Evaluation of the quality of information online for arthroscopic Bankart repair

Purpose The purpose of this study was to evaluate the quality and readability of information online for patients searching terms related to arthroscopic Bankart repair (ABR). Methods Google, Yahoo and Bing were searched with terms related to ABR. The quality of information was assessed using the Journal of the American Medical Association (JAMA) Benchmark criteria, DISCERN Score, and the Flesch-Kincaid Reading Ease & Grade Level. The presence of the HONcode marker was noted. Additionally, we used a scoring system specific to content relating to the ABR (AB score), a 1-20 Likert scale. Websites were also categorised according to the source: academic institution, physician, allied healthcare, commercial, media or social media. Statistical analysis was performed using GraphPad Prism. Results Ninety-six unique websites were evaluated, with the most common website category being physician websites (52) and academic institution websites (24). There were nine websites with the HONcode marker. The average JAMA Benchmark criteria score was 1.95 (1-4), the average DISCERN score was 48.8 (20-78), with an average Flesch-Kincaid reading ease of 50.9 (11-96) and grade level of 8 (1-18). The average AB score was 5.9 (0-18), and there was a strong correlation with a higher DISCERN score (r=0.57), but not JAMA score (r=0.18) or Flesch-Kincaid grade (r=0.16). Websites with the HONcode marker did not score higher in any criteria than those without it (p>0.05). The quality of information on physician websites was better than (statistically insignificant) non-physician websites; however, the readability of information in the former was poorer (statistically significant) than the latter. Conclusion There was wide variability in the quality and readability online of the information on ABR, and the AB scoring system was shown to correlate strongly with increased quality.