Cross-platform social media analysis regarding ACL injury and surgery

IF 0.2 Q4 ORTHOPEDICS
Hunter L. Hasley, Lainey Bukowiec, Jay M. Zaifman, Martin Malik, Brian D. Batko, Y. Kissin, Michael Kelly
{"title":"Cross-platform social media analysis regarding ACL injury and surgery","authors":"Hunter L. Hasley, Lainey Bukowiec, Jay M. Zaifman, Martin Malik, Brian D. Batko, Y. Kissin, Michael Kelly","doi":"10.1097/bco.0000000000001229","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"\n \n Anterior cruciate ligament (ACL) injury affects a broad patient population, but there is limited knowledge on how ACL injury is discussed across social media platforms. This study aims to develop an extensive snapshot of the social media milieu for understanding who uses social media platforms, what topics users discuss, and how these platforms vary regarding ACL injury and surgery.\n \n \n \n We utilized a qualitative, descriptive design with quantitative statistical analysis including Kruskal-Wallis tests and Fisher’s Exact tests with post hoc analyses to examine new posts across Facebook, Instagram, Twitter, and TikTok using ACL-specific search terms from August 2021 to January 2022. Posts were analyzed by authorship, content characterization, and engagement.\n \n \n \n Across social media sites, 760 posts were examined involving ACL surgery and injury. There was statistically significant difference among the platforms when comparing categories of authorship (P<0.001). There were statistically significant differences where physicians (P<0.001) and patients (P<0.001) posted, with physicians representing 20.6% and 19.5% of posts on Facebook and Twitter, respectively. TikTok displayed the highest patient authorship (83.5%) and greatest content engagement. There were also significant differences among platforms regarding content characterization (P<0.001).\n \n \n \n This study breaks down a snapshot of social media revolving around ACL injury and surgery demonstrating differences in authorship, content, and engagement of posts across platforms. These findings demonstrate the frequent use of social media by patients to address unmet clinical needs and can help surgeons and patients connect on the same platforms.\n \n \n \n Level IV.\n","PeriodicalId":10732,"journal":{"name":"Current Orthopaedic Practice","volume":" ","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":0.2000,"publicationDate":"2023-08-03","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Current Orthopaedic Practice","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1097/bco.0000000000001229","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q4","JCRName":"ORTHOPEDICS","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

Anterior cruciate ligament (ACL) injury affects a broad patient population, but there is limited knowledge on how ACL injury is discussed across social media platforms. This study aims to develop an extensive snapshot of the social media milieu for understanding who uses social media platforms, what topics users discuss, and how these platforms vary regarding ACL injury and surgery. We utilized a qualitative, descriptive design with quantitative statistical analysis including Kruskal-Wallis tests and Fisher’s Exact tests with post hoc analyses to examine new posts across Facebook, Instagram, Twitter, and TikTok using ACL-specific search terms from August 2021 to January 2022. Posts were analyzed by authorship, content characterization, and engagement. Across social media sites, 760 posts were examined involving ACL surgery and injury. There was statistically significant difference among the platforms when comparing categories of authorship (P<0.001). There were statistically significant differences where physicians (P<0.001) and patients (P<0.001) posted, with physicians representing 20.6% and 19.5% of posts on Facebook and Twitter, respectively. TikTok displayed the highest patient authorship (83.5%) and greatest content engagement. There were also significant differences among platforms regarding content characterization (P<0.001). This study breaks down a snapshot of social media revolving around ACL injury and surgery demonstrating differences in authorship, content, and engagement of posts across platforms. These findings demonstrate the frequent use of social media by patients to address unmet clinical needs and can help surgeons and patients connect on the same platforms. Level IV.
关于前交叉韧带损伤和手术的跨平台社交媒体分析
前交叉韧带(ACL)损伤影响着广泛的患者群体,但关于如何在社交媒体平台上讨论ACL损伤的知识有限。这项研究旨在开发社交媒体环境的广泛快照,以了解谁使用社交媒体平台,用户讨论什么话题,以及这些平台在ACL损伤和手术方面的差异。我们利用定性、描述性设计和定量统计分析,包括Kruskal-Wallis检验和Fisher精确检验和事后分析,从2021年8月到2022年1月,使用ACL特定的搜索词,检查了Facebook、Instagram、Twitter和TikTok上的新帖子。文章根据作者、内容特征和参与度进行了分析。在社交媒体网站上,760条涉及ACL手术和损伤的帖子被检查。在比较作者类别时,两个平台之间存在统计学上的显著差异(P<0.001)。医生(P<0.001。TikTok显示出最高的患者署名率(83.5%)和最高的内容参与度。不同平台在内容表征方面也存在显著差异(P<0.001)。这项研究对围绕ACL损伤和手术的社交媒体快照进行了分解,表明不同平台在作者、内容和帖子参与度方面存在差异。这些发现表明,患者经常使用社交媒体来满足未满足的临床需求,并可以帮助外科医生和患者在同一平台上建立联系。四级。
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
CiteScore
0.60
自引率
0.00%
发文量
107
期刊介绍: Lippincott Williams & Wilkins is a leading international publisher of professional health information for physicians, nurses, specialized clinicians and students. For a complete listing of titles currently published by Lippincott Williams & Wilkins and detailed information about print, online, and other offerings, please visit the LWW Online Store. Current Orthopaedic Practice is a peer-reviewed, general orthopaedic journal that translates clinical research into best practices for diagnosing, treating, and managing musculoskeletal disorders. The journal publishes original articles in the form of clinical research, invited special focus reviews and general reviews, as well as original articles on innovations in practice, case reports, point/counterpoint, and diagnostic imaging.
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
确定
请完成安全验证×
copy
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
右上角分享
点击右上角分享
0
联系我们:info@booksci.cn Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。 Copyright © 2023 布克学术 All rights reserved.
京ICP备2023020795号-1
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术官方微信