Characteristics of pelvic organ prolapse content available on social media.

AIMS

To analyze the quality, understandability, and actionability of pelvic organ prolapse (POP) content and to characterize creators of content and treatment options discussed on social media platforms YouTube, Instagram, and Pinterest.

METHODS

A cross-sectional, qualitative study was conducted for each platform. A search for "pelvic organ prolapse" was conducted and the first 100 relevant results analyzed. Data collected include source characteristics, treatments discussed, and scores for each criterion of validated Patient Education Materials and Assessment Tool and DISCERN metrics to evaluate quality, actionability, and understandability. The χ analysis, univariate and multivariate logistic regressions were done to assess correlations and the impact of variables on outcomes of interest across platforms.

RESULTS

Low to moderate quality was present in 74.1% of posts. Poor understandability was seen in 37.1% of posts, and 56.1% had poor actionability. The most common publisher of content overall was health and wellness or physical therapy groups (44.6%). The most common YouTube publisher was doctors, hospitals, or clinics (49%). Pelvic floor muscle training was the most discussed treatment overall (57.4%). On YouTube surgery was discussed more frequently than Instagram or Pinterest (58% vs. 11% vs. 43%, p < 0.001. Pinterest posts had better understandability ratings than YouTube videos (odds ratio = 0.19; 95% confidence interval: [0.10-0.36]; p < 0.001).

CONCLUSION

Information on popular platforms regarding POP demonstrates inconsistent quality and poor understandability and actionability. There is an opportunity for health care providers to direct patients to curated lists of high-quality educational content on these platforms. Awareness of information available on social media is an increasingly important aspect of patient care.