Youtube videos as an educational resource for ventrogluteal injection: A content, reliability and quality analysis


Nurse Education Today, vol.107, 2021 (SCI-Expanded) identifier identifier identifier

  • Publication Type: Article / Article
  • Volume: 107
  • Publication Date: 2021
  • Doi Number: 10.1016/j.nedt.2021.105107
  • Journal Name: Nurse Education Today
  • Journal Indexes: Science Citation Index Expanded (SCI-EXPANDED), Social Sciences Citation Index (SSCI), Scopus, ASSIA, CINAHL, EBSCO Education Source, Education Abstracts, Educational research abstracts (ERA), EMBASE, MEDLINE, DIALNET
  • Keywords: Education, Intramuscular injection, Nursing, Social media, Ventrogluteal injection, INTRAMUSCULAR INJECTIONS, NURSING-EDUCATION, CLINICAL SKILLS, INFORMATION, TECHNOLOGY, STUDENTS, NURSES
  • Karadeniz Technical University Affiliated: Yes


© 2021Background: YouTube has become an important social media platform for teaching nursing skills. However, the content, reliability and quality levels of the videos on this platform are not adequately known. Objectives: This study aims to evaluate the content, reliability and quality of YouTube videos on ventrogluteal injection application. Design: Descriptive. Settings: Online. Participants: 26 videos about ventrogluteal injection. Methods: Videos were searched using the keyword “ventrogluteal injection”. The content of the 26 videos meeting the inclusion criteria were evaluated using the “Ventrogluteal Intramuscular Injection Skill Form”, the reliability with the “DISCERN Questionnaire”, and the quality levels using the “Global Quality Scale”. The videos were categorized by their theme, type and upload source, and analysed statistically. Results: Of the 26 videos meeting the inclusion criteria, 21 (80.8%) were classified as useful information, 5 (19.2%) as misleading information by theme, 22 (84.6%) as educational, 4 (15.4%) as hormone therapy by type, 5 (19.2%) as official institutions, 13 (50%) as individual by source of uploads. The content, reliability, quality score of useful videos were higher than misleading videos. There was a significant difference (p < 0.05) between reliability score and the source of video uploads. Pairwise comparisons indicated that there was no statistically significant difference (p > 0.05) between the source of uploads of video and characteristics. Conclusions: The use of the examined YouTube videos in the training of injection into the ventrogluteal site appears to have various risks in terms of ethics and patient safety. It may be suggested that the injection videos should be prepared by competent institutions/individuals, using best practice guides to increase the content, reliability and quality levels. It should particularly be borne in mind that videos on hormone therapy can be a public health threat.