Abstract
Background Patient education is a key element of spinal surgery informed consent. Patients frequently access health information online, yet this information is unregulated and of variable quality. We aimed to assess the quality of information available on degenerative cervical myelopathy (DCM) websites with a focus on identifying high-quality information websites.
Methods We performed a Google search using keywords pertaining to DCM. The top 50 websites returned were classified based on their publication source, intended audience, and country of origin. The quality of these websites was assessed using both the DISCERN instrument and Journal of the American Medical Association (JAMA) benchmark criteria. We also utilized a novel Myelopathy Information Scoring Tool (MIST) to assess the comprehensiveness, accuracy, and detail of online DCM information.
Results The mean DISCERN score was 39.9 out of 80. Only one-quarter of these websites were rated “good” or “excellent” using DISCERN, and the remaining were rated “very poor,” “poor,” and “fair.” The mean JAMA benchmark score was 1.6 out of 4, with 23 out of 50 websites scoring 0. Evaluation using MIST found a mean score of 25.6 out of 50. Using 30 points as a satisfactory MIST cutoff, 72% of DCM websites were deemed critically deficient and unsatisfactory for comprehensive patient education. Both DISCERN and MIST indicated poorest information pertaining to surgical risks and complications as well as treatment outcomes. Websites such as Orthoinfo.aaos.org and Myelopathy.org provided reliable, trustworthy, and comprehensive patient education.
Conclusions Information available on almost three-quarters of DCM websites was of poor quality, with information regarding complications and treatment outcomes most deficient. Clinicians should be aware of quality sites where patients may be directed to augment patient education and surgical counseling.
Footnotes
Funding The authors disclose no financial or material support for the research, authorship, and/or publication of this article.
Declaration of Conflicting Interests Leo S.L. Chong and Mark Zhu have nothing to disclose. Joseph F. Baker discloses that he has received teaching honoraria from Medtronic and grants/contracts from NuVasive, Medtronic, and Smith and Nephew (all paid to the institution). All authors were fully involved in the study and preparation of the manuscript. All authors declare this study is original and they have full rights in the study materials.
Author Contributions Leo S. L. Chong – Conceptualization, methodology, investigation, data collection, writing: original draft, writing: review and editing. Mark Zhu – Methodology, data analysis, writing: original draft, writing: review and editing. Joseph F. Baker – Conceptualisation, methodology, writing: original draft, writing: review and editing, supervision.
- This manuscript is generously published free of charge by ISASS, the International Society for the Advancement of Spine Surgery. Copyright © 2024 ISASS. To see more or order reprints or permissions, see http://ijssurgery.com.