Ecem USMAN, Ersagun KARA, Arzum YILMAZ, Ilgın ARI
Clinical Dentistry and Research - 2026;50(1):38-46
Background and Aim: This study aimed to evaluate the content and quality of YouTube videos of pterygoid implants. Materials and Methods: A systematic search was conducted on YouTube using the keyword "pterygoid implant," limited to English-language videos uploaded in the last five years. A total of 130 videos were analyzed based on content, source, viewer engagement, and educational value. Videos were assessed using the DISCERN tool, Global Quality (GQ) scale, and a 16-point content checklist. Demographic characteristics, including the number of views, likes/dislikes, comments, video duration, number of days after upload, and the uploaders and target audiences of the videos, were evaluated. Statistical analysis was conducted using IBM SPSS Statistics version 26. Data were analyzed using independent samples t-test, Mann-Whitney U, chi-square test, Pearson correlation, and Spearman correlation analyses according to data distribution. Results: Most videos originated from Asia (67.7%) and were primarily intended for dental professionals (97.7%). Only 3.8% of videos had high content quality, while 58.3% classified as low quality. DISCERN and GQ scores indicated that overall educational standards were poor. Company-uploaded videos had the lowest quality, while university-generated videos showed relatively higher quality (p < 0.01). A significant correlation was found between video popularity (in terms of views and likes) and content quality (p < 0.01), although some low-quality videos received high views. Conclusion: The educational content of YouTube videos on pterygoid implants is generally inadequate, with a notable lack of patient-centered resources. Given the platform's open-access nature and influence on decision-making, healthcare professionals should play a more active role in producing and promoting reliable, evidence-based video content. Additionally, YouTube should consider implementing content verification and ranking mechanisms to improve the reliability of health-related information.
