背景:最近的数据强调了互联网作为患者主要信息来源的关键作用。在这项研究中,我们模仿患者/护理人员寻求有关胸部畸形的在线信息,并评估可用信息的质量。
方法:我们结合术语“漏斗胸”进行了互联网搜索,“漏斗胸手术,“漏斗胸”,\"\"pectuscavatumrepair\"并从三个最受欢迎的搜索引擎中确定了前100个相关网站:谷歌,雅虎,还有Bing.使用改良的确保患者质量信息(EQIP)仪器评估这些网站。
结果:在生成的300个网站中,140(46.7%)在消除重复后被包括在我们的评估中,非英语网站,以及那些针对医疗专业人员的人。最终样本中的EQIP评分范围为8至32/36,中位评分为22。大多数被评估的网站(32.8%)来自医院,然而,没有人符合所有36项EQIP标准。
结论:所有与漏斗胸有关的评估网站均未达到完美的“内容质量”评分。多样化的网站可能会使患者寻求高质量资源的努力复杂化。访问高质量在线患者信息的障碍可能会导致转诊方面的差异,患者参与,治疗满意度,和整体生活质量。
方法:IV.
BACKGROUND: Recent data highlight the internet\'s pivotal role as the primary information source for patients. In this study, we emulate a patient\'s/caregiver\'s quest for online information concerning chest deformities and assess the quality of available information.
METHODS: We conducted an internet search using combination of the terms \"pectus excavatum,\" \"pectus excavatum surgery,\" \"funnel chest,\" \"pectus excavatum repair\" and identified the first 100 relevant websites from the three most popular search engines: Google, Yahoo, and Bing. These websites were evaluated using the modified Ensuring Quality Information for Patients (EQIP) instrument.
RESULTS: Of the 300 websites generated, 140 (46.7%) were included in our evaluation after elimination of duplicates, non-English websites, and those targeting medical professionals. The EQIP scores in the final sample ranged from 8 to 32/36, with a median score of 22. Most of the evaluated websites (32.8%) originated from hospitals, yet none met all 36 EQIP criteria.
CONCLUSIONS: None of the evaluated websites pertaining to pectus excavatum achieved a flawless \"content quality\" score. The diverse array of websites potentially complicates patients\' efforts to navigate toward high-quality resources. Barriers in accessing high-quality online patient information may contribute to disparities in referral, patient engagement, treatment satisfaction, and overall quality of life.
METHODS: IV.