Quality of anaesthesia-related information accessed via Internet searches.

BACKGROUND We conducted a study to examine the quality and stability of information available from the Internet on four anaesthesia-related topics. METHODS In January 2006, we searched using four key words (porphyria, scleroderma, transfusion risk, and epidural analgesia risk) with five search engines (Google, HotBot, AltaVista, Excite, and Yahoo). We used a published scoring system (NetScoring) to evaluate the first 15 sites identified by each of these 20 searches. We also used a simple four-point scale to assess the first 100 sites in the Google search on one of our four topics ('epidural analgesia risk'). In November 2006, we conducted a second evaluation, using three search engines (Google, AltaVista, and Yahoo) with 14 synonyms for 'epidural analgesia risk'. RESULTS The five search engines performed similarly. NetScoring scores were lower for transfusion risk (P < 0.001). One or more high-quality sites was identified consistently among the first 15 sites in each search. Quality scored using the simple scale correlated closely with medical content and design by NetScoring and with the number of references (P < 0.05). Synonyms of 'epidural analgesia risk' yielded similar results. The quality of accessed information improved somewhat over the 11 month period with Yahoo and AltaVista, but declined with Google. CONCLUSIONS The Internet is a valuable tool for obtaining medical information, but the quality of websites varies between different topics. A simple rating scale may facilitate the quality scoring on individual websites. Differences in precise search terms used for a given topic did not appear to affect the quality of the information obtained.