Skip to main content

Advertisement

SpringerLink
Log in

Social Media: Opportunities for Quality Improvement and Lessons for Providers—A Networked Model for Patient-Centered Care Through Digital Engagement

  • Public Health Policy (NK Choudhry, Section Editor)
  • Published:
Current Cardiology Reports Aims and scope Submit manuscript

Abstract

Social media brings a new dimension to health care for patients, providers, and their support networks. Increasing evidence demonstrates that patients who are more actively involved in their healthcare experience have better health outcomes and incur lower costs. In the field of cardiology, social media are proposed as innovative tools for the education and update of clinicians, physicians, nurses, and medical students. This article reviews the use of social media by healthcare providers and patients and proposes a model of “networked care” that integrates the use of digital social networks and platforms by both patients and providers and offers recommendations for providers to optimize their use and understanding of social media for quality improvement.

This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.

Access this article

Log in via an institution

Price excludes VAT (USA)
Tax calculation will be finalised during checkout.

Instant access to the full article PDF.

Institutional subscriptions

Fig. 1

Similar content being viewed by others

References

Papers of particular interest, published recently, have been highlighted as: • Of importance •• Of major importance

  1. Rhebergen MD, Lenderink AF, van Dijk FJ, Hulshof CT. Comparing the use of an online expert health network against common information sources to answer health questions. J Med Internet Res. 2012;14(1):e9.

    Article  PubMed Central  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  2. Makovsky Health. Online Health Research Eclipsing Patient-Doctor Conversations New York: Makovsky Integrated Communications; 2013 [updated Sept 9Nov 4]; Available from: http://www.makovsky.com/insights/articles/25-insights/articles/article/229-as-the-web-goes-mobile-healthcare-stands-still.

  3. Brenner J. Pew Internet: Social Networking (full detail) Washington, DC: Pew Internet & American Life Project; 2013 [updated Ayg 5Nov 4, 2013]; Available from: http://pewinternet.org/Commentary/2012/March/Pew-Internet-Social-Networking-full-detail.aspx.

  4. Boyd DM, Ellison NB. Social network sites: Definition, history, and scholarship. J Comp Med Commun. 2008;13:210–30.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  5. Glick PL, Yamout SZ. Social media for surgeons: Understand it, embrace it, and leverage it for our profession and our patient. Surgery. 2012;152(5):941–2.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  6. O’Connor D. The apomediated world: regulating research when social media has changed research. J Law Med Ethics J Am Soc Law Med Ethics. 2013;41(2):470–83.

    Google Scholar 

  7. Moorhead AS, Hazlett DE, Harrison L, Carroll JK, Irwin A, Hoving C. A new dimension of health care: Systematic review of the uses, benefits, and limitations of social media for health communication. J Med Internet Res. 2013;15(4):e85.

    Article  PubMed Central  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  8. Lefebvre RC. The new technology: the consumer as participant rather than target audience. Soc Mark Q. 2007;13:31–42.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  9. O’Reilly T. What is Web 2.0? Design Patterns and Business Models for the Next Generation of Software. O'Reilly Media, Inc.; 2005 [updated September 30October 28, 2013]; Available from: http://oreilly.com/web2/archive/what-is-web-20.html.

  10. Santoro E, Caldarola P, Villella A. Using Web 2.0 technologies and social media for the cardiologist's education and update. G Ital Cardiol. 2011;12(3):174–81.

    Google Scholar 

  11. Eysenbach G. Medicine 2.0: social networking, collaboration, participation, apomediation, and openness. J Med Internet Res. 2008;10(3):e22.

    Article  PubMed Central  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  12. Lefebvre RC, Bornkessel AS. Digital social networks and health. Circulation. 2013;127(17):1829–36. This article documents the emergence of social media, and specifically, how people are using SNS for health-information seeking and health-related behaviors. It concludes with recommendations for practice to optimize the use of social media to help improve health outcomes and offers a series of questions that encourage the development of a research agenda in this area.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  13. Federal Communications Commission, National Broadband Plan. America's Plan. Chapter 10.; 197-222]. Available from: http://download.broadband.gov/plan/national-broadband-plan-chapter-10-health-care.pdf.

  14. Wagner K. 5 ways to provide more connected care. Healthc Financ Manag J Healthc Financ Manag Assoc. 2012;66(3):40.

    Google Scholar 

  15. Munson SA, Cavusoglu H, Frisch L, Fels S. Sociotechnical challenges and progress in using social media for health. J Med Internet Res. 2013;15(10):e226.

    Article  PubMed Central  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  16. Cook DJ, Manning DM, Holland DE, et al. Patient engagement and reported outcomes in surgical recovery: effectiveness of an e-health platform. J Am Coll Surg. 2013;217(4):648–55.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  17. Hibbard JH, Greene J, Overton V. Patients with lower activation associated with higher costs; delivery systems should know their patients’ ‘scores’. Health Aff. 2013;32(2):216–22.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  18. Institute of Medicine (IOM). Crossing the Quality Chasm. Crossing the Quality Chasm: A New Health System for the 21st Century. Washington, DC: National Academy Press; 2001.

    Google Scholar 

  19. Stewart M. Towards a global definition of patient centred care - The patient should be the judge of patient centred care. Brit Med J. 2001;322(7284):444–5.

    Article  CAS  PubMed Central  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  20. Little P, Everitt H, Williamson I, et al. Preferences of patients for patient centred approach to consultation in primary care: observational study. Brit Med J. 2001;322(7284):468–72.

    Article  CAS  PubMed Central  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  21. Mesko B. Social Media in Clinical Practice. New York: Springer Science + Business Media; 2013.

    Book  Google Scholar 

  22. Fox S. The Engaged E-patient Population Washington, DC: Per Internet & American Life Project; 2008 [updated Aug 26Nov 4, 2013]; Available from: http://www.pewinternet.org/Reports/2008/The-Engaged-Epatient-Population/The-Engaged-E-patient-Population.aspx.

  23. Rainie L. The Rise of the e-Patient Washington, DC: Pew Internet & American Life Project; 2012 [updated Jan 12Nov 4, 2013]; Available from: http://www.pewinternet.org/Presentations/2012/Jan/The-Rise-of-the-ePatient.aspx. This report summarizes how patients and caregivers seek and use health information online.

  24. Rainie L. E-patients and their hunt for health information. Pew Internet & American Life Project: Washington, DC; 2013 [updated Jul 26Nov 4, 2013]; Available from: http://www.pewinternet.org/Presentations/2013/Jul/Epatients-and-their-hunt-for-health-information.aspx.

  25. Lober WB, Flowers JL. Consumer empowerment in health care amid the internet and social media. Semin Oncol Nurs. 2011;27(3):169–82.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  26. Keene N, Chesser A, Hart TA, Twumasi-Ankrah P, Bradham DD. Preliminary benefits of information therapy. J Prim Care Community Health. 2011;2(1):45–8.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  27. Eysenbach G, Powell J, Englesakis M, Rizo C, Stern A. Health-related communities and electronic support groups: Systematic review of the effects of online peer to peer interactions. BMJ. 2004;328:1–6.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  28. Neal L, Lindgaard G, Oakley K, et al. Online health communities. In CHI '06 Extended Abstracts on Human Factors in Computing Systems (CHI EA '06) ACM, New York, NY, USA, 444-447 doi:10.1145/11254511125549/ 2006.

  29. Rupert DJ, Moultrie RR, Gard Read J, et al. What role should healthcare professionals play in patient and caregiver use of online health communities? Results from a qualitative study. Presented at the International Conference on Communication in Healthcare, Montreal, QC2013.

  30. Fox S. Peer-to-Peer Healthcare. Washington, DC: Pew Internet & American Life Project; 2011 [cited 2013 November 6]; Available from: http://www.pewinternet.org/Reports/2011/P2PHealthcare.aspx.

  31. Macias W, Lewis LS, Smith TL. Health-related message boards / chat rooms on the Web: Discussion content and implications for pharmaceutical sponsorships. J Health Comm. 2005;10(3):206–23.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  32. Fox S, Duggan M, K. P. Family caregivers are wired for health. 2013 [cited 2013 November 7]; Available from: http://www.pewinternet.org/Reports/2013/Family-Caregivers/Part-2/Reviews.aspx.

  33. Hamm M. Social media use among patients and caregivers: a scoping review. BMJ Open. 2013;3(5):e002819.

    Article  PubMed Central  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  34. Desilver D. As population ages, more Americans become caregivers. 2013 [cited 2013 November 7]; Available from: http://www.pewresearch.org/fact-tank/2013/07/18/as-population-ages-more-americans-becoming-caregivers/.

  35. Reinhard S. Home alone: Family caregivers providing complex chronic care. 2012 [cited 2013 November 7]; Available from: http://www.aarp.org/home-family/caregiving/info-10-2012/home-alone-family-caregivers-providing-complex-chronic-care.html.

  36. Bosslet GT, Torke AM, Hickman SE, Terry CL, Helft PR. The patient-doctor relationship and online social networks: results of a national survey. J Gen Intern Med. 2011;26(10):1168–74.

    Article  PubMed Central  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  37. Hughes B, Joshi I, Lemonde H, Wareham J. Junior physician’s use of Web 2.0 for information seeking and medical education: a qualitative study. Int J Med Inform. 2009;78(10):645–55.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  38. von Muhlen M, Ohno-Machado L. Reviewing social media use by clinicians. J Am Med Inform Assoc. 2012. doi:10.1136/amiajnl-2012-000990.

    Google Scholar 

  39. Modahl M, Tompsett L, Moorhead T. Doctors, patients and social media. QuantiaMD2011 [cited 2013 October 30]; Available from: http://www.quantiamd.com/q-qcp/DoctorsPatientSocialMedia.pdf.

  40. McGowan BS, Wasko M, Vartabedian BS, Miller RS, Freiherr DD, Abdolrasulnia M. Understanding the factors that influence the adoption and meaningful use of social media by physicians to share medical information. J Med Internet Res. 2012;14(5):e117.

    Article  PubMed Central  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  41. de Carnargo I. Screen to script: The Doctor's digital path to treatment. 2012 [cited 2013 November 1]; Available from: http://www.slideshare.net/istvancamargo/2012-google-physicianstudy.

  42. AMN Healthcare. Use of social media and mobile by healthcare professionals: 2011 survey results. 2012 [cited 2013 November 4]; Available from: http://www.amnhealthcare.com/industry-research/542/1033/.

  43. Potts HWW, Wyatt JC. Survey of doctors’ experience of patients using the Internet. J Med Internet Res. 2002;4(1):e5.

    Article  PubMed Central  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  44. van Uden-Kraan CF, Drossaert CHC, Taal E, Smit WM, Seydel ER, van de Laar MAFJ. Experiences and attitudes of Dutch rheumatologists and oncologists with regard to the their patients’ health-related Internet use. Clin Rheumatol. 2010;29:1229–36.

    Article  PubMed Central  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  45. Hart A, Henwood F, Wyatt S. The role of the Internet in patient-practitioner relationships: Findings from a qualitative research study. J Med Internet Res. 2004;6(3):e36.

    Article  PubMed Central  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  46. Moick M, Terlutter R. Physicians’ motives for professional Internet use and differences in attitudes toward the Internet-informed patient, physician-patient communication, and prescribing behavior. Medicine. 2012;1(2):e2.

    Google Scholar 

  47. Olgin J, Pletcher M, Marcus G. Health eHeart Study. University of California San Francisco. 2013 [cited 2013 November 1]; Available from: http://www.health-eheartstudy.org/.

  48. Pletcher M, Fowler J, Sim I, Olgin J. The Social Heart Study, a collaboration between the University of California San Francisco and the University of California San Diego. 2012; Available from: https://socialheartstudy.org.

  49. Bennett GG, Glasgow RE. The delivery of public health interventions via the Internet: actualizing their potential. Annu Rev Public Health. 2009;30:273–92.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  50. Merollia M, Graya K, Martin-Sanchez F. Health outcomes and related effects of using social media in chronic disease management: A literature review and analysis of affordances. J Biomed Inform. 2013;46:957–69.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  51. Scanfield D, Scanfield V, Larson EL. Dissemination of health information through social networks: Twitter and antibiotics. Am J Infect Control. 2010;38:182–8.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  52. Achrekar H, Gandhe A, Lazarus R, Yu S-H, Liu B. Predicting flu trends using twitter data. In Communications Workshops (INFOCOM WKSHPS) 2011 I.E. Conference 2011.

  53. Liang B, Scammon DL. E-Word-of-Mouth on health social networking sites: An opportunity for tailored health communication. J Consum Behav. 2011;10(6):322–31.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  54. Young SD, Cumberland WG, Lee SJ, Jaganath D, Szekeres G, Coates T. Social networking technologies as an emerging tool for HIV prevention: a cluster randomized trial. Ann Intern Med. 2013;159:318–24.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  55. Rainie L, Horrigan J, Wellman B, Boase J. The Strength of Internet Ties. Washington, DC: Pew Internet & American Life Project; 2006 [February 12, 2013]; Available from: http://www.pewinternet.org/Reports/2006/The-Strength-of-Internet-Ties.aspx.

  56. O'Connor D. Apomediation and the significance of online social networking. Am J Bioeth AJOB. 2009;9(6–7):25–7.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  57. Bottles K. Health hackers and citizen scientists shake up medical research. Physician Exec. 2013;39(1):88–90.

    PubMed  Google Scholar 

  58. Redfern J, Ingles J, Neubeck L, Johnston S, Semsarian C. Tweeting our way to cardiovascular health. J Am Coll Cardiol. 2013;61(15):1657–8.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  59. Mitchell DJ. Toward a definition of Information Therapy. Proc Annu Symp Comput Appl Med Care 1994:71–5.

  60. Selby P, van Mierlo T, Voci SC, Parent D, Cunningham JA. Online social and professional support for smokers trying to quit: an exploration of first time posts from 2562 members. J Med Internet Res. 2010;12(3):e34.

    Article  PubMed Central  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  61. Kutner M, Greenberg E, Jin Y, Paulsen C. The Health Literacy of America’s Adults: Results From the 2003 National Assessment of Adult Literacy (NCES 2006-483). Washington, DC: U.S. Department of Education, National Center for Education Statistics; 2006.

    Google Scholar 

  62. Centers for Disease Control and Prevention. CDC’s guide to writing for social media. Electronic Media Branch, Division of News and Electronic Media, Office of the Associate Director of Communication: Author; 2012; Available from: http://www.cdc.gov/socialmedia/tools/guidelines/pdf/guidetowritingforsocialmedia.pdf.

  63. U.S. Department of Health and Human Services., Office of Disease Prevention and Health Promotion. Health literacy online: A guide to writing and designing easy-to-use health Web sites. Washington, DC: Author; 2010; Available from: http://www.health.gov/healthliteracyonline/Web_Guide_Health_Lit_Online.pdf.

  64. Moturu ST, Liu H. Quantifying the trustworthiness of social media content. Distrib Parallel Database. 2011;29(3):239–60.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  65. American Medical Association. AMA policy: Professionalism in the use of social media, 2012. [1 November 2013]; Available from: http://www.ama-assn.org/ama/pub/physician-resources/medical-ethics/code-medical-ethics/opinion9124.page.

  66. Federation of State Medical Boards of the United States Inc. Model Policy Guidelines for the Appropriate Use of Social Media and Social Networking in Medical Practice. Euless, TX: Author; no date; Available from: http://www.fsmb.org/pdf/pub-social-media-guidelines.pdf.

  67. Azu MC, Lilley EJ, Kolli AH. Social media, surgeons, and the Internet: an era or an error? Am Surg. 2012;78(5):555–8.

    PubMed  Google Scholar 

  68. Collins SE, Lewis DM. Social Media Made Easy: Guiding Patients to Credible Online Health Information and Engagement Resources. Clin Diabetes. 2013;31(3):137–41.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  69. Abril PA, Cava A. Health privacy in a techno-social world: a cyber-patient’s bill of rights. NW J Tech Intell Prop. 2008;6:244–77.

    Google Scholar 

  70. Solove D. A taxonomy of privacy. Univ PA Law Rev. 2006;154:477–560.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  71. Fernandez-Luque L, Karlsen R, Melton GB. HealthTrust: a social network approach for retrieving online health videos. J Med Internet Res. 2012;14(1):e22.

    Article  PubMed Central  PubMed  Google Scholar 

Download references

Compliance with Ethics Guidelines

ᅟ

Conflict of Interest

Alexandra Bornkessel was supported by RTI International (her employer), who supported some of her time spent working on this manuscript. She is also an adjunct professor at American University, teaching Social Media and Health Promotion.

Robert Furberg declares that he has no conflict of interest.

R. Craig Lefebvre is employed by the University of South Florida College of Public Health, where he is a Research Professor engaged in teaching and research with the Florida Prevention Research Center. He is a Fellow in the Society for New Communications Research.

Human and Animal Rights and Informed Consent

This article does not contain any studies with human or animal subjects performed by any of the authors.

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

  1. Center for Communication Science, RTI International, 6110 Executive Boulevard, Suite 902, Rockville, MD, 20852, USA

    Alexandra Bornkessel

  2. Center for the Advancement of Health IT, RTI International, 3040 East Cornwallis Road, Research Triangle Park, NC, 27709, USA

    Robert Furberg

  3. Center for Communication Science, RTI International, 7010 Bridle Path Ct, University Park, FL, 34201, USA

    R. Craig Lefebvre

Authors
  1. Alexandra Bornkessel
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  2. Robert Furberg
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  3. R. Craig Lefebvre
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Alexandra Bornkessel.

Additional information

This article is part of the Topical Collection on Public Health Policy

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

About this article

Check for updates. Verify currency and authenticity via CrossMark

Cite this article

Bornkessel, A., Furberg, R. & Lefebvre, R.C. Social Media: Opportunities for Quality Improvement and Lessons for Providers—A Networked Model for Patient-Centered Care Through Digital Engagement. Curr Cardiol Rep 16, 504 (2014). https://doi.org/10.1007/s11886-014-0504-5

Download citation

  • Published:

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s11886-014-0504-5

Keywords

Search

Navigation