The digital footprint has huge implications for medical professionals. There are many instances where a students/residents/staff have posted things on social media sites that clearly demonstrated unprofessional behaviour and have been reprimanded for it. Below are just two examples I know of:
The above examples are an important reminder that anything we post on the internet, even though it’s “private, or invitation-only” can become public down the road. As professionals in this digital era, we need to maintain professionalism digitally and personally.
Apparently, some medical schools are looking at digital footprints as part of the admissions process. Although this is still quite controversial.
On the flip side, our footprints can have a huge influence on health literacy and dissemination of health information to the public. For example, for the conditions that I deal with such as urinary incontinence and pelvic organ prolapse, many people don’t seek help because they attribute these conditions to “natural aging” and because they are too embarrassed to seek help. It may also be attributed to the lack of knowledge regarding treatment options. But effective use of social media can help us reach patients and given them reliable information.
As far as I know, our medical school does not teach on digital literacy, digital professionalism or topics surrounding digital footprints. I think these are vital topics that I am currently learning “on the fly”. We are definitely NOT doing enough for our students regarding this topic. I hope that we can implement these topics to teach our students to use social media and digital information correctly, responsibly and professionally. I guess I better go make a meeting with our curriculum committee!
Hi Mo,
What are your thoughts on sites such as RateMDs (https://www.ratemds.com)? Should patients still be cautioned about what they write on these sites even though it does not require that you put your name? I am wondering if this is in a sense of community of practice. Wenger (1998) defines it as “groups of people who share a concern or a passion for something” and describes it as “not merely a club of friends or a network of connections between people. It has an identity defined by a shared domain of interest. Membership therefore implies a commitment to the domain…”. In this case, the domain is a vested interests in obtaining optimal patient care. Could there even be repercussions if a doctor found out about a negative online comment from an existing patient of theirs or are patients simply exercising their right to freedom of speech?
Edwin
Reference:
Wenger, E. (1998): Communities of Practice: learning, meaning and identity, Cambridge, Cambridge University
Press
I am often conflicted when people ask me my opinion on RateMD, or other similar sites. I think people have the right to freedom of speech. But whether you are rated well on RateMD or not does not generally equate to the level of competence of that physician. Most patients can only rate physicians on whether they were personable, on schedule, spent enough time with them etc, but may not have the medical background to state whether the management approach is standard of care or not. Take for example, a physician who is payed by the tradition fee for service system versus a physician who is paid an ARP (alternate relations plan – usually a flat fee for their services per year). The fee for service physician will end up seeing more patients, and spending less time with each as they are pressured to do so. But the ARP physician is not time dependent and can spend 45min with each patient. But time spent, which patient usually rate highly, does not alway mean they were managed well.
As for repercussions, a physician has the right to refuse care to a patient if they deem that they cannot offer them the best care (in this case, due to the negative impact of comments on RateMD). The physician should, ethically speaking, find the patient another physician who can provide this care.