RESUMO
BACKGROUND: To compare the fat transfer combined with plasma energy and only fat transfer methods for genital rejuvenation and to investigate the efficacy enhancing properties of plasma energy. METHODS: Forty-six patients were equally divided into two groups according to the surgical method as the group A (n = 23) and the group B (n = 23). The patients in the group A received only fat transfer, while the patients in the group B received fat transfer combined with plasma energy. Both groups were scheduled for postoperative follow-up at 1, 3, 6, and 12 months. The lifting effect on the labia majora after the procedure was evaluated with photographs and patient satisfaction questionnaires including the female genital self-image scale (FGSIS). RESULTS: The mean age of all participants was 32.8 ± 5.1 years, and the mean body mass index (BMI) was 24.7 ± 3.4 kg/m2. The mean preoperative FGSIS scores were similar between the groups (p = 0.542). The mean total FGSIS score was 18.8 ± 1.4 in the group A and 18.3 ± 1.5 in the group B in the preoperative period. However, the mean FGSIS scores at 1, 3, and 6 months were significantly higher in the group B than the group A (p = 0.032, p = 0.012, and p = 0.009, respectively). At 6 months of follow-up, the mean total FGSIS score was 20.7 ± 1.4 in the group A and 22.3 ± 1.5 in the group B, indicating a statistically significant difference (p = 0.028). CONCLUSION: This novel technique is a more minimally invasive technique compared to other energy modalities with lower lateral and vertical energy dissipation than other conventional methods, and labia majora fat filling augmentation application can be performed with more permanent and longer-lasting outcomes than fat transfer only. LEVEL OF EVIDENCE II: This journal requires that authors assign a level of evidence to each article. For a full description of these Evidence-Based Medicine ratings, please refer to the Table of Contents or the online Instructions to Authors www.springer.com/00266.
RESUMO
Background: Social media, with its low cost and easy accessibility, represents an ideal medium for sharing medical interests, but the quality of its content is questionable. Aim: The primary aim of this study was to evaluate the quality of video content related to vaginismus on YouTube as a source of information by using scores of established classification systems. The secondary aim was to examine the relationship between objective and subjective measures of their quality. Methods: The term vaginismus was typed into the YouTube search bar (http://www.youtube.com). The first 50 videos with the highest number of views were included in the study. All videos were assessed on August 18, 2022, by a gynecologist and/or a urologist experienced in vulvodynia. Data of all the videos were recorded, such as source, content, duration, day since upload date, number of views, number of likes, number of comments, and views per day. The Global Quality Scale (GQS) and modified DISCERN score were employed to assess the quality of the videos. Outcomes: The primary outcomes of this study were the scores of established classification systems and the measures relating to the preference and evaluation of viewers of YouTube videos on vulvodynia. Results: A total of 50 videos were evaluated. The sources of 32 (64%) of these videos were "universities/professional organizations/nonprofit physicians/physicians" and "stand-alone health information websites." The GQS and modified DISCERN scores of the videos whose source was "universities/professional organizations/nonprofit physicians/physicians" were higher than those whose source was "talk show programs/television programs" (P = .014 for GQS score, P = .046 for modified DISCERN score). When classified according to GQS score, the quality level of 58% of the videos was low. Of the videos whose source was "universities/professional organizations/nonprofit physicians/physicians," 56.3% were of good quality. Clinical Implications: The quality of information was very low and suggested that health care professionals should take on a more active role in configuring the qualitative characteristics of the material available online about the given health issues. Strengths and Limitations: To the best of our knowledge, this is the first study to investigate the quality of YouTube videos on vaginismus (vulvodynia). However, the limitation of this study is the relatively subjective evaluation of videos, including the risk of observer bias, although we attempted to overcome this problem with the inclusion of 2 independent reviewers and the use of validated tools. Conclusion: YouTube videos may offer a huge amount of information about this condition, but the quality of the available sources is heterogeneous.
