Quality,reliability,and educational value of YouTube™ videos on Pavlik harness treatment for developmental dysplasia of the hip

Abstract

Background:

Pavlik harness is a widely accepted first-line treatment for Developmental dysplasia of the hip in infants. Given the increasing use of online video platforms by caregivers seeking medical information, this study aimed to evaluate the content, quality, and reliability of the most-viewed YouTube™ videos related to the Pavlik harness.

Methods:

A YouTube™ search was conducted using the terms “Pavlik harness,” “Pavlik harness treatment,” “Pavlik harness overview,” “Pavlik harness how to apply,” “Pavlik harness application,” and “Pavlik harness tips.” 48 videos were included for analysis. Data collected included upload source, video length, date of upload, number of views, likes, dislikes, comments, and the interaction index. Video quality and reliability were evaluated using the Global Quality Scale (GQS), Journal of the American Medical Association (JAMA) benchmark criteria, and DISCERN instrument.

Results:

Of the 48 videos analyzed, 26 (54.2%) were classified as high quality, 10 (20.8%) as intermediate, and 12 (25%) as low quality. Videos uploaded by healthcare professionals and academic institutions had significantly higher GQS, JAMA, and DISCERN scores compared to those uploaded by non-medical sources(p < 0.001). High-quality videos also had a higher number of likes per day and views per day (p = 0.001 and p = 0.001, respectively).

Conclusion:

Nearly half of the most-viewed YouTube™ videos on this topic were of intermediate or low quality. Pediatric orthopedic specialists and professional societies should be encouraged to contribute high-quality, evidence-based videos to guide caregivers appropriately. Parents should be advised to rely on videos uploaded by reputable academic sources to ensure accurate and safe application of the Pavlik harness.

Keywords

Pavlik harness developmental dysplasia of the hip YouTube™parent education pediatric orthopedics

Introduction

Developmental dysplasia of the hip (DDH) represents a spectrum of anatomical abnormalities of the hip joint that can lead to permanent disability if not detected and treated early.^1,2 The Pavlik harness is the standard initial treatment for DDH in infants under 6 months of age, maintaining the femoral head in the acetabulum while allowing movement to stimulate acetabular development.^3–6

The internet has turned into a digital databank with the increase in the usage of the internet by society in our era. YouTube™ is one of the social platforms used by more than 2 billion people to access information in this digital era, and it is a platform where health-related data are mostly searched due to the ease of free access.⁷ YouTube™ contains numerous health-related videos regarding the diagnosis, treatment, pathogenesis, and prevention of diseases. When the literature is reviewed, it is seen that YouTube™ provides quality information as well as incorrect and incomplete information.⁸ For this reason, YouTube™ resembles a knife with two sharp edges.

Pavlik harness treatment for DDH is uniquely sensitive to caregiver technique, adherence, and follow-up because successful reduction and maintenance depend on correct harness positioning and ongoing compliance throughout treatment.^9,10 Inadequate caregiver understanding or incorrect application may plausibly contribute to ineffective reduction/maintenance, suboptimal positioning, delayed recognition of complications (including femoral nerve palsy, avascular necrosis and skin related problems) delayed or inappropriate follow-up—issues repeatedly emphasized in the DDH treatment literature and complication reviews.¹¹ As caregivers increasingly seek procedural guidance through unregulated online video platforms, the lack of peer-review and quality-control mechanisms can lead to substantial variability in accuracy and completeness of widely consumed content.^12,13 Given the central role of structured caregiver education in supporting compliance and safe harness use, studies focusing on parent compliance and parent-directed educational interventions underscore the importance of standardized teaching and supervision during Pavlik harness treatment.¹⁴ This is a topic in which the triangle of patient’s relative-physician-internet is so complicated and linked; however, no studies are analyzing the quality of the YouTube™ videos related to Pavlik harness treatment in the literature. In this study, we aimed to evaluate the quality of the most viewed videos related to Pavlik harness treatment in English, to make an analysis and comparison based on the source.

Materials and methods

We planned our study as a descriptive study. First, the titles to be searched were determined. In total, six terms, namely Pavlik harness, Pavlik harness treatment, Pavlik harness overview, Pavlik harness how to apply, Pavlik harness application and Pavlik harness tips were determined to search on YouTube™. These search terms were used on YouTube™ (www.youtube.com) on 15 May 2025 to determine videos that could be evaluated in the study. Video listings are made in a way that the most viewed videos are placed on the first pages. It has been reported that over 90% of Internet users review videos on the first three pages of query results.¹⁵ Therefore, the videos on the first 3 pages (60 videos) for each search term were analyzed. As the view counts of the videos on YouTube™ change fast, the data of these 360 videos searched were transformed into an Excel file and archived. This type of selection method has been used in similar studies in the literature.^16,17 The videos which were in a language other than English, were only animated, contained ads, were silent, were shorter than 60 s, were replications, and focused on another topic were excluded from the study. The animated-only videos were excluded because our primary outcome instruments (Global Quality Scale (GQS)/Journal of the American Medical Association (JAMA)/DISCERN) assess quality/reliability but do not specify media type; nevertheless, we initially excluded “only animated” videos to minimize heterogeneity in evaluating whether videos demonstrate practical harness positioning. The analysis was restricted to English-language videos to ensure reliable assessment of content by the reviewers and to maintain consistency with the target scientific audience. Inclusion of non-English videos could have introduced variability in interpretation and scoring.

Assessment of quality

All videos were reviewed and categorized by two independent researchers according to the GQS. GQS was used to assess the overall quality of all selected videos. As shown in Table 1, GQS is an easily applicable assessment tool that includes five questions and scores between 1 and 5. If a video score is 4 or 5 points, it is considered high quality, 3 points are considered as an intermediate quality, and 1 or 2 points is considered poor quality.¹⁸ The audio and video quality were checked according to the personalized scoring system defined by Sorensen et al.¹⁹ In these criteria, video quality was grouped as follows. Good—clear visuals and text, with some professional graphics or effects, HD, fair—regular video quality, average text clarity, home video, poor—visuals are blurry, grainy, or difficult to understand. Audio quality was grouped as follows. Good—no difficulty understanding spoken words, music, fair—speech difficult to understand, distracting audio or background sounds, poor—no audio.

Table 1.

Global quality scale.

Score	Description
1	Poor quality, poor flow, most information missing, not helpful for patients
2	Generally poor, some information given but of limited use to patients
3	Moderate quality, some important information is adequately discussed
4	Good quality good flow, most relevant information is covered, useful for patients
5	Excellent quality and excellent flow, very useful for patients

GQS: Global Quality Scale. Scores range from 1 (poor quality) to 5 (high quality). Videos with scores of 4–5 were classified as high quality, 3 as intermediate quality, and 1–2 as low quality.

Assessment of reliability and educational content

The JAMA benchmark criteria and modified DISCERN tool were used to evaluate video reliability.^20,21 The JAMA criteria are an objective tool including four individual criteria. To use JAMA criteria, an observer assigns 1 point for each criterion present in a video. Each title is scored 1 point; while 4 points refer to the highest quality, 0 point indicates poor quality. The Modified DISCERN is a scoring system consisting of five questions. In this system, each “yes” answer is scored 1 point, and the maximum score is 5. The criteria in the scoring system are as follows: Is the video clear, concise, and understandable? Are reliable sources of information used? Is the information presented balanced and unbiased? Has an additional source of information been provided for reference to the patient? Are areas of uncertainty/controversy mentioned?

The source of the videos, video length, date of upload, the number of views, number of likes and dislikes, view per day, like per day, dislike per day, comment per day, interaction index, and the number of comments of the videos were recorded. The videos were evaluated via the interaction index developed by Hassona et al.²² and calculated using likes, dislikes, total view and upload time.

In addition to standardized quality and reliability assessments, a content-domain deficiency analysis was performed for videos classified as low or intermediate quality. Two independent reviewers re-evaluated these videos using a structured checklist of clinically relevant educational domains derived from established principles of Pavlik harness management and caregiver instruction.

The checklist included the following domains: (1) explanation of the target hip position, including appropriate flexion and abduction range and avoidance of extension or adduction; (2) description of warning signs and “do-not” guidance indicating inappropriate positioning or potential complications; (3) recommendations regarding follow-up scheduling and escalation pathways, including circumstances requiring prompt medical consultation; (4) information on recommended wear duration and adjustment frequency; and (5) guidance on skin care and monitoring for pressure-related complications.

Video upload sources

Each domain was scored as present or absent. Disagreements between reviewers were resolved by consensus. The frequency of omitted domains was calculated and incorporated into the descriptive analysis.

The video sources to be checked were classified as eight titles and five groups: (1) Pediatric orthopedic specialist + academic institutions, (2) trainer + nonphysician health personnel, (3) patient + independent user, (4) Professional organizations /Societies, (5) health-related website.

This study does not involve any humans or animals as participants. Since the data on the Internet are open to and accessible for everyone, it was not found necessary to receive the approval of any ethics committees, after reviewing the previous studies in the literature.^16,23

Statistical analysis

SPSS Windows 22.0 version package program was used in the analysis of the data. The Shapiro–Wilk test was used to evaluate the distribution of the data. Kruskal–Wallis and Dunn tests were used to testing the variables that were not normally distributed in groups of three or more. Relations between numerical variables were tested with Spearman rank correlation coefficient. p values <0.05 were considered significant.

Results

As a result of the search, among 360 videos, 231 were replications, and 81 were other reasons excluded from the study (Figure 1). After the necessary exclusions, 48 videos that met the inclusion criteria were analyzed for the study. The general evaluation parameters of the videos are shown in Table 2. The most viewed video was a video with a view count of 17,269,907, which was uploaded by a professional organization/association. Meanwhile, this was also the most liked (373,000) and the most disliked (7300) video. Considering the sources of upload of the videos, 4 videos (8.3%) were produced by trainers, 15 (31.2%) by physicians, 5 (10.5%) by independent users, 6 (12.5%) by patients, 10 (20.8%) by universities/organizations/associations, 3 (6.3%) by non-physician health professionals, 1 (2.1%) by an academician, and 4 (8.3%) by health-related websites. When the videos were grouped as per GQS, 26 (54.2%) had high quality, 10 (20.8%) had intermediate quality, and 12 (25%) had low quality. The Kappa score for the interrater agreement was 0.86. When the video parameters were evaluated according to GQS, both the view and like counts of the high-quality videos were significantly higher than the intermediate- and poor-quality groups (Table 3).

Figure 1.

Flowchart for video selection.

Table 2.

General descriptive data of the videos.

Variable	N	Mean	Standard deviation	Minimum	Maximum
GQS score	48	3.4	1.3	1.0	5.0
DISCERN score	48	2.4	1.2	0.0	5.0
JAMA score	48	1.7	1.3	0.0	4.0
Number of views	48	425,004.9	2,299,703.0	60.0	17,296,907.0
Number of likes	48	7920.6	48,831.6	0.0	373,000.0
Number of dislikes	48	158.9	954.3	0.0	7300.0
Duration (second)	48	250.9	150.8	60.0	742.0
Days since upload	48	1483.1	1141.7	5.0	4922.0
Number of comments	48	14.3	52.1	0.0	376.0
View per day	48	440.78	1901.46	0.00	14,016.00
Like per day	48	7.91	40.47	0.00	302.00
Dislike per day	48	0.18	0.80	0.00	5.90
Comment per day	48	0.02	0.08	0.00	.40
Interaction index	48	1.41	1.48	0.00	6.70

GQS: Global Quality Scale; JAMA: Journal of the American Medical Association.

Values are presented as mean ± standard deviation and minimum–maximum. Rate variables are expressed per day (views/day, likes/day, dislikes/day, comments/day). Interaction index was calculated as: (likes − dislikes) / total views × 100.

Table 3.

Comparison of the video parameters between the GQS groups.

Video parameter	GQS			p
Video parameter	High	Intermediate	Low	p
View per day	20.75 [5.22–90.33]^A	3 [0.18–14.91]^B	0.78 [0.2–5.04]^B	0.001*
Like per day	0.14 [0.05–1.75]^A	0.05 [0–0.1]^B	0 [0–0.02]^B	0.001*
Dislike per day	0.01 [0–0.04]^A	0 [0–0]^B	0 [0–0]^B	0.001*
Comment per day	0 [0–0.01]	0 [0–0.01]	0 [0–0]	0.092
Interaction index	0.73 [0.42–2.15]	0.97 [0.22–3.08]	0.7 [0.11–2.1]	0.416

Comparisons were performed using the Kruskal–Wallis test with Dunn post-hoc analysis.

A and B indicate statistically significant differences between groups.

p < 0.05 was considered statistically significant.

Considering the video and audio quality, the GQS, JAMA, and DISCERN scores of the good-quality videos were significantly higher than the poor quality in terms of both audio and video quality (Table 4). Among the 22 videos classified as low (n = 12) or intermediate quality (n = 10), deficiencies in key educational domains were frequently observed (Table 5). Omission rates were consistently higher in low-quality videos across all domains. Warning signs and follow-up recommendations were the most commonly absent elements, particularly among low-quality videos. These findings indicate that deficiencies in caregiver-oriented safety and monitoring information contribute substantially to reduced educational quality.

Table 4.

Comparison of the videos’ visual and audio analysis according to the quality and reliability.

Quality domain	Good	Fair	Poor	p
Video quality
GQS score	4 [4–5]^A	3 [2–4]^B	1.5 [1–2]^B	0.001*
DISCERN score	3 [2–4]^A	2 [1–2]^B	1 [1–1]^B	0.001*
JAMA score	2.5 [2–3]^A	1 [0–2]^B	0 [0–0]^B	0.001*
Audio quality
GQS score	4 [3–5]^A	2 [1–4]^B	1 [1–1]^B	0.002*
DISCERN score	3 [2–3]^A	1.5 [1–3]^A,B	1 [1–1]^B	0.027*
JAMA score	2 [1–3]^A	1 [0–2]^A,B	0 [0–0]^B	0.028*

GQS: Global Quality Scale; JAMA: Journal of the American Medical Association.

Values are presented as median [25th–75th percentile]. Comparisons were performed using the Kruskal–Wallis test with Dunn post-hoc analysis.

A and B indicate statistically significant differences between groups.

p < 0.05 was considered statistically significant.

Table 5.

Content-domain deficiencies in low- and intermediate-quality Pavlik harness videos (n = 22).

Content domain	Description	Omitted, n (%)	Intermediate (n = 10) (%)	Low (n = 12) (%)	Examples
Target hip position	Explanation of proper hip flexion/abduction angles; and avoidance of extension/adduction	12 (54.5)	4 (40.0)	8 (66.7)	Maintain hip flexion 90–100°; and abduction between 45 and 60° Avoid hip extension and adduction
Warning signs	Guidance on signs requiring medical consultation, advice on harmful adjustments or activities	14 (63.6)	5 (50.0)	9 (75.0)	Do not tighten straps beyond the recommended adjustment line Seek care if toes are cold/discolored
Follow-up recommendations	Advice on follow-up visits and cases warranting escalation of care	13 (59.1)	4 (40.0)	9 (75.0)	Follow-up every 1–2 weeks Return immediately if your baby cries excessively and you cannot soothe them
Wear duration and adjustment	Duration of harness use and adjustment recommendations	12 (54.5)	4 (40.0)	8 (66.7)	Wear 23–24 h/day Check and adjust the harness straps at least once a day
Skin care and monitoring	Instructions on skin care redness, and pressure monitoring	11 (50.0)	3 (30.0)	8 (66.7)	Inspect the skin under the straps daily for any redness or sores

Low- and intermediate-quality videos (n = 22) were evaluated using a structured checklist of clinically relevant educational domains. Each domain was scored as present or absent by two independent reviewers. Percentages were calculated based on the total number of videos in each quality category.

When the videos were analyzed according to the distribution of the sources of upload, it was seen that the most qualified and highly reliable videos were uploaded by academician + physicians, university organizations, and health-related websites (p = 0.001). Moreover, when it comes to the most viewed and the most liked videos, the videos were uploaded by academician + physicians and university organizations (Table 6). No statistically significant correlation was identified between video quality and reliability and the interaction index (p = 0.416).

Table 6.

Comparison of the videos according to the distribution of source.

Variable	Source					p
Variable	Pediatric orthopedic specialist + academic institutions	Trainer + nonphysician health professional	Patient + independent user	Professional organizations /Societies	Health-related website	p
GQS score	4 [4–5]^A,B	3 [2–3]^C	2 [1–3]^C	5 [4–5]^A	3 [2–4]^B,C	0.001*
DISCERN score	3 [2–4]^A,B	1 [1–2]^C	1 [1–2]^C	3 [3–4]^A	2 [2–3]^B,C	0.001*
JAMA score	2 [2–3]^A,B	1 [0–1]^C	0 [0–1]^C	3 [2–3]^A	1 [1–3]^B,C	0.001*
Number of views	65,315 [13,542–177,096]^A	977 [470–4974]^B	876 [383–16,306]^B	16,851 [1407–26,458]^A,B	1463 [249–16,842]^B	0.001*
Number of likes	329 [46–5200]^A	20 [10–76]^B,C	10 [2–72]^C	99 [5–402]^A,B	10 [2–67]^B,C	0.001*
Number of dislikes	16 [2–95]^A	1 [0–2]^B	1 [0–8]^B	7 [1–13]^A,B	0 [0–5]^B	0.006*
Duration	232 [140–278]	258 [198–341]	215 [156–288]	215 [187–316]	151 [104–224]	0.321
Number of comments	3 [0–21]^A	1 [0–2]^A,B	0 [0–0]^B	3 [0–14]^A	0 [0–1]^B	0.013*
View per day	26 [5.33–1627]^A	3.12 [1.17–5]^B	1 [0.2–6]^C	19.6 [1.53–67.04]^A,B	0.56 [0.21–14.91]^B	0.001*
Like per day	0.16 [0.03–3.3]^A	0.07 [0.01–0.1]^A,B	0 [0–0.02]^B	0.12 [0.04–0.48]^A,B	0 [0–0.05]^B	0.005*
Dislike per day	0 [0–0.29]^A	0 [0–0]^A,B	0 [0–0]^B	0.01 [0–0.02] ^A	0 [0–0]^A,B	0.049*
Comment per day	0 [0–0.01]	0 [0–0]	0 [0–0]	0 [0–0.04]	0 [0–0]	0.117
Interaction index	0.66 [0.31–2.11]^A	2.19 [2–3.4]^B	0.22 [0.09–1.4]^A	0.56 [0.38–2.79]^A,B	0.6 [0.36–0.97]^A,B	0.047*

GQS: Global Quality Scale; JAMA: Journal of the American Medical Association.

Values are presented as median [25th–75th percentile]. Comparisons were performed using the Kruskal–Wallis test with Dunn post-hoc analysis.

A, B, and C indicate statistically significant differences between groups.

p < 0.05 was considered statistically significant.

Discussion

Due to the common use of the Internet worldwide and the increase in the use of social media and the Internet especially during the pandemic, both very useful and quite inaccurate information can be provided regarding the topic researched depending on the video quality. The large content, ease of use, easy accessibility, and free-of-cost aspect of the information have made the Internet use interesting. In health-related areas, it can be both platform for sharing information and a source of advertisement not only for patients but also physicians, healthcare organizations, pharmaceutical companies, and universities.²⁴ YouTube™ is one of the most preferred platforms used by internet users to search for health-related information. Via social media platforms, both patients and patients’ relatives rather find themselves in a process of diagnosis, treatment and follow-up. Due to the wide diversity of the video upload perspectives, and the uploading sources, the information content varies from videos of personal opinions to high-quality articles. No control mechanisms are checking YouTube™ and reviewing the videos, which may result in the easy proliferation of incorrect and incomplete information within a community. Since the first publication on YouTube™, there have been no studies evaluating the quality of the YouTube™ videos regarding Pavlik harness treatment, although publications have been made on many different areas from rheumatology to orthopedics, and from ear-nose-throat diseases to oral health.^25–28 We aimed to transfer this topic, which is common and concerns the pediatrics, orthopedics, and family medicine departments, from a subjective digital platform into an objective scientific article by using scores such as GQS, DISCERN, and JAMA.

The success of Pavlik harness treatment depends not only on early diagnosis but also on proper caregiver compliance with application guidelines.²⁹ Studies have shown that parental understanding significantly improves adherence to treatment regimens, making the quality of instructional content paramount.^30–32 Low-quality videos often omit essential information regarding fit, adjustment frequency, duration of use, and potentially compromising the caregiver’s ability to manage the condition effectively.^33,34

The present study highlights the dual role of internet-based platforms, particularly YouTube™, as both accessible educational resources and potential sources of inaccurate or incomplete medical information. While online videos may enhance caregiver understanding and engagement, the absence of formal quality-control mechanisms allows misleading or insufficient content to be widely disseminated. In the context of Pavlik harness treatment, where therapeutic success is highly dependent on correct application, adherence, and timely follow-up, such deficiencies may have clinically meaningful consequences.

Looking at the sources of upload of the videos, it is observed that a significant part of the videos were uploaded by physicians, an academician, and universities/organizations/associations. In some previous studies, videos with high video quality were uploaded by physicians and health-related professionals.³⁵ In our study, considering both audio and video quality, the most quality videos were uploaded by an pediatric orthopedic specialist + academic institutions and professional organizations/societies. The videos with the lowest quality were uploaded by patients and independent users. Similar to our study, there are studies in which the videos with low video quality were uploaded by patients and independent users in the literature.³⁶ As presented by our results, quality videos were uploaded by health professionals. Users should watch these videos more frequently, and uploaders should share more videos. Health professionals should highlight the videos related to this topic in the digital platform further, and parents should be informed more.

The incorporation of content-domain deficiency analysis provides clinically meaningful insight beyond global quality scores. By identifying specific educational domains that are frequently omitted in lower-quality videos, this study highlights concrete areas of caregiver instruction that may be compromised when relying on unregulated online content. These deficiencies, particularly in relation to hip positioning, warning signs, and follow-up guidance, may translate into actionable clinical risks, including inappropriate harness application and delayed recognition of treatment failure or complications.

Though open to various manipulations, when the video parameters about YouTube™ are considered, the view count appears to be the most important value.³⁵ In the literature, studies are presenting no relations between likes, dislikes, and videos as well as the studies indicating the statistical significance of these parameters.^36,37 Our findings demonstrate that videos uploaded by pediatric orthopedic specialists, academic institutions, and professional organizations consistently achieved higher quality and reliability scores than those produced by non-medical sources. In contrast, engagement metrics such as views, likes, and comments were not reliable indicators of educational quality. These parameters may be strongly influenced by algorithmic promotion, early popularity, and platform-specific trends and therefore do not necessarily reflect the accuracy or safety of the presented information. Importantly, our data indicate that upload source represents a substantially more meaningful predictor of video quality than interaction indices.

Consistent to the previous YouTube™ evaluations on the orthopedic posterior cruciate ligament, hip, and spine, our study has revealed that the videos related to Pavlik harness treatment are intermediate and low quality in general.^38–40

Accordingly, caregivers should be encouraged to prioritize educational materials produced by recognized healthcare professionals and academic centers. Furthermore, clinicians should actively guide parents toward appropriate online resources and, where possible, recommend specific high-quality videos as adjuncts to in-person education. Online video content should be regarded as a complementary tool rather than a substitute for structured clinical instruction and regular follow-up.

These findings underscore the responsibility of the pediatric orthopedic community to actively participate in the digital dissemination of evidence-based information. Professional societies, academic institutions, and healthcare organizations should be encouraged to develop and distribute standardized, high-quality instructional videos addressing Pavlik harness application, monitoring, and complication management. Such initiatives may improve caregiver confidence, enhance treatment adherence, and reduce the risk of inappropriate harness use and delayed recognition of complications. By integrating clinician-guided education with validated digital resources, a more reliable and patient-centered model of caregiver instruction may be achieved, ultimately contributing to improved clinical outcomes in DDH. Caregivers should be encouraged to prioritize educational videos uploaded by pediatric orthopedic specialists, academic centers, and professional organizations. In addition, treating physicians should actively guide families toward reliable digital resources and, where appropriate, recommend specific videos as adjuncts to face-to-face instruction. Online materials should support, rather than replace, structured clinical education and regular follow-up.

Our study has some limitations. First, it included only English-language videos, possibly omitting valuable content in other languages. Second, the dynamic nature of YouTube™ means that video popularity and visibility fluctuate, and new content may emerge at any time. Third, metrics such as likes, dislikes, and views can be manipulated and do not always reflect true educational quality. We clarify that videos <60 s were chosen to prioritize videos likely to contain essential educational domains. However, we agree that concise, high-yield institutional tutorials may exist; therefore, we now justify the cutoff as a pragmatic decision for content completeness and explicitly list this as a limitation with potential for selection bias. Finally, our assessment, while based on validated scoring systems, remains subject to the inherent subjectivity of video review.

Conclusion

YouTube™ serves as an accessible and influential source of medical education for parents and caregivers seeking information on Pavlik harness treatment. However, the reliability of its content is highly variable. Videos uploaded by physicians, academic institutions, and healthcare organizations provide the most accurate and educational material. Therefore, healthcare professionals should actively contribute to this digital ecosystem by producing high-quality videos and directing patients to trustworthy sources. Doing so will enhance treatment adherence and reduce the risk of complications associated with improper harness use.

Supplemental Material

sj-pdf-1-cho-10.1177_18632521261438642 – Supplemental material for Quality, reliability, and educational value of YouTube™ videos on Pavlik harness treatment for developmental dysplasia of the hip

Supplemental material, sj-pdf-1-cho-10.1177_18632521261438642 for Quality, reliability, and educational value of YouTube™ videos on Pavlik harness treatment for developmental dysplasia of the hip by Beytullah Unat, Çağrı Karabulut, Musa Alperen Bilgin, Ramazan Erol, İbrahim Halil Rızvanoğlu and Nevzat Gönder in Journal of Children's Orthopaedics

Footnotes

Author contributions

All authors contributed to the study conception and design. N.G.—lead author: Substantial contributions to the concept and design of the study, organization of the study, specifying questions, supervision of all staff and procedures for implementing study, data collection, analysis, interpretation of the data, processing work, translating protocol into practice, writing the manuscript, drafting the article and critical revision for important intellectual content; final approval of the version to be published. R.E.: Contribution to the conception and design, interpretation of the data, final approval of the version to be published. Ç.K., M.A.B.: Contribution to the conception and design, data collection, processing work. R.E.: Drafting the article or revising it critically, statistical analysis and interpretation of data, final approval of the version to be published. B.U.: Contribution to the conception and design, interpretation of the data, final approval of the version to be published. İ.H.R.: Contribution to the conception and design, interpretation of the data, final approval of the version to be published. All authors read and approved the final version of the manuscript.

Declaration of conflicting interests

The authors declared no potential conflicts of interest with respect to the research, authorship, and/or publication of this article.

Funding

The authors received no financial support for the research, authorship, and/or publication of this article.

Ethics statement

Only publicly available videos were analyzed; no personal identifying information was collected; no interaction with human participants occurred and no animals were involved. The study, therefore, constitutes analysis of publicly available content and does not include human-subject intervention.

ORCID iD

Nevzat Gönder

Data availability

The datasets used and/or analyzed during the current study are available from the corresponding author on reasonable request.

References

Dezateux

Rosendahl

Developmental dysplasia of the hip. Lancet 2007; 369(9572): 1541–1552.

Jackson

Runge

Nye

NS.

Common questions about developmental dysplasia of the hip. Am Fam Physician 2014; 90(12): 843–850.

Vaquero-Picado

González-Morán

Garay

, et al. Developmental dysplasia of the hip: update of management. EFORT Open Rev 2019; 4(9): 548–556.

Nair

Yatsonsky

Liu

Comparison of outcomes of different Graf grades of developmental dysplasia of the hip in infants treated with Tubingen splint versus Pavlik harness—a systematic review. J Orthop 2023; 49: 68–74.

Gahleitner

Pisecky

Gotterbarm

, et al. Long-term results of developmental hip dysplasia under therapy with Pavlik harness. J Pediatr Orthop 2024; 44(3): 135–140.

Abdulla

Ashoor

Heinz

, et al. Prognostic factors for failed Pavlik harness treatment in infants with developmental dysplasia of the hip: a retrospective cohort study. Int Orthop 2023; 47(9): 2337–2345.

Kwok

Singla

Phang

, et al. YouTube as a source of patient information for varicose vein treatment options. J Vasc Surg Venous Lymphat Disord 2017; 5: 238–243.

Madathil

Rivera-Rodriguez

Greenstein

, et al. Healthcare information on YouTube: a systematic review. Health Informatics J 2015; 21: 173–194.

Dwan

Kirkham

Paton

, et al. Splinting for the non-operative management of developmental dysplasia of the hip (DDH) in children under six months of age. Cochrane Database Syst Rev 2022; 10(10): CD012717.

10.

Hassan

FA.

Compliance of parents with regard to Pavlik harness treatment in developmental dysplasia of the hip. J Pediatr Orthop B 2009; 18(3): 111–115.

11.

Badrinath

Orner

Bomar

, et al. Narrative review of complications following DDH treatment. Indian J Orthop 2021; 55(6): 1490–1502.

12.

Oztermeli

Karahan

Evaluation of YouTube video content about developmental dysplasia of the hip. Cureus 2020; 12(8): e9557.

13.

Lock

Baker

JF.

Quality of YouTube videos for three common pediatric hip conditions: developmental hip dysplasia, slipped capital femoral epiphysis and Legg-Calve-Perthes disease. J Pediatr Orthop B 2022; 31(6): 546–553.

14.

Theunissen

van der Steen

van Veen

, et al. Parental experiences of children with developmental dysplasia of the hip: a qualitative study. BMJ Open 2022; 12(9): e062585.

15.

Drozd

Couvillon

Suarez

. Medical YouTube videos and methods of evaluation: literature review. JMIR Med Educ 2018;4(1): e3.

16.

Tolu

Yurdakul

Basaran

, et al. English-language videos on YouTube as a source of information on self-administer subcutaneous anti-tumour necrosis factor agent injections. Rheumatol Int 2018; 38: 1285–1292.

17.

Pons-Fuster

Ruiz Roca

, et al. YouTube information about diabetes and oral healthcare. Odontology 2020; 108: 84–90.

18.

Bernard

Langille

Hughes

, et al. A systematic review of patient inflammatory bowel disease information resources on the World Wide Web. Am J Gastroenterol 2007; 102: 2070–2077.

19.

Sorensen

Pusz

Brietzke

SE.

YouTube as an information source for pediatric adenotonsillectomy and ear tube surgery. Int J Pediatr Otorhinolaryngol 2014; 78: 65–70.

20.

Silberg

Lundberg

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: 1244–1245.

21.

Charnock

Shepperd

Needham

, et al. DISCERN: an instrument for judging the quality of written consumer health information on treatment choices. J Epidemiol Community Health 1999; 53: 105–111.

22.

Hassona

Taimeh

Marahleh

, et al. YouTube as a source of information on mouth (oral) cancer. Oral Dis 2016; 22: 202–208.

23.

Leong

Sanghera

Jhajj

, et al. Is YouTube useful as a source of health information for adults with type 2 diabetes? A south Asian perspective. Can J Diabetes 2018; 42: 395.e4–403.e4.

24.

McNab

What social media offers to health professionals and citizens. Bull World Health Organ 2009; 87: 566.

25.

Keelan

Pavri-Garcia

Tomlinson

, et al. YouTube as a source of information on immunization: a content analysis. JAMA 2007; 298: 2482–2484.

26.

Simsek

Buyuk

Cetinkaya

, et al. “How I whiten my teeth”: YouTube™ as a patient information resource for teeth whitening. BMC Oral Health 2020; 20: 183.

27.

Kunze

Cohn

Wakefield

, et al. YouTube as a source of information about the posterior cruciate ligament: a content-quality and reliability analysis. Arthrosc Sports Med Rehabil 2019; 1: e109–e114.

28.

Kocyigit

Akaltun

Sahin

AR.

YouTube as a source of information on COVID-19 and rheumatic disease link. Clin Rheumatol 2020; 39: 2049–2054.

29.

Touzopoulos

Koutserimpas

Begkas

, et al. An educational module for Pavlik harness application for developmental dysplasia of the hip: study in a Greek population. Kurume Med J 2021; 66(3): 145–152.

30.

Merchant

Khan

Douglas

, et al. A virtual clinic for DDH Pavlik harness monitoring. J Pediatr Orthop 2022; 42(2): e149–e153.

31.

Gargan

Bradley

Maxwell

, et al. Education of parents in Pavlik harness application for developmental dysplasia of the hip using a validated simulated learning module. J Child Orthop 2016; 10(4): 289–293.

32.

Lewsirirat

Piyapromdee

Sathompanich

Effectiveness of mom-made Pavlik harness for maintaining reduction of the hip in DDH. J Med Assoc Thai 2015; 98(1): 53–58.

33.

Batley

Gornitzky

Sarkar

, et al. What are the psychosocial effects of Pavlik harness treatment? A prospective study on perceived impact on families and maternal-infant bonding. J Pediatr Orthop 2024; 44(2): e109–e114.

34.

Ömeroglu

Treatment of developmental dysplasia of the hip with the Pavlik harness in children under six months of age: indications, results and failures. J Child Orthop 2018; 12(4): 308–316.

35.

Gabarron

Fernandez-Luque

Armayones

Identifying measures used for assessing quality of YouTube videos with patient health information: a review of current literature. Interact J Med Res 2013; 2: e6.

36.

Kocyigit

Nacitarhan

Koca

, et al. YouTube as a source of patient information for ankylosing spondylitis exercises. Clin Rheumatol 2019; 38: 1747–1751.

37.

Naslund

Grande

Aschbrenner

, et al. Naturally occurring peer support through social media: the experiences of individuals with severe mental illness using YouTube. Plos One 2014; 9: e110171.

38.

Brooks

Lawrence

Jones

, et al MJ. YouTube™ as a source of patient information for lumbar discectomy. Ann R Coll Surg Engl 2014; 96: 144–146.

39.

Erdem

Karaca

Evaluating the accuracy and quality of the information in Kyphosis videos shared on YouTube. Spine (Phila Pa 1976) 2018; 43: E1334–E1339.

40.

Gokcen

Gumussuyu

A quality analysis of disc herniation videos on YouTube. World Neurosurg 2019; 124: e799–e804.

Supplementary Material

Please find the following supplemental material available below.

For Open Access articles published under a Creative Commons License, all supplemental material carries the same license as the article it is associated with.

For non-Open Access articles published, all supplemental material carries a non-exclusive license, and permission requests for re-use of supplemental material or any part of supplemental material shall be sent directly to the copyright owner as specified in the copyright notice associated with the article.

2.20 MB

0.00 MB