Hüsch Tanja, Ober Sita, Thomas Anita, Haferkamp Axel, Saar Matthias, Kranz Jennifer
Abteilung für Urologie und Kinderurologie, Universitätsmedizin der Johannes Gutenberg Universität, Langenbeckstr. 1, 55131, Mainz, Deutschland.
Praxis Dr. med. Ober & Team, Praxis für Gynäkologie und Geburtshilfe, Michelstadt, Deutschland.
Urologie. 2025 Jun;64(6):567-573. doi: 10.1007/s00120-025-02593-7. Epub 2025 May 19.
The interest in digital information on pelvic floor dysfunction is constantly increasing. Various digital platforms offer an easy and anonymous way for patients to seek information about their condition. However, little is known about the quality of the information on the different platforms or about the how the quality of different sites compares.
The aim of this study was to investigate the completeness and quality of information on the search term "stress urinary incontinence" in comparison between different digital platforms.
A systematic analysis of the keyword search "stress urinary incontinence" was performed on Google and the social networks Facebook, YouTube, Instagram, and LinkedIn. The first 30 search results on each platform were evaluated. The results were categorized according to information content and readability. The Health On the Net Foundation (HON) seal was used to assess medical quality.
The proportion of informative content was highest on YouTube (97%) and Google (93%). Content was predominantly provided by professional organizations on Google and YouTube. Information on conservative therapies dominated across all platforms. Surgical therapies were only discussed in up to 63% of results on Google and in up to 50% of results on YouTube. In most cases, there was also no comprehensive presentation of all surgical options. The readability of the texts was unsuitable for laypersons on all platforms, and HON certification was only present on Google (37%) and YouTube (3%).
The results offer practical insights into the quality of digital information on stress urinary incontinence. However, they show deficits in readability and comprehensive presentation of surgical therapies. The physician-patient relationship remains indispensable for taking individual needs into account and avoiding misinformation.
人们对盆底功能障碍数字信息的兴趣持续增长。各种数字平台为患者提供了一种轻松且匿名的方式来获取有关自身病情的信息。然而，对于不同平台上信息的质量以及不同网站质量的比较情况，我们知之甚少。
本研究旨在调查不同数字平台上关于搜索词“压力性尿失禁”信息的完整性和质量。
在谷歌以及社交网络脸书、优兔、照片墙和领英上对关键词搜索“压力性尿失禁”进行系统分析。对每个平台上的前30个搜索结果进行评估。结果根据信息内容和可读性进行分类。使用健康网络基金会（HON）标志来评估医学质量。
优兔（97%）和谷歌（93%）上信息性内容的比例最高。谷歌和优兔上的内容主要由专业组织提供。所有平台上关于保守治疗的信息占主导。谷歌上高达63%的结果以及优兔上高达50%的结果中仅讨论了手术治疗。在大多数情况下，也没有对所有手术选择进行全面介绍。所有平台上文本的可读性都不适合普通大众，并且只有谷歌（37%）和优兔（3%）有HON认证。
这些结果为压力性尿失禁数字信息的质量提供了实用见解。然而，它们在可读性和手术治疗的全面介绍方面存在不足。考虑个体需求并避免错误信息，医患关系仍然不可或缺。
