The state of online information about Platelet-rich plasma (PRP): what are patients asking and what are their sources of information?

IF 1.6 4区医学 Q2 ORTHOPEDICS

Physician and Sportsmedicine Pub Date : 2025-12-01 Epub Date: 2025-11-07 DOI:10.1080/00913847.2025.2586451

Aaron Z Chen, Kyle K Obana, Christian Law, Michael A Mastroianni, Matthew L Magruder, Bryan M Saltzman, David P Trofa

{"title":"The state of online information about Platelet-rich plasma (PRP): what are patients asking and what are their sources of information?","authors":"Aaron Z Chen, Kyle K Obana, Christian Law, Michael A Mastroianni, Matthew L Magruder, Bryan M Saltzman, David P Trofa","doi":"10.1080/00913847.2025.2586451","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"Objectives: Platelet-rich plasma (PRP) has emerged as a promising treatment option in orthopedics, albeit with mixed clinical data. Therefore, patient interest in PRP has grown, reflected as an increase in the number of PRP-related internet searches. The aims of this study are to 1) investigate the most frequently searched online patient questions related to platelet-rich plasma (PRP) and 2) evaluate the quality of websites providing information.Methods: Three PRP-related search queries were entered into Google Web Search and the 100 most common questions for each query were included. Questions were categorized based on Rothwell's Classification of Questions (Fact, Policy, Value) and further subcategorized based on their content. Websites were further categorized by type (Academic, Commercial, Government, Medical Practice, Single Surgeon Personal, and Social Media) and evaluated based on the JAMA Benchmark Criteria for website quality. Statistical analysis was performed with descriptive statistics and reported as percentages where appropriate.Results: Most questions fell into the Rothwell Value (43.0%) and Fact (40.6%) categories. The most common questions that patients had about PRP pertained to efficacy of treatment (14.0%), comparison of treatment with other options (13.0%), and cost (10.9%). The most common sources of information were medical practice (50.9%) and single surgeon personal websites (14.7%), which had low website quality with JAMA Benchmark criteria of 0.68 ± 0.87, and 0.58 ± 0.85, respectively.Conclusion: The most common questions patients had about PRP pertained to the evaluation of its effectiveness and how it compared with other treatment options. Notably, patients received most information from websites of low quality, highlighting the potential for bias and misinformation. Physicians should use these results instead provide up-to-date, evidence-driven information about PRP to help guide patient expectations.","PeriodicalId":51268,"journal":{"name":"Physician and Sportsmedicine","volume":" ","pages":"492-499"},"PeriodicalIF":1.6000,"publicationDate":"2025-12-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Physician and Sportsmedicine","FirstCategoryId":"3","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1080/00913847.2025.2586451","RegionNum":4,"RegionCategory":"医学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"2025/11/7 0:00:00","PubModel":"Epub","JCR":"Q2","JCRName":"ORTHOPEDICS","Score":null,"Total":0}

引用次数: 0

Abstract

Objectives: Platelet-rich plasma (PRP) has emerged as a promising treatment option in orthopedics, albeit with mixed clinical data. Therefore, patient interest in PRP has grown, reflected as an increase in the number of PRP-related internet searches. The aims of this study are to 1) investigate the most frequently searched online patient questions related to platelet-rich plasma (PRP) and 2) evaluate the quality of websites providing information.

Methods: Three PRP-related search queries were entered into Google Web Search and the 100 most common questions for each query were included. Questions were categorized based on Rothwell's Classification of Questions (Fact, Policy, Value) and further subcategorized based on their content. Websites were further categorized by type (Academic, Commercial, Government, Medical Practice, Single Surgeon Personal, and Social Media) and evaluated based on the JAMA Benchmark Criteria for website quality. Statistical analysis was performed with descriptive statistics and reported as percentages where appropriate.

Results: Most questions fell into the Rothwell Value (43.0%) and Fact (40.6%) categories. The most common questions that patients had about PRP pertained to efficacy of treatment (14.0%), comparison of treatment with other options (13.0%), and cost (10.9%). The most common sources of information were medical practice (50.9%) and single surgeon personal websites (14.7%), which had low website quality with JAMA Benchmark criteria of 0.68 ± 0.87, and 0.58 ± 0.85, respectively.

Conclusion: The most common questions patients had about PRP pertained to the evaluation of its effectiveness and how it compared with other treatment options. Notably, patients received most information from websites of low quality, highlighting the potential for bias and misinformation. Physicians should use these results instead provide up-to-date, evidence-driven information about PRP to help guide patient expectations.

查看原文本刊更多论文

富血小板血浆（PRP）在线信息的现状：患者在询问什么？他们的信息来源是什么？

富血小板血浆（PRP）已成为一种有前景的骨科治疗选择，尽管临床数据好坏参半。因此，患者对PRP的兴趣有所增长，这反映在PRP相关的互联网搜索数量的增加上。本研究的目的是1)调查与富血小板血浆（PRP）相关的最常搜索的在线患者问题，2)评估提供信息的网站的质量。方法：在b谷歌Web search中输入3个与prp相关的搜索查询，每个查询中包含100个最常见的问题。根据Rothwell的问题分类（事实、政策、价值）对问题进行分类，并根据问题的内容进一步细分。网站进一步按类型分类（学术、商业、政府、医疗实践、单个外科医生个人和社交媒体），并根据JAMA网站质量基准标准进行评估。采用描述性统计进行统计分析，并在适当情况下以百分比报告。结果：大多数问题属于Rothwell Value（43.0%）和Fact（40.6%）类别。患者关于PRP最常见的问题是治疗效果（14.0%）、治疗与其他方案的比较（13.0%）和费用（10.9%）。最常见的信息来源是医疗实践（50.9%）和单个医生个人网站（14.7%），其网站质量较低，JAMA基准标准分别为0.68±0.87和0.58±0.85。结论：患者对PRP最常见的问题是评估其有效性以及与其他治疗方案的比较。值得注意的是，患者从低质量的网站获得的信息最多，这突出了存在偏见和错误信息的可能性。医生应该使用这些结果，而不是提供最新的、证据驱动的关于PRP的信息，以帮助指导患者的期望。

本文章由计算机程序翻译，如有差异，请以英文原文为准。

求助全文

约1分钟内获得全文求助全文

来源期刊

Physician and Sportsmedicine PRIMARY HEALTH CARE-ORTHOPEDICS

CiteScore

4.90

自引率

4.30%

发文量

审稿时长

>12 weeks

期刊介绍： The Physician and Sportsmedicine is a peer-reviewed, clinically oriented publication for primary care physicians. We examine the latest drug discoveries to advance treatment and recovery, and take into account the medical aspects of exercise therapy for a given condition. We cover the latest primary care-focused treatments serving the needs of our active patient population, and assess the limits these treatments govern in stabilization and recovery. The Physician and Sportsmedicine is a peer-to-peer method of communicating the latest research to aid primary care physicians’ advancement in methods of care and treatment. We routinely cover such topics as: managing chronic disease, surgical techniques in preventing and managing injuries, the latest advancements in treatments for helping patients lose weight, and related exercise and nutrition topics that can impact the patient during recovery and modification.