A Systematic Quality Assessment of Online Resources on Eyelid Ptosis Using the Modified Ensuring Quality Information for Patients (mEQIP) Tool.

ABSTRACT

BACKGROUND: Eyelid ptosis is an underestimated pathology deeply affecting patients' quality of life. Internet has increasingly become the major source of information regarding health care, and patients often browse on websites to acquire an initial knowledge on the subject. However, there is lack of data concerning the quality of available information focusing on the eyelid ptosis and its treatment. We systematically evaluated online information quality on eyelid ptosis by using the "Ensuring Quality Information for Patients" (EQIP) scale. MATERIALS AND METHODS: Google, Yahoo and Bing have been searched for the keywords "Eyelid ptosis," "Eyelid ptosis surgery" and "Blepharoptosis." The first 50 hits were included, evaluating the quality of information with the expanded EQIP tool. Websites in English and intended for general non-medical public use were included. Irrelevant documents, videos, pictures, blogs and articles with no access were excluded. RESULTS: Out of 138 eligible websites, 79 (57,7%) addressed more than 20 EQIP items, with an overall median score of 20,2. Only 2% discussed procedure complication rates. The majority fail to disclose severe complications and quantifying risks, fewer than 18% clarified the potential need for additional treatments. Surgical procedure details were lacking, and there was insufficient information about pre-/postoperative precautions for patients. Currently, online quality information has not improved since COVID-19 pandemic. CONCLUSIONS: This study highlights the urgent requirement for improved patient-oriented websites adhering to international standards for plastic and oculoplastic surgery. Healthcare providers should effectively guide their patients in finding trustworthy and reliable eyelid ptosis correction information. LEVEL OF EVIDENCE V This journal requires that authors assign a level of evidence to each article. For a full description of these Evidence-Based Medicine ratings, please refer to the Table of Contents or the online Instructions to Authors www.springer.com/00266 .