J. 2022;10(8):906–8. https://doi.org/10.1002/ueg2.12311 .
doi: 10.1002/ueg2.12311
Lawson KA, Codella S, Ciccotti MG, Kane PW, Duncan IC, Cohen SB. Evaluation of internet information about rotator cuff repair. Am J Orthop (Belle Mead NJ). 2016;45(3):E136–42.
pubmed: 26991581