Fayed Mohamed, Mostafa Zeinab, Ahmed Fouzia, Basharat Kaleem, Adly Mohammed, Karakullukçu Serdar, Paslı Sinan, Idris Salah, Jerjawi Esam, Khan Keebat
Department of Emergency Medicine, School of Medicine, Hamad Medical Corporation, Doha, Qatar.
Department of Public Health, School of Medicine, Karadeniz Technical University, Trabzon, Turkey.
Emerg Med Int. 2025 Apr 10;2025:2582984. doi: 10.1155/emmi/2582984. eCollection 2025.
The aim of our study was to evaluate the accuracy and reliability of videos available on YouTube and Google showing the use of automated external defibrillators. Videos available on YouTube and Google between 2020 and 2023 were searched using the search terms "Defibrillator," "Resuscitation," "Basic life support," "Cardiac arrest," "CPR," "Cardiac shock," "Chest trust," or "First aid." Data such as the year the video was uploaded, number of views, and video length were collected. The videos were watched and evaluated by two independent emergency physicians. According to the 6-stage evaluation criteria, 1 point was given if the information given in the video was correct and 0 point was given if no information was given. The maximum score was determined as 6 and the minimum score as 1. Out of a total of 315 videos uploaded to the specified platforms, 29 met the inclusion criteria. After the evaluation, the average score given to the videos was 5.45 ± 1.02. When the videos were categorized as low and medium-high according to their fidelity levels, there was no statistically significant difference between these two groups in terms of the number of views, video length, and the score given (=0.469, 0.078, and 0.110, respectively). Videos from institutions were shorter, with a median length of 180 s compared to 289 s for noninstitution uploads (=0.047). Both groups received similar scores, with a median of 6 for each (=0.257). The main findings of our study were that most of the videos were uploaded by health institutions and were shorter. Video scores did not differ according to the level of loyalty of the mannequins used and the uploading source.
我们研究的目的是评估YouTube和谷歌上有关自动体外除颤器使用的视频的准确性和可靠性。使用搜索词“除颤器”“复苏”“基础生命支持”“心脏骤停”“心肺复苏”“心源性休克”“胸部按压”或“急救”搜索了2020年至2023年期间YouTube和谷歌上的视频。收集了视频上传年份、观看次数和视频时长等数据。由两名独立的急诊医生观看并评估这些视频。根据6级评估标准,如果视频中提供的信息正确则得1分,如果未提供信息则得0分。最高分数确定为6分,最低分数为1分。在上传到指定平台的总共315个视频中,有29个符合纳入标准。评估后,视频的平均得分为5.45±1.02。当根据逼真度水平将视频分为低和中高两类时,这两组在观看次数、视频时长和得分方面没有统计学上的显著差异(分别为=0.469、0.078和0.110)。机构上传的视频较短,中位数时长为180秒,而非机构上传的视频中位数时长为289秒(=0.047)。两组得分相似,每组中位数均为6分(=0.257)。我们研究的主要发现是,大多数视频是由卫生机构上传的,且时长较短。视频得分不因所用人偶的逼真程度和上传来源而有所不同。