The Educational Value and Impact Characteristics of YouTube Videos on Abscess Drainage: A Systematic Analysis (2020–2026)
DOI:
https://doi.org/10.66288/actamedi.2026.78Keywords:
Abscess drainage, Youtube, Medical EducationAbstract
Background: Cutaneous abscesses are common conditions in emergency medicine that require incision and drainage (I&D). While YouTube is a popular resource for procedural learning, its lack of standardized peer review raises concerns regarding the accuracy and educational quality of the medical content. This study aimed to evaluate the accuracy, completeness, and educational quality of YouTube videos on abscess drainage.
Methods: A systematic search was conducted using a specialized API to identify videos with the keyword "Abse Drainage" published between 2020 and 2026. Data, including upload dates, view counts, comments, and likes, were extracted using the "YouTube Scraper" program. The viewing rate (views per day) and interaction index (likes per view) were calculated to assess the engagement. Statistical analyses were performed using JASP (version 0.96).
Results: A total of 503 videos were analyzed in this study. Significant differences were found in the viewing rates across years (p < 0.001), with the highest rates observed in 2022. The interaction index also showed significant annual variation (p < 0.001), peaking in 2024 and 2026. The mean viewing rate was 74,960, and the mean interaction rate was 2.119.
Conclusion: YouTube serves as a significant but variable supplementary resource for learning how to perform abscess drainage. Although engagement metrics peaked at different intervals between 2020 and 2026, the absence of formal quality control necessitates caution. Educators should guide learners toward high-quality, evidence-based content to ensure patient safety and effective training.
References
1.Stevens DL, Bisno AL, Chambers HF, et al. Practice guidelines for the diagnosis and management of skin and soft tissue infections. Clin Infect Dis. 2014;59(2):e10–e52.
2.Singer AJ, Taira BR, Thode HC Jr, et al. Management of skin abscesses in the emergency department. Ann Emerg Med. 2011;58(5):503–508.
3.Ruiz JG, Mintzer MJ, Leipzig RM. The impact of e-learning in medical education. Acad Med. 2006;81(3):207–212.
4.George PP, Papachristou N, Belisario JM, et al. Online eLearning for undergraduate health professions education. Cochrane Database Syst Rev. 2014;2014(12):CD011736.
5.Azer SA. Can “YouTube” help students in learning surface anatomy? Surg Radiol Anat. 2012;34(5):465–468.
6.Rapp AK, Healy MG, Charlton ME, et al. YouTube is the most frequently used educational video source for surgical preparation. J Surg Educ. 2016;73(6):1072–1076.
7.Madathil KC, Rivera-Rodriguez AJ, Greenstein JS, et al. Healthcare information on YouTube: A systematic review. Health Informatics J. 2015;21(3):173–194.
8.Singh AG, Singh S, Singh PP. YouTube for information on rheumatoid arthritis. J Rheumatol. 2012;39(5):899–903.
9.Bordea IR, Candrea S, Sălăgean T, et al. YouTube as a source of information on oral surgery procedures. J Craniofac Surg. 2020;31(2):e169–e172.
10.Drozd B, Couvillon E, Suarez A. Medical YouTube videos and misinformation. J Gen Intern Med. 2018;33(8):1321–1326.
11.ZORTUK, Ö. (2025). Youtube Pneumothorax Scraper (1.4). Zenodo. https://doi.org/10.5281/zenodo.17380409
12. Zortuk, O. (2025). Impact Characteristics of Pneumothorax Videos Published on YouTube: 2020-2025. Acta Medica Young Doctors, 1(3), 43–49. https://doi.org/10.5281/zenodo.17608045
13. Buyukcavus, Muhammed & Kurnaz, Safa. (2020). Are YouTube™ Videos a Reliable Source of Information About Root Resorption?. Forum Ortodontyczne.16. 201-209. 10.5114/for.2020.100177.
14.Barry DS, Marzouk F, Chulak-Oglu K, et al. Anatomy education for the YouTube generation. Anat Sci Educ. 2016;9(1):90–96.
15.Jaffar AA. YouTube: An emerging tool in anatomy education. Anat Sci Educ. 2012;5(3):158–164.
16.Patel A, Pawar A, Akinyemi E. Evaluation of clinical documentation videos on YouTube. Med Educ Online. 2021;26(1):1886820.
17.Fischer J, Geurts J, Valderrabano V, et al. Educational quality of YouTube videos on orthopedic procedures. Arch Orthop Trauma Surg. 2013;133(4):473–478.
18.Greenhalgh T. How to read a paper: The basics of evidence-based medicine. 6th ed. Wiley; 2019.
19.Cook DA, Steinert Y. Online learning for faculty development. Med Teach. 2013;35(11):930–937.
20.Clifton A, Mann C. Can YouTube enhance student nurse learning? Nurse Educ Today. 2011;31(4):311–313.
21.Berk RA. Multimedia teaching with video clips. Int J Technol Teach Learn. 2009;5(1):1–21.
22.Schmitz GR, Bruner D, Pitotti R, et al. Randomized controlled trial of antibiotics in abscess management. Ann Emerg Med. 2010;55(5):401–407.
23.Talan DA, Mower WR, Krishnadasan A, et al. Incision and drainage vs antibiotics. N Engl J Med. 2016;374(9):823–832.
24.Gaspari RJ, Resop D, Mendoza M, et al. Bedside ultrasound for abscess detection. Acad Emerg Med. 2012;19(5):542–546.
25.Marin JR, Lewiss RE. Point-of-care ultrasonography. Pediatrics. 2015;135(4):e1113–e1122.
26.Costantino TG, Satz WA, Dehnkamp W, et al. Innovative techniques in abscess drainage. J Emerg Med. 2016;50(1):e1–e5.
27. Ladde JG, Baker S, Rodgers CN, et al. Loop drainage technique vs traditional I&D. Pediatrics. 2015;135(1):e96–e105.
28.Daum RS, Miller LG. Antibiotics in abscess treatment. Clin Infect Dis. 2017;65(3):377–382.
29. Malik AI, Nelson RL. Surgical management of anorectal abscesses. Cochrane Database Syst Rev. 2008;(4):CD006827.
Downloads
Published
How to Cite
Issue
Section
License
Copyright (c) 2026 Tansu Gencer, Orhan Özsoy
This work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International License.
