Is YouTube™ a reliable source for patient information about Holmium Laser Enucleation of Prostate?

OBJECTIVES:Prior to benign prostate surgery, the patient's informed consent is mandatory. Among the multiple source of information for patients, social networks are very popular, but the quality of information delivered is unknown. The aim of this study was to evaluate the quality of the information freely available for patients on YouTube™ regarding HoLEP. MATERIALS AND METHODS:The term "HOLEP" was searched on YouTube™ on December 24, 2020. Videos that were not in English, French or Arabic, specifically destined to the medical community, with no written or oral comment, patient testimonials, pure surgical technique or had content unrelated to HoLEP were excluded from the study. The patient information sheet by the French Urology Association (AFU) was used to create a list of 31 items classified into 4 categories as follows: anatomy and pathophysiology (6 items), technique and perioperative preparation (10 items), usual outcomes (10 items) and complications (5 items). For each item on the predefined list, correct, missing and incorrect information were rated respectively 1, 0 and -1. RESULTS:Thirty-five videos met the inclusion criteria. Their average length was 6'06"±7'03" [00'20"; 31'30"], with an average number of views of 5279±17,821 [8; 87,354]. The information provided on the videos was written and oral, oral-only and written-only in 51%, 34% and 14% of cases, respectively. 23% of the videos showed surgery sequences, 40% animations and 62% a doctor speaking. Only one video had a quality score greater than 80% and 7 videos got a score below 20%. CONCLUSION:The information about HoLEP on YouTube™ seemed not of sufficiently high quality to allow patients to make informed decisions, and was occasionally misleading. Surgeons still have the duty to give the best quality information, and may point patients towards adequate sources of information, especially those delivered by national and international professional societies. LEVEL OF EVIDENCE: 5: