Abstract
Injectable facial fillers have become tremendously more popular in recent years, and
the Internet offers a proportional amount of consumer-facing educational material.
This study sought to explore the quality of these online materials. The top 20 Web
sites offering educational materials about facial filler were identified via Google
search and sorted by source: Medical Professional Boards, Hospitals and Providers,
Medical News and Reference, and Fashion. The materials were assessed for overall quality
with the validated DISCERN instrument. The authors also assessed understandability
and actionability (Patient Education Material Assessment Tool - PEMAT), accuracy,
comprehensiveness, and readability (Flesch-Kincaid Grade Level and Flesch Reading
Ease). The mean DISCERN score was 46.9 ± 7.6, which is considered “fair” quality educational
material; above “poor,” but below “good” and “excellent.” Understandability and actionability
scores were low, particularly with respect to visual aids. The materials were generally
accurate (76–99%), but scored poorly in comprehensiveness, as 15% failed to mention
any risks/adverse effects and only 35% mentioned cost. On average, readability was
at an 11th grade level, far more complex than ideal (< 6th grade level). Information
disseminated from seemingly reputable sources such as professional boards and hospitals/providers
were not of higher quality or superior in any of the above studied domains. In conclusion,
online educational materials related to injectable facial fillers are of subpar quality,
including those from academic and professional organizations. Visual aids were particularly
weak. The facial rejuvenation community should make a concerted effort to set a higher
standard for disseminating such information.
Keywords
facial filler - injectable - patient education - quality
