A cross-sectional quality assessment of TikTok content on benign prostatic hyperplasia.

BACKGROUND: With an increasing reliance on online sources for medical information, we studied the quality and completeness of health literacy videos on TikTok regarding BPH. METHODS: A cross-sectional systematic evaluation of TikTok videos using the search term "Benign Prostatic Hyperplasia" was performed on 14th April 2023, and included 49 patient information and educational videos. The videos were then analysed by two reviewers and scored using two instruments: the DISCERN instrument and a completeness analysis. RESULTS: Of the 49 videos, 38 were created by healthcare professionals (HCPs). The average length of each video was 62.7 ± 59.3 s, with a large average number of total views (24,990.1 ± 109,534.9 views). The DISCERN score trended higher in every category in videos published by HCPs compared to non-HCPs, with HCPs providing a statistically significant increase in reliability (19.0,14.6, p < 0.05) and total score (29.4,23, p < 0.05). Majority of videos were deemed as poor or worse (91.8%) in quality. The completeness of the videos' content was also evaluated across five categories with an average score of 2.53 ± 2.1 out of the maximum 12. The DISCERN scores did not correlate with the degree of completeness of the videos (r = 0.226). CONCLUSION: BPH videos on TikTok have a wide reach, but the videos are mostly of low quality and completeness. Future videos should be made with quality and completeness in mind given the large viewership and more can be done to evaluate the extent of BPH misinformation and its impact on patients.

An in vitro Comparative Assessment of Single-Use Flexible Ureteroscopes Using a Standardized Ureteroscopy Training Model.

INTRODUCTION: Perceived benefits like decreased contamination rates and reduced postoperative incidence of complications after urolithiasis surgery have led to increased adoption of single-use flexible ureteroscopes (su-fURS). Using a validated, standardized simulator model with enhanced "fluoroscopic" capabilities, we performed an in vitro comparative assessment of four commercially available models of su-fURS. Both objective and subjective parameters were assessed in this study. METHODS: Two standardized tasks, (1) exploration of the model's kidney collecting system and (2) repositioning of a stone fragment from the upper renal to lower renal pole were assigned to participants, who performed these tasks on all four scopes. Four models of su-fURS (Boston LithoVue, PUSEN PU3033A, REDPINE, INNOVEX EU-ScopeTM) were assessed, with task timings as end-points for objective analysis. Cumulative "fluoroscopic" time was also recorded as a novel feature of our enhanced model. Post-task questionnaires evaluating specific components of the scopes were distributed to document subjective ratings. RESULTS: Both subjective and objective performances (except stone repositioning time) across all four su-fURS demonstrated significant differences. However, objective performance (task timings) did not reflect subjective scope ratings by the participants (Rs < 0.6). Upon Kruskal-Wallis H test with post hoc analyses, REDPINE and INNOVEX EU-ScopeTM were the preferred su-fURS as rated by the participants, with overall scope scores of 9.00/10 and 9.57/10. CONCLUSIONS: Using a standardized in vitro simulation model with enhanced fluoroscopic capabilities, we demonstrated both objective and subjective differences between models of su-fURS. However, variations in perception of scope features (visibility, image quality, deflection, maneuverability, ease of stone retrieval) did not translate into actual technical performance. Eventually, the optimal choice of su-fURS fundamentally lies in individual surgeon preference, as well as cost-related factors.